The Voice of Reason

Cloverfield Review

2008-01-21T01:41:00.000-05:00

I don't do movie reviews here often but here's mine for the J.J. Abrams monster film "Cloverfield":

Fucking Brilliant.

re: $2500 Car - Evil or Devine?

2008-01-11T00:06:00.000-05:00

An India car manufacturer unveiled the world's cheapest car. The "Ta Ta" priced at just $2500

Evil or Devine? That depends on who you are asking.

Now, if you've traveled to Europe, you see these bubble cars running around all over. Okay, fine, all well and good. Well, this is super! No, not really for some. The environmentalist wackos are absolutely livid. "Environmental critics have said that the car will lead to mounting air and pollution problems on India's already clogged roads. But Tata said the car had passed emission standards..."

This is not the point! The point is, here is a car that might help the Third World move into the Twenty-First Century by getting the horse and buggy or the donkey or the mule out of their lives; expanding their ability to go places and transport things. It has no air-conditioning; it's 2,500 bucks, probably a thousand miles to the gallon. And WHO is it that is denying the poor people of the world this tiny little technological advancement? It's the same environmentalist wackos who are spreading this global warming hoax on everybody else. It is they who deny the poor people of the world a chance to prosper and improve their lot in life, be it in India or anywhere else. Take this thing to sub-Saharan Africa, and you watch what happens. They will blow a gasket. So this idea that the liberals and the socialists of the world are all for the little guy, and that they want to improve the lot in life of the little guy, that's not what they want to do. They want to destroy prosperity for everybody. You never hear liberals talk about elevating people at the lower rungs of society. You only hear them talk about punishing people at the upper rungs, and here's a great example.

This car is a joke for most of us, but for certain people in the world, it would be one of the most amazing steps up in their lives ever: the improvement in their lives, the quality of their lives, their ability to get places, transport things. BUT it runs on fossil fuels! Eek Ghad! the environmentalists will shriek. I can hear them now ..."That's right, it runs on fossil fuels, and we're trying to get rid of fossil fuels, and this is certainly insensitive of you not to understand." The truth is, that all the bleeding heart leftists, disguised here as people in the environmental movement who have all this understanding and compassion for the suffering of the poor and the destitute -- the hungry, the thirsty, the sick -- don't want them to improve their lives at all. They won't allow farming techniques in the Twenty-First Century nor will they allow any kind of technological advancement in these Third World countries. They want them to continue to live in maggot & insect-infested little swamps; pools of water with malaria all over the place - because they think that will save the planet, when it's killing the very people in Africa they claim are the ones who they have all the understanding for.

This little car from India -- and you'll have some liberals in this country buying it because it's a status symbol -- it's like wearing a ribbon: "I care." But they are denying this to the people of world who need it, or want to. Mark my words.

What so bad about Global Warming?

2007-11-18T14:17:00.000-05:00

Stop, for a moment, and consider:

* people inhabit regions on Earth where temperatures regularly reach -40 °F to those where temperatures regularly exceed 120 °F. Our planet's critters inhabit even more extreme regions.

* people fly from sub-zero winters to Mediterranean or tropical holidays -- where they toast themselves in the sunshine. Birds and mammals migrate from polar to tropical regions and back again every year.

* people and animals we can surmise, can tolerate huge changes in temperature and generally seek warmth.

These things you can see and, if you can afford, probably do. Now, why are you frightened of the unfortunately slight possibility you won't have to spend so much keeping warm?

re: Al Gore + Nobel Prize = Nonsense

2007-10-14T17:33:00.000-04:00

Five Norwegians gave a prize to Al Gore, and all the world is supposed to heed his counsel henceforth. No, thanks.

Alfred Nobel felt horrible about the uses to which his invention -- dynamite -- was put. So he endowed the Nobel Peace Prize and instructed that it go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Al Gore has done exactly none of those things.

Gore, however, did write a book and make a film about global warming. He has become the second environmental activist to win the peace prize in the past four years. Wangari Muta Maathai won it in 2004 for planting trees.

Thus we have indisputable confirmation that the Nobel Peace Prize is no longer a serious international award. In 1994 the five Norwegian politicians who award the prize gave it to the murdering thug Yasser Arafat. Two years before that they gave it to literary fraud Rigoberta Menchu, whose autobiography was largely fabricated. (An example: The brother she supposedly watched die of malnutrition was later found by a New York Times reporter to be very much alive and well.)

On Friday the prize was given to Al Gore and the International Panel on Climate Change. Two days before, a British judge ruled that Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," contained so many errors (read: lies) that it could be shown in British public schools only if accompanied by a fact sheet correcting the errors.

The Nobel Peace Prize is worse than a joke. It's a fraud. It is such a transparent fraud that the five Norwegian politicians who award it have been reduced to defending their decision by concocting elaborate rationalizations. This year they laughably claimed that Gore deserves the prize because, well, global climate change" may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the Earth's resources," and "there may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars." (Emphasis ours.)

And Islamic terrorists may give up jihad and sing "Kumbaya" after listening to old Cat Stevens records. But that's no basis for distributing the world's formerly most prestigious prize.

If winning this useless medal prompts Al Gore to get into the presidential race, which I doubt, the irony will be that the American people will turn a more skeptical eye to His Smugness than the Nobel committee did.

The American public won't accept at face value Gore's self-righteous proclamations or his self-serving predictions of looming global catastrophe. And Gore has to know that, which is why he will almost certainly stick to the world of make-believe -- Hollywood and International Do-Goodery -- where he can pretend to be the great sage and savior he wishes he really were and left-wing Europeans and thespians try to convince us he is.

Obama Almighty

2007-10-08T00:14:00.000-04:00

Senator Barack Obama, addressing an Evangelical Church, Sunday Oct. 7, 2007:

"Sometimes this is a difficult road being in politics, sometimes you can become fearful, sometimes you can become vain, sometimes you can seek power just for power's sake instead of because you want to do service to God. I just want all of you to pray that I can be an instrument of God in the same way that Pastor Ron and all of you are instruments of God."

He finished his brief remarks by saying, "We're going to keep on praising together. I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth."

-----

well, how thoughtful of you "Senator with a Muslim name". Has anyone else thought that if you took his remarks, put them in Osama Bin Ladin's mouth it wouldn't sound unnatural? I mean with a few alterations for the sake of differences of faith reasons it would read something like this;

Osama Bin Ladin addressing a mosque Sunday, Oct. 7th, 2007:
"Sometimes this is a difficult road being in terrorism, sometimes you can become fearful, sometimes you can become vain, sometimes you can seek power just for power's sake instead of because you want to do service to God. I just want all of you to pray that I can be an instrument of God in the same way that I and all of you are instruments of God."

He finished his brief remarks by saying, "We're going to keep on praising together. I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth."

Scary isn't it? The left screamed bloody murder whenever George Bush mentioned his faith in speeches or press Q&A. They would come down on him like some holier than thou Christian who is doing everything in God's name. What is the difference in what Obama said? His faith in God seems just as, if not stronger, than George Bush's. I wonder if that will be addressed by the Liberal media? Hmm?? Will they poke and prod him on abortion, stem cell research, teenage promiscuity, homosexuality? Somehow I think not.

What I love about his comment is that it plays right out of the Liberal's utopian vision of the future. "Kingdom right here on Earth". Even George Bush never that far with a religious statement. To him it's a personal issue. he NEVER wore it on his sleeve. But of course this is also right out of the Democrat handbook - "Pander to your base, as much as possible no matter how much it may even be against your own personal beliefs. Win at all costs".

Hillary doesn't even go this far I'll give her that - she just panders with fake accents and empty promises of "womb to the tomb" govt. care.

Astounding.

Springsteen's - the Looney Lefts Rock Hero

2007-10-04T19:31:00.001-04:00

In an interview for CBS-TV, Rocker Bruce Springsteen said this "I think we've seen things happen over the past six years that I don't think anybody ever thought they'd ever see in the United States." "When people think of the Unites States' identity, they don't think of torture. They don't think of illegal wiretapping. They don't think of voter suppression..." ---- Well, well well Mr. Springsteen. Let's take a look at each of these shall we? 1. Torture - what qualifies as torture? Naked men in a pyramid or hacking limbs/heads off. Cornering a man in his jail cell with a dog or hanging people upside down and beating the soles of their feet until they bleed? The formers were used by US guards, the latter by Al Qaida and the Taliban against captured US soldiers and citizens. I'm sorry Mr. Bruce but making men stand naked doesn't qualify as torture. Intimidation? Yes. Torture? No. Nobody has died at Guantanamo Bay, nobody was killed at Abu Ghraib. And they say Rush Limbaugh degrades the view of the troops. Mr. Bruce is essentially calling US soldiers torturers and murderers. Nice isn't it? 2. Illegal Wiretapping - On whom may I ask? Name me ONE private, innocent citizen that was illegally tapped and their lives disrupted or damaged by it Mr. Bruce. Listening in on phone conversations between suspected terrorists here and abroad does NOT infringe on the rights of Mr. Q Public here in the US. I have no fear the govt. is monitering my conversations or tapping my internet use. I'm just Mr. Joe Schmo who goes to work, pays his taxes and stays out of trouble. They're not interested in me so I have no fear of my govt. So tell me, we're supposed to give up avenues we have to stopping terror plots BEFORE they happen right? The recent terror plot in the Netherlands was stopped by just that - listening in on conversations and communications of suspected terrorists. It works Mr. Bruce. It works - so therefore we have to stop doing it because some people are overly paranoid? Paranoid about their govt because they've listened to people like you spread this illusion? Wow. The Bush Administration has been accused by the Left of not "connecting the dots" before Sept. 11, 2001. Now we are using every possible way to do just that and people like Mr. Springsteen think it's wrong because there's the "possibility" an innocent citizen could be monitored by mistake. The prisons are full of "innocent" people too Bruce. The govt. would have no reason to tap your phone or internet if you didn't give them reason too. If you stay out of trouble and you can rest easy. I am scratching my head in disbelief on this one. 3. Voter Suppression - Oh this is rich. If there's ONE political party that goes out of it's way to suppress or intimidate voters it's the Democrats. Shall we revisit the attempt by the Democrats to NOT COUNT the votes of the US military in the 2000 Presidential election? Shall we name the countless times Democrats have refused to make laws requiring voters to show a photo ID to vote? Shall we name the times a Democrat candidate was caught attempting to fix and election (i.e 1960 Primary in Chicago). The Democrats are the ONLY party that has the illegal immigrant, imprisoned felon and the dead vote for their candidates. All that and they still can't get over 50% of the vote in any major election. Astounding. Shameless ignorance and denial of facts is the calling card of Democrat voters and liberals like Mr. Springsteen. They make political debate so much fun. They're not wrong on just some issues - they're wrong on basically every issue.
It's astounding to me that people actually think this way. It must suck to be that miserable.

2007-10-04T19:31:00.000-04:00

In an interview for CBS-TV, Rocker Bruce Springsteen said this "I think we've seen things happen over the past six years that I don't think anybody ever thought they'd ever see in the United States." "When people think of the Unites States' identity, they don't think of torture. They don't think of illegal wiretapping. They don't think of voter suppression..." ---- Well, well well Mr. Springsteen. Let's take a look at each of these shall we? 1. Torture - what qualifies as torture? Naked men in a pyramid or hacking limbs/heads off. Cornering a man in his jail cell with a dog or hanging people upside down and beating the soles of their feet until they bleed? The formers were used by US guards, the latter by Al Qaida and the Taliban against captured US soldiers and citizens. I'm sorry Mr. Bruce but making men stand naked doesn't qualify as torture. Intimidation? Yes. Torture? No. Nobody has died at Guantanamo Bay, nobody was killed at Abu Ghraib. And they say Rush Limbaugh degrades the view of the troops. Mr. Bruce is essentially calling US soldiers torturers and murderers. Nice isn't it. 2. Illegal Wiretapping - On whom may I ask. Name me ONE private, innocent citizen that was illegally tapped and their lives disrupted or damaged by it. Listening in on phone conversations between suspected terrorists here and abroad does NOT infringe on the rights of Mr. Q Public. I have no fear the govt. is monitering my conversations or tapping my internet use. I'm just Mr. Joe Schmo who goes to work, pays his taxes and stays out of trouble. Are we supposed to give up ANY avenue we have to stopping terror plots BEFORE they happen. The Bush Administration was accused of not "connecting the dots" before Sept. 11, 2001. Now we attempt to do so and people like Mr. Springsteen think it's wrong. Scratching my head in disbelief. 3. Voter Suppression - Oh this is rich. If there's ONE political party that goes out of it's way to suppress or intimidate voters its the Democrats. Shall we revisit the attempt by the Democrats to NOT COUNT the votes if US military in the 2000 Presidential election? Shall we name the countless times Democrats have refused to make laws requiring voters to show a photo ID to vote? Shall we name the times a Democrat candidate was caught attempting to fix and election (1960 Primary in Chicago). The Democrats are the ONLY party that has the illegal immigrant, imprisoned felon and the dead vote for their candidates. All that and they still can't get over 50% of the vote in any major election. Astounding. Shameless ignorance and denial of fact is the calling card of Democrat voters and liberals like Mr. Springsteen that make political debate so much fun. They NEVER have a valid argument. They're not wrong on just some issues - they're wrong on basically every issue. It's astounding to me that people actually think this way. It must suck to be that miserable.

RIP Elvis Aaron Presley

2007-08-17T02:23:00.001-04:00

RIP Elvis Aaron Presley Aug 16, 1977

Our Victim Culture

2007-08-10T18:21:00.000-04:00

Man says hold the cheese, claims McDonald's didn't, sues for $10 million

A Morgantown man, his mother and his friend are suing McDonald's for $10 million.

The man says he bit into a hamburger and had a severe allergic reaction to the cheese melted on it. Jeromy Jackson, who is in his early 20s, says he clearly ordered two Quarter Pounders without cheese at the McDonald's restaurant in Star City before heading to Clarksburg.

The lawsuit alleges Jeromy "was only moments from death" or serious injury by the time he reached the hospital. Houston said his clients were in Morgantown in October 2005 and stopped at the Star City McDonald's on the way home to Clarksburg. Jeromy Jackson was living with his mother at the time.

Jeromy did his part to make it known he didn't want cheese on the hamburgers because he is allergic, Houston said. He told a worker through the ordering speaker and then two workers face-to-face at the pay and pick-up windows that he couldn't eat cheese, Houston said.

"By my count, he took at least five independent steps to make sure that thing had no cheese on it," Houston said. "And it did and almost cost him his life."

After getting the food, the three drove to Clarksburg and started to eat the food in a darkened room where they were going to watch a movie, Houston said.

-----

OK one thing I can see where this can be thrown out of court (but it won't).

1. His lawyer says he took "5 steps to make sure it had no cheese". Really? He could have avoided everything if he had done the most fool-proof check of all - open the bun to see if it has cheese! Like duh. How stupid are people? I had a girlfriend who was allergic to anything dairy and she checked EVERYTHING thoroughly like it was a crime scene on "CSI". She caught any cheese or milk by product every time.

There were two other people with him. None of these rocket scientists bothered to check for him?

Lastly, he ordered two Quarter Pounders. How big is this guy? Two? That's a half pound of meat plus bread & condiments. How about a side salad fat boy. For someone with food allergies you'd think he'd eat a better diet. And why not simply order 4 hamburgers? They don't come with cheese - ever.

Didn't this guy see Lethal Weapon 2 where Joe Pesci explains why you don't order at the drive-thru window?

Just another example of our victim culture where no one is responsible for their own actions. I think McDonald's is liable for his medical costs and that's it. Beyond that, the judge should call him an idiot and kick him out of the court room - and his Mom's house.

Hot Off The Presses!

2007-08-08T17:04:00.000-04:00

Here are two strange items: Fidel Castro is worried about Cuban boxers defecting, and people are fleeing the UK in droves. Now, why wouldn't people want to live in these two models of Utopian socialism?

You simply won't believe what some people are saying about the Minneapolis bridge collapse. Somali muslims blame the collapse on Bush and liken America to a crumbling, Third World country; Jesse Jackson says it's the fault of the "right-wing;" and the liberals are agitating to raise the gas tax. The liberals pushed through a light rail system in Minneapolis and guess what? Nobody uses it.

By the way, a little quick question here.
What's the top US natural disaster, the greatest? The 1900 Galveston hurricane, 8,000 dead.
The second greatest natural disaster, the 1936 heat wave, the Dust Bowl, 5,000 dead.
The third greatest US natural disaster, the great Okeechobee hurricane, 2500 dead, 1928.
The fourth greatest US natural disaster, the Johnstown flood in Pennsylvania in 1889, 2200 dead. And the fifth greatest US natural disaster, Louisiana hurricane of 1893, before they were named, 2,000 dead.

The top five greatest US natural disasters, 1990 and prior.

Breaking news from ABC TV!!!

2007-08-07T02:25:00.000-04:00

A bulletin, bulletin, bulletin, bulletin, bulletin! Breaking news from ABC!

It's time to stop the check writing in Minnesota. A coal mine in central Utah just collapsed, or earlier today after a 4.0 magnitude earthquake, trapping six miners inside.

The infrastructure is going to hell under the Bush administration. My God, mines can't even handle a 4.0 earthquake! What's happening to this country? What do they think we are, Russia? China?

What do you mean, "Why are we mining coal?"
That's a good question.

Here's your answer:
It's a clandestine Bush project, obviously, mining coal to pollute the planet, destroy our climate.

'nuff said.

Quote of the Day

2007-06-20T03:33:00.000-04:00

The Knights vs. The Jihadists

19 June 2007 @ 8:55AM >> The Washington Times reports that Pakistan is condemning Britain’s decision to grant knighthood to author Salman Rushdie. You may recall that Rushie’s 1988 novel The Satanic Verses led to an Iranian fatwa being issued against him that ordered his death.

This leads to the Quote of the Day, courtesy of Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, Pakistan’s Religious Affairs Minister:

The West is accusing Muslims of extremism and terrorism. If someone exploded a bomb on his body, he would be right to do so unless the British government apologizes and withdraws the ’sir’ title.

In other words, do what we say—and don’t accuse us of being terrorists!—or we’ll blow you up.

Toyota Prius vs. The Hummer

2007-06-13T14:03:00.000-04:00

Here is an ubridged version of a great article on the Hybrid myth -

March 7, 2007

Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage
By Chris Demorro
Staff Writer

The Toyota Prius has become the flagship car for those in our society so environmentally conscious that they are willing to spend a premium to show the world how much they care. Unfortunately for them, their ultimate ‘green car’ is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America; it takes more combined energy per Prius to produce than a Hummer.

The Prius is powered by not one, but two engines: a standard 76 horsepower, 1.5-liter gas engine found in most cars today and a battery- powered engine that deals out 67 horsepower and a whooping 295ft/lbs of torque, below 2000 revolutions per minute. Essentially, the Toyota Synergy Drive system, propels the car from a dead stop to up to 30mph. This is where the largest percent of gas is consumed. As any physics major can tell you, it takes more energy to get an object moving than to keep it moving. The battery is recharged through the braking system, as well as when the gasoline engine takes over anywhere north of 30mph.

Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.

The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.

The journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery. Are these not sounding less and less like environmentally sound cars and more like a farce?

When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis.

Through a study by CNW Marketing called “Dust to Dust,” the total combined energy is taken from all the electrical, fuel, transportation, materials (metal, plastic, etc) and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime of a vehicle. The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles - the expected lifespan of the Hybrid.

The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it.

So, if you are really an environmentalist - ditch the Prius. Instead, buy one of the most economical cars available - a Toyota Scion xB. The Scion only costs a paltry $0.48 per mile to put on the road. If you are still obsessed over gas mileage - buy a Chevy Aveo and fix that lead foot.

One last fun fact for you: it takes five years to offset the premium price of a Prius. Meaning, you have to wait 60 months to save any money over a non-hybrid car because of lower gas expenses.

Terrorism - Just a Bumper Sticker?

2007-06-02T15:49:00.000-04:00

Democratic candidate John Edwards recently said that the global war on terrorism doesn't really exist and "its just a bumper sticker slogan" used by the Bush Administration to scare Americans.

OK lets see where we are in just the last two years:
Outside the US:
June 3, 2006 - Canadian police halted a "real and serious" terror threat in and around Toronto. Twelve men and five youths said to have been inspired by al Qaeda were arrested in the operation involving hundreds of officers.

Aug, 11, 2006 - Islamic Terrorists were in the "final stages" of a plot to simultaneously blow up as many as 10 jets leaving Britain for the U.S., sending the planes and thousands of passengers into the Atlantic Ocean. An undercover British agent infiltrated the group.

Inside the US:
June 2006, seven Muslim men were arrested in the early stages of a plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and destroy FBI offices and other buildings

July 2006 - Authorities broke up a plot to bomb underwater New York City train tunnels to flood lower Manhattan.

May 2007 - Six Muslim men were arrested in a plot to unleash a bloody rampage on Fort Dix in New Jersey.

June 2, 2007 - Three people were arrested and one other was being sought Saturday, June 2 in connection to a plot to blow up jet-fuel lines at John F. Kennedy International Airport.

So...John Edwards. What does it take to convince you? Some days I really do believe Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Comrade Hillary

2007-05-29T12:40:00.000-04:00

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) -- Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it's time to replace an "on your own" society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an "ownership society" really is an "on your own" society that has widened the gap between rich and poor. "I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said.
--------------

well, well, well, Comrade Hillary Clinton speaks her true outlook for America. But this should be nothing new. Her and Bill have made outwardly Socialist statements for almost 15 years. Remember "Hillary-care"? Socialized medical care. Even Canadians didn't like her plan. I wrote a post a while ago on a Hillary statement saying she wanted to basically steal $40 Billion in American oil company profits and spend it on whatever she wants.

I also like how the Associated Press calls it a "broad economic vision". It's broad alright. Lenin would be proud.

Socialism - exploiting the real workers by giving a share of their hard work to the slackers. This was tried by the pilgrims of the Mayflower and they almost perished. It wasn't until they converted to an "ownership society" did they thrive and prosper.

Think of it this way - how would feel if your boss gave your hard earned bonus to the guy in the mail room just to make everyone equal? Because it's not fair you make more money than he does. That is socialism my friend.

Ms. Pelosi Goes to Greenland

2007-05-29T01:15:00.001-04:00

So...Ms. Pelosi goes to Greenland and says this "we saw firsthand evidence that climate change is a reality; there is just no denying it."

"It wasn't caused by the people of Greenland — it was caused by the behavior of the rest of the world," she said.

Scientists have noticed that Greenland's output of ice into the North Atlantic had increased dramatically, doubling over the decade that ended in 2005.

OK, here's the thing - why is Greenland called "Greenland" in the first place? This was a question we joked about when I was in grade school in the 70's - "why is Greenland covered in ice and Iceland green?". Kind of like "why do we drive on parkways and park in driveways?". A conundrum.

I'll tell you why - because when the Vikings discovered the continent 1000 years ago it was - - - - - - - wait for it - - - - - - -Green! Shocking isn't it? Yes, Greenland was once actually green. So green in fact that the Vikings settled on it, built villages, grew crops etc. Evidence of this has been found since the ice has started to recede in many areas. The fact that Greenland is losing it's ice is not only unremarkable, it's the natural course of the continent.

My biggest problem with these climate doomsayers (besides how they are very loose with the science behind their claims) is that they make every single climate event happening today out to be as if this is the first time it's every happened in the history of the Earth's. A 4 BILLION year history.

Does anyone honestly believe that in the last 4 billion years our planet has not warmed and cooled, ice formed and melted, hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes and wild fires wreaked devastation?

spare me.

I'm still waiting for the day these climate scare mongers somehow blame mankind for earthquakes. Believe me, they're working on it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - we are NOTHING to this planet. It hardly blinks at anything we throw at it. It lives and breathes on a much larger scale than we can imagine. It's been through far worse than we puny, humans with our jet planes and SUV's. If the earth wanted to tomorrow, it could shake us off like bad case of fleas - and it wouldn't miss us. To the Earth we are nothing but a minor surface infestation. When the power of this planet shows itself in earthquakes, hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes etc. we can only get out of it's way. We are POWERLESS to it's forces. To think that we can affect it by driving a car or using a can of hairspray is just sheer lunacy.

It's not only sheer lunacy but intoxicating vanity on our part.

Cho Seung-Hui & Political Correctness

2007-04-19T00:50:00.000-04:00

I'm not going to say much here that hasn't been reported, posted or blogged about the Virginia Tech killings.

There was a major and serious mental problem with Cho Seung-Hui and every teacher and student who shared a class with him knew it. He scared the hell out of people, wrote hideous, hateful and violence ridden words, he stalked two fellow women students AND he was diagnosed as mentally ill - yet nothing was done to stop him

Are we fucking stupid or what?

How many warning bells have to go off before anybody will step out of the bounds of being "PC" and do something about people like this? When a young loner does nothing but speak of killing and murdering people, somewhere, somebody MUST take action regardless of the consequences to being politically correct. University Police refused to take action against Cho because his"freedom of speech" rights could be violated if they acted upon his violence ridden plays and essays. Huh?? WTF is that about? Freedom of speech? How about the right to live?

When someone exudes the textbook traits of a "killer in waiting" you should NEVER hesitate to take action - regardless if it will violate his 1st amendment rights. These are the signs people - they always have been. One brave professor saw the signs and tried to take action, but it fell on deaf ears. Where have we heard this before?

It used to be in this culture that doing what was right was more important than doing what easy especially if it appeared they might violate the rights of others. Who was protecting the rights of those killed to lead a decent life, the right to pursue the American dream, to raise a family, to love and cherish? Huh? Who was defending their right to live? No one. We've become such a society of wussies - afraid to offend anyone or anything. Afraid to do what's right before it's too late.

Here's a simple analogy: if I find a pit of rattlesnakes in my backyard near where my daughter usually plays, I'm not going to wait until they make a threatening move against her before I do something about them. As soon as I had found the snakes, they would be dead. End of story. Screw their right to survive. No calls to pest control or the ASPCA. They're dead. I'm not taking the chance with my daughter.

Why isn't this simple logic used in cases like this - cases when people see the warning signs, try to warn authorities. How many signs need to be there before action is taken to protect the lives of ordinary citizens? Someone please tell me.

This has happened over and over again in history - the Rev. Jim Jones, Jeffrey Dahmer, Oklahoma City Bomber Timothy McVeigh, Branch Davidian leader David Koresh, Unabomber Ted Kazinski, Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, Osama Bin Laden and now Cho Seung-Hui. How many times?

I say again - are we fucking stupid?

Undeniable Fact About CO2

2007-04-02T23:08:00.000-04:00

Carbon Dioxide (aka C02) has just been heralded as a "pollutant" by a Supreme Court Judge. This judge I guess never went to science class.

FACT: Carbon Dioxide is necessary for life on this planet. During photosynthesis plants & trees take in CO2 and turn it into carbohydrates to sustain their lives. In the process they release Oxygen.

You remember Oxygen don't you? It's that invisible gas we all breathe to sustain our lives. We breathe it, our pets breathe it, dolphins and whales breathe it, hell even the polar bears breathe it.

Did you know that at one time in the Earth's geological history Oxygen was a metabolic poison in our atmosphere? But over time life adapted to breathing it and well...here we are trying to diminish it.

So for all intents and purposes, this Supreme Court judge has declared breathing akin to polluting the environment. So everything that exhales CO2 must die to save the planet? This is the kind of insane thinking of the global warming kool-aid drinkers.

They ignore three major facts.
1. Water vapor from our oceans is the single biggest green house gas.
2. CO2 takes up 4% of our atmosphere's gases.
3. The Sun is the biggest factor in the warming of this planet.

Why not regulate water vapor and ban the Sun from shining? Hmm? Well, they can't - so where do they go? Humans. The only thing they can regulate.

Liberals drone on and on about Republican efforts to control our lives. Well what party does Al Gore belong to? Doesn't regulating what car we can drive, how much energy we can consume, what light bulbs we can use, whether third world countries can develop by using gas, oil and coal etc. a major intrusion into our lives? Isn't the fear of global warming Al Gore perpetuates just as big as as the so-called "fear" Liberals say the Bush Administration uses to fuel it's "war on terror"?

I'm sorry folks but the war on Islamic Fundamentalism is real, it's undeniable and there's no need for a consensus of opinion. And its not going to take 50 years to happen. It's already here.

So you tell me, which is more important - switching to florescent light bulbs or killing terrorists?

The choice is yours.

Peacetime Military Deaths in Clinton Years

2007-02-20T22:34:00.000-05:00

Here's an interesting story.
It's in the New York Sun. It's by Alicia Colon, and it's entitled, "Heroes and Cowards." Here's the interesting paragraph. “The total military dead in the Iraq war between 2003 and this month stands at about 3,133. This is tragic, as are all deaths due to war, and we are facing a cowardly enemy unlike any other in our past that hides behind innocent citizens. Each death is blazoned in the headlines of newspapers and Internet sites. What is never compared is the number of military deaths during the Clinton administration: 1,245 in 1993; 1,109 in 1994; 1,055 in 1995; 1,008 in 1996. That's 4,417 deaths in peacetime but, of course, who's counting?”

woah...

Now, you might wonder, well, she doesn't cite the source of these figures. But I found them. There's a Department of Defense pdf file on death rates that you can download. I went to download it and I got it and then subsequent attempts after that the site was either down or it was locked and loaded. The point here is, of course these 4,417 deaths between 1993 and 1996, those are deaths in peacetime, those are for the most part accidental deaths. I just wanted to get this out there and on the record: more deaths in four years of the Clinton administration due to military accidents than deaths in Iraq. If you look at this pdf, you will find that in 1980, which was the last year of the Carter administration, there were far more military deaths in 1980 than in any year of the Bush administration. The death rate was also higher, and that's because of differences in the care given the training and standards and so forth. The point here is that we're fighting the Iraq war with lower casualties than casualties expected from training accidents during peacetime.

I mention this just to show you how out of proportion and agenda oriented the death count in Iraq is.

re: Warming Planet Meeting Cancelled Due to Snowstorm!

2007-02-13T21:21:00.000-05:00

Tue Feb 13 2007 19:31:25 ET
HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELLED AFTER SNOW/ICE STORM
HEARING NOTICE

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 14, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building has been postponed due to inclement weather. The hearing is entitled “Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?”

The hearing will be rescheduled to a date and time to be announced later.

DC WEATHER REPORT:
Wednesday: Freezing rain in the morning...then a chance of snow in the afternoon. Ice accumulation of less than one quarter of an inch.

Wednesday Night: Partly cloudy. Lows around 18. Northwest winds around 20 mph.
------
probably one of the best news headlines ever...
Is it just me or does it seem every time Al Gore opens his mouth the temperature drops 5 degrees?

Hillary Rodham Clinton - Defined

2007-02-06T14:50:00.000-05:00

When ExxonMobil announced a profit of $40 billion, here's what Hillary Rodham Clinton said in her own words.

HILLARY: I want to take those profits, and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, the woman who would be president, actually told you and me and all of us, that she wants to take $40 billion of profits earned by an American company and put that money into whatever she wants to put the money into, something like alternative fuels.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been defined - - Socialist.

Hillary Answered 1 Question

2007-01-29T19:24:00.000-05:00

Well, so Hillary was asked what qualifies her to deal with a world full of evil men. Her answer? A joke about her husband Bill's marriage infidelity.

huh?

Ok, so let me get this straight...being too stupid or too blind to your husband's constant philandering and lying - for decades - qualifies you to deal with murderous dictators? I'm sorry if I missed something here but how does one equate to the other? How does having your head so far up your butt that you either can't see what's happening in your own home or that you are too driven by political ambition that you will overlook such behavior make you a good war time President?

Hillary is "supposed" to be the smartest woman on the planet according to some democrats and liberals but somehow missed the boat about her husband.

For 8 years her husband Bill didn't have the stomach for waging war with our enemies, so how will she be any different?

Past Time for a Woman President?

2007-01-29T01:56:00.000-05:00

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton drew big crowds and loud cheers on Saturday during her first visit to Iowa as a presidential contender, defending her votes on Iraq and saying it was "about time" for a woman president.

"It's about time, if not past time, we had a woman president," she told an enthusiastic and overflow crowd of 1,500 Iowa Democrats jammed into a high school gymnasium in Des Moines. Reuters Jan. 28, 2006

----------------
Well, well, well so Hillary thinks it's past time for a woman President. Really? Let's see her answer these simple questions shall we?

1. How will you deal with evil men plotting to destroy our way of life?
2. How will you interact with leaders of countries whose religion tells them women are barely a step above a dog in the societal chain?
3. How could you possibly be taken seriously from above said leaders? What weight would your words carry with them?
4. With cold, calculating, patient, hard as stone terrorists plotting to attack US citizens anywhere in the world, do you really think we need a "Mom" leading us right now? Or are we better suited with a "Dad" who wields a large metal bat?

Winston Churchill was the perfect war time Prime Minister for the UK during WWII. He was strong, defiant and willing to defend his country no matter what the cost. But after the war was over, in peace time, the UK didn't need a man like him anymore and so he wasn't re-elected. He wasn't an appropriate peace time leader.

Ronald Reagan was the perfect President when we needed someone to defeat the USSR and end the cold war. Its that kind of determination and willingness to stand and fight - not negotiate - that we need today.

And so we come back to Hillary. How in the world does she think she could possibly be relevant in a VERY male dominated, terrorist climate? I'm not saying that in chauvinistic way. But with evil men plotting to destroy Western civilization we better, no, we DESERVE a war time president. I don't think she has the guts. He husband certainly didn't. A woman's touch simply isn't appropriate now. There will be a time and a place for a woman President but given the current state of world affairs, I say let "Mom" sit this one out.

Unhappy About What America?

2007-01-15T03:54:00.000-05:00

A recent Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3s of the citizenry just ain't happy and want a change. So being the knuckle-dragger I am, I started thinking, 'What are we so unhappy about?' Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy people have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year? Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state?

Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved. Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital. Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of having a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes; an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss.

This is all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers. How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy. Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people on earth who do nothing but complain about what we don't have and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here. I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession?

Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from terrorist attacks? The commander-in-chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me? Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a 'general' discharge, an 'other than honorable' discharge or, worst case scenario, a 'dishonorable' discharge after a few days in the brig. So why then the flat out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts.

How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells. Just ask why they are going to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife, but if he did how he would have It's insane! Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage, and, I might add, every day is better than the one before.

re: Saddam Executed

2006-12-31T03:13:00.000-05:00

Video of his Execution

On the Gallows, Curses for U.S. and ‘Traitors’
By Marc Santora

BAGHDAD, Dec. 30 — Saddam Hussein never bowed his head, until his neck snapped.

His last words were equally defiant.

“Down with the traitors, the Americans, the spies and the Persians.”

The final hour of Iraq’s former ruler began about 5 a.m., when American troops escorted him from Camp Cropper, near the Baghdad airport, to Camp Justice, another American base at the heart of the city.

There, he was handed over to a newly trained unit of the Iraqi National Police, with whom he would later exchange curses. Iraq took full custody of Mr. Hussein at 5:30 a.m.

Two American helicopters flew 14 witnesses from the Green Zone to the execution site — a former headquarters of the Istikhbarat, the deposed government’s much feared military intelligence outfit, now inside the American base.

Mr. Hussein was escorted into the room where the gallows, with its red railing, stood, greeted at the door by three masked executioners known as ashmawi. Several of the witnesses present — including Munkith al-Faroun, the deputy prosecutor for the court; Munir Haddad, the deputy chief judge for the Iraqi High Tribunal; and Sami al-Askari, a member of Parliament — described in detail how the execution unfolded and independently recounted what was said.

To protect himself from the bitter cold before dawn during the short trip, Mr. Hussein wore a 1940s-style wool cap, a scarf and a long black coat over a white collared shirt.

His executioners wore black ski masks, but Mr. Hussein could still see their deep brown skin and hear their dialects, distinct to the Shiite southern part of the country, where he had so brutally repressed two separate uprisings.

The small room had a foul odor. It was cold, had bad lighting and a sad, melancholic atmosphere. With the witnesses and 11 other people — including guards and the video crew — it was cramped.

Mr. Hussein’s eyes darted about, trying to take in just who was going to put an end to him.

The executioners took his hat and his scarf.

Mr. Hussein, whose hands were bound in front of him, was taken to the judge’s room next door. He followed each order he was given.

He sat down and the verdict, finding him guilty of crimes against humanity, was read aloud. “Long live the nation!” Mr. Hussein shouted. “Long live the people! Long live the Palestinians!”

He continued shouting until the verdict was read in full, and then he composed himself again.

When he rose to be led back to the execution room at 6 a.m., he looked strong, confident and calm. Whatever apprehension he may have had only minutes earlier had faded.

The general prosecutor asked Mr. Hussein to whom he wanted to give his Koran. He said Bandar, the son of Awad al-Bandar, the former chief justice of the Revolutionary Court who was also to be executed soon.

The room was quiet as everyone began to pray, including Mr. Hussein. “Peace be upon Mohammed and his holy family.” Two guards added, “Supporting his son Moktada, Moktada, Moktada.” Mr. Hussein seemed a bit stunned, swinging his head in their direction.

They were talking about Moktada al-Sadr, the firebrand cleric whose militia is now committing some of the worst violence in the sectarian fighting; he is the son of a revered Shiite cleric, Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, whom many believe Mr. Hussein ordered murdered.

“Moktada?” he spat out, mixing sarcasm and disbelief.

Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraq’s national security adviser, asked Mr. Hussein if he had any remorse or fear. “No,” he said bluntly. “I am a militant and I have no fear for myself. I have spent my life in jihad and fighting aggression. Anyone who takes this route should not be afraid.”

Mr. Rubaie, standing shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Hussein, asked him about the killing of the elder Mr. Sadr. They were standing so close to each other that others could not hear the exchange.

One of the guards, though, became angry. “You have destroyed us,” the masked man yelled. “You have killed us. You have made us live in destitution.” Mr. Hussein was scornful: “I have saved you from destitution and misery and destroyed your enemies, the Persians and Americans.”

The guard cursed him. “God damn you.”
Mr. Hussein replied, “God damn you.”

Two witnesses, apparently uninvolved in selecting the guards, exchanged a quiet joke, saying they gathered that the goal of disbanding the militias had yet to be accomplished.

The deputy prosecutor, Mr. Faroun, berated the guards, saying, “I will not accept any offense directed at him.”

Mr. Hussein was led up to the gallows without a struggle. His hands were unbound, put behind his back, then fastened again. He showed no remorse. He held his head high.

The executioners offered him a hood. He refused. They explained that the thick rope could cut through his neck and offered to use the scarf he had worn earlier to keep that from happening. Mr. Hussein accepted.

He stood on the high platform, with a deep hole beneath it.

He said a last prayer. Then, with his eyes wide open, no stutter or choke in his throat, he said his final words cursing the Americans and the Persians.

At 6:10 a.m., the trapdoor swung open. He seemed to fall a good distance, but he died swiftly. After just a minute, his body was still. His eyes still were open but he was dead. Despite the scarf, the rope cut a gash into his neck.

His body stayed hanging for another nine minutes as those in attendance broke out in prayer, praising the Prophet, at the death of a dictator.

The Execution of Saddam Hussein

2006-12-29T23:50:00.000-05:00

Game over. Dead.

Maybe some souls he put to death too young and too innocent can rest in peace now.

Iraq Death Toll Exceeds 9/11 Deaths

2006-12-26T13:12:00.000-05:00

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - The U.S. military death toll in Iraq has reached 2,974, one more than the number of deaths in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, according to an Associated Press count on Tuesday.

--------

The point being? What does one have to do with the other? Iraqi military deaths have zero to do with the Sept. 11 attacks.

Would these same "drive by media" types people have reported that fewer allied troops were killed during WWII than Jews killed by the Third Reich if that would have be detrimental to the current presidency?

Top 10 Democrat Sex Scandals in Congress

2006-10-06T09:57:00.000-04:00

Information compiled from the Washington Post, “Congressional Sex Scandals in History,” and other sources.

10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation.

9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990.

8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990.

7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.

6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later.

4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.

3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms.

2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.

1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991.

While I don't condone sexual predators of ANY kind, all I ask for is a little balance. Liberals LOVE to pounce on Republicans who violate ethics and moral boundries because Republicans/Conservatives are generally know as the "Moralities Party". Ok that may be partially true but which is worse - standing for morality and promoting proper behavior and having a bad apple every now and then or being the party that condones, conjoles and coddles amazing feats of immoral and indignint behavior? The Democrats - a party whose members rally for the release of convicted killers, wants to "understand" sex offenders, rapists, molesters instead of punishing them and pushes legislation that would give Islamic terrorists the same legal rights as the pot smoker busted with a joint in his car on a Saturday night.

Again, I just ask for a little balance here.

Come to think of it, we are just weeks away from the November mid term elections and can anyone tell me what the Democratic campaign platform IS? Not what it's against but what its for? I'd like to know because I don't see or hear it anywhere. What are the issues they're running on? Got any ideas?

JFK illegally targeting Muslims, groups say

2006-08-26T00:55:00.000-04:00

Dateline: Aug 25, 2006
Source: Newsday

(this is really good)

Muslim, Arab and South Asian passengers are being profiled by Homeland Security officers at Kennedy Airport, civil liberties groups said Wednesday, citing a New Jersey family that was detained and interrogated after a flight from Dubai last week.

Nahgam Alyaqoubi and her daughters, Arwa and Sumia Ibrahim, naturalized American citizens, said 200 other passengers of Arab, Muslim or South Asian backgrounds were detained on Aug. 15 in a roped-off area, days after the London bomb suspects were arrested.

The family joined officials from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU - aka Islamo-Fascist Rights Supporters) and other rights groups at a news conference in the Manhattan office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The ACLU and other rights groups said they planned to investigate this and several other complaints of profiling.

---

Ok while I don't agree a Mother and two daughters should be detained since 100% of Islamic Terrorism is carried out by Muslim males aged between 18-40, I do support profiling. Its when I'm pulled off the line because I have a steel support toe in my work shoes that I hate profiling.

So tell me what does the standard, stereotypical Islamic Terrorist look like? Shouldn't you start by looking more closely at the people who resemble that stereotype and work from there? Seems pretty practical to me.

If guys that look like Van Halen or Thurston Howell III were blowing people up, I'll still be for it. Its what they look like, even if I do too. I'd understand and be pissed at those guys for making my life hell.

Where is the outcry from the Muslim communty that this very small percentage of male Islamics are ruining it for the 98% of law abiding Muslims? I just don't hear it. Of course its not their fault, its the big, bad US Govt's fault. It's Bush's fault, Cheney's fault, Rumsfeld's fault.

No, its radical Islamics fault folks. Shocking as that may be. Nobody elses. But groups like the ACLU LOVE to come to the aid of anyone who's anti-white, anti-establishment, anti-Bush. Regardless of where the blame really is.

These women should not be blaming the screeners at JFK but laying the blame on Bin Laden and his ilk. They are truly the ones at the heart of this problem, not the US Govt. We're just trying to protect ourselves.

re: World Trade Center film

2006-08-19T03:00:00.000-04:00

I have only written about two other films here. Peter Jackson's "King Kong" and "United 93" but I mist comment on Oliver Stone's gripping new film "World Trade Center"

I haven't had much respect for Stone and his conspiracy and anti-war films of past but his new film deserves much respect. Thankfully Stone has kept all the politics out of this film. This story is not really about the attacks of Sept. 11 but what happened in the aftermath. By telling the stories of survivors 18 & 19 of the 20 people pulled alive from the wreckage of the Twin Towers, Stone paints a stirring picture of hope, courage, duty, honor and friendship.

Most of the film is dark and cramped as we watch the faces of the two Port Authority officers trapped in the rubble under Tower 1 hang on for dear life in what must have seemed like certain death. The flashbacks and glimpses into their families lives as they cope with the aftermath give a genuine insight into these two men and why they HAD to survive.

The only pro-war stance in the film is the sub plot of a retired Marine in Connnecticut, who after witnessing the attacks tells his co-workers we're at war that he's needed at the rescue site. After getting a haircut and dressing his battle fatigues, he drives to NYC to join the search efforts. He ends up being instrumental in finding the two buried officers. Upon their rescue see hear him phone his office and tell them he doesn't know when he'll be back to work "because this country will need great men to avenge this". That man re-enlisted in the Marines and served tours of duty in Afghanistan & Iraq. Pro-attack flag waving from Oliver Stone? That's something new.

The performances by Nicholas Cage and Michael Peña are outstanding considering that a great deal of their screen time is spent buried under rubble with close ups of their faces. Fine acting for sure.

There is a nice end piece to this film that happens two years after the attacks. We see for a very quick instance Cage and Pena meet the real life people they portrayed at a barbeque. Nice touch.

Its not going to win awards or make huge amounts of money but this film deserves some heartfelt respect for telling the true story of courage and determination - truthfully. Thumbs up for Mr. Stone.

Take That Global Warming!!

2006-08-19T02:53:00.000-04:00

Rescuers searched Friday for 30 people missing after the devastating explosion of a volcano that killed at least one person and appeared poised for a new eruption.

The head of Ecuador's Geophysics Institute urged people to stay away from the 16,575-foot volcano in the nation's central Andes. "There is more potential for it to do very big things. We see that there is a fault in the volcano and it is very unstable," institute head Hugo Yepes said. "There is great activity inside."

Volcanic ash rained down about 140 miles west of Tungurahua, whose crater filled with magma and exploded before dawn Thursday.
-----

This vocano is wiping out cities and people are actually worried about global warming? This just proves again how insignificant we are to this planet. The Earth could wipe the human race from existence tomorrow and no "Save the Planet" campaign could stop it.

The Case for Torture

2006-08-17T03:17:00.000-04:00

Reports from Pakistan suggest that much of the intelligence that led to the raids came from that country and that some of it may have been obtained in ways entirely unacceptable to human rights groups here in the United States and in Britain. In particular Rashid Rauf, a British citizen said to be a prime source of information leading to last week's arrests, has been held without access to full consular or legal assistance. Reports in Pakistani papers that he had "broken" under interrogation have been echoed by local human rights bodies.

Personally, I'm not willing to conclude that torture was used as I'm not willing to take some international human rights groups word for it. Their definition of torture and mine probably aren't the same.

That being said, this does pose something of an interesting moral question. The information from this detainee in Pakistan was undoubtedly crucial in thwarting a major terror plot that could have killed thousands and had dire consequences on the global economy. In light of that, how important was it that he have an attorney present during questioning? What if he'd been granted a lawyer and, during the subsequent delays, the terror plot was carried out?

Going even further to the extreme, suppose this guy was subjected to some aggressive interrogation...how far is too far? Is making the room uncomfortably hot or cold torture? How about sleep deprivation? How about humiliation and fear? How about a few slaps to the face?

When we're talking about stopping a terror attack that is imminent how concerned can we afford to be about the treatment of one informant?

It begs an answer.

Bit of History for Global Warmers: Look at 1930

2006-08-04T14:44:00.001-04:00

As the local and national news outlets foam at the mouth to cover what is a yearly event, - the hot temperatures during Summer - and hinting at the cause could be the dreaded "global warming" I offer this news story.

(CNSNews.com) - People sweltering from a heat wave in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. might find cold comfort in the fact that the temperatures of the past few days are not the hottest on record. That "honor" belongs to a summer 76 years ago -- decades before the controversy over "man-made global warming" began.

"From June 1 to August 31, 1930, 21 days had high temperatures that were 100 degrees or above" in the metropolitan Washington, D.C., area, Patrick Michaels, senior fellow for environmental studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Cybercast News Service. "That summer has never been approached, and it's not going to be approached this year."

Between July 19 and Aug. 9 of that year, heat records were set on nine days and they remain unbroken more than three-quarters of a century later.

However, the first six months of this year were the hottest across the nation since the federal government began keeping records in 1890, according to Dennis Feltgen, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who told NBC News that about 50 all-time high-temperature records were broken during the month of July.

But Michaels noted that high temperatures are common in the middle of the summer.

"Climatologically, the last week in July is the warmest week of the year on average, and when the atmospheric flow patterns get into anomalously warm configurations during this time of the year, temperatures will skyrocket," he said.

-----

so take that Global Warming fantatics. 1930....read again 1930. Long before worldwide industrialization and SUV's.

Beside that somehow high temperatures in the Summer is big news? Am I missing something? It's like making a huge news story about cold temps in Wisconsin in January.

Because It's All About Him

2006-07-26T13:06:00.000-04:00

If John Kerry were president, peace would magically descend on the Middle East:

U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who was in town Sunday [...], took time to take a jab at the Bush administration for its lack of leadership in the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.
"If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry [...]

Sure. Simply by being inside the Oval Office for an extended period of time, the mere presence of John Kerry's superior intellect would bring about a peace that had eluded the region for generations.

I'm surprised Kerry's ego hasn't yet acquired enough mass to become visible to the naked eye.

Clinton Speaks Out His Ass Again.

2006-06-13T02:15:00.000-04:00

As Tropical Storm Alberto threatened to strengthen into the ninth hurricane in 22 months to affect Florida, former President Clinton predicted today that Republican environmental policies will lead to more severe storms.

"It is now generally recognized that while Al Gore and I were ridiculed, we were right about global warming," Clinton said at a fundraiser for the Florida Democratic Party. "It's a serious problem. It's going to lead to more hurricanes."

The only problem with this stupid and obviously "catered to the crowd" statement is that in ex-Vice President Al Gore's own Global Doomsday documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," one of his own climate charts clearly states that global warming worsened during the Clinton Administration.

Oops....

I've said this before and I'll say it again, when will these politicians realize that NOTHING gets by anyone, anymore. You can make blanket statements like this and not expect someone, somewhere to call you to task on them.

Ding Dong Zarqawi's Dead!

2006-06-08T17:48:00.000-04:00

Rot in Hell MotherFucker.

re: June 6, 2006

2006-05-02T12:24:00.000-04:00

The Number of the Beast, 666, is mentioned in the Bible's book of Revelation and is believed by some to be when the Antichrist will exercise power over Earth.

The Internet is full of websites that predict terrible things could happen June 6, 2006.

One website warns that the "Bible Code says 2006 A.D. is the Year of the Beast" and predicts that the Antichrist will reveal himself. It also says there may be a holy war against Israel and that the United States and Russia would be drawn into a dangerous conflict as a result.

"We have announced that wherever America does something evil, the first place that we target will be Israel," ISNA quoted a senior Iran Revolutionary Guards commander, Rear Admiral Mohammad-Ebrahim Dehqani, as saying on Tuesday.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map".

Have any doubts about who "the beast" might be?

re: why "United 93" is a must see film

2006-05-02T00:16:00.000-04:00

My wife and I took in the film "United 93" this past weekend partly because I wanted to see it and partly because a portion of the box office take of the opening weekend went to the families of those murdered on 9/11/01.

Now I understand it's not usual fare for most people. Movies are escape from the every day realities we all share - work, family, commuting, bad pizza etc. but this is a film I think everyone should see. Not only for it's historical importance, but it seriously puts in perspective who and what we face with Islamic fanaticism. This movie is neither sympathetic to them nor overtly hateful to the United 93 hijackers. It shows them realistically. These were young men driven by a twisted, religious conviction to their faith. These were not automotons or robots but flesh and blood people who believed what they were doing was righteous for their faith and their God. To conceive that people in this world consider the outright murder of innocent men, women and children a holy ideal is downright scary enough as it is, but this film shows you that these men believed in it, were sure of it and were willing to kill and die for it.

The film is done is a semi-documentary style, cutting back and forth between various flight control towers, the military air command and United Flight 93. The pace is brisk, swift and tense and filmed in a "you are there" sense of perspective.

There is only one shot of a plane hitting the World Trade Center. That's all that is needed. It brings it all back home for everyone. I heard gasps in the theatre. Every major news agency has this ridiculous standing order to not show the planes hitting the buildings or the towers falling. Why? I do not know. They will show unspeakable aftermaths of murder, fire, natural disaster but an act of overt terrorism is off limits? Huh?? It has to be shown. People get complacent too easily. They need to be reminded of who and what these people are.

Too soon? Not soon enough I say. People have short memories of why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. This film reminds them why we are there. For some this film will make them sad, for others like me, it will make them angry all over again. The rage I felt on that day came rushing back when I saw the shot of the plane hitting the south tower. There is nothing more shocking, more visually caustic than that explosion as the plane vaporizes upon impact. I gripped my armrest in anger.

The naysayers of this film, the Bush administration and the war against terrorism have another thing to contend with. Those 8min. This film clearly shows how unprepared we as a nation and defense force were on that day. Liberals and Michael Moore types love to bring up the 8min Pres. Bush sat in that classroom after being told we're under attack as being the defining moment of George Bush's imcompetence. Well this film puts that baby to bed once and for all.

The sheer chaos, confusion and inability to gather valid information by not only civilian air control but also by the military air command make those 8min of inaction by the President a non-issue. We didn't know our ass from our elbow on that day. When Mohammad Atta's plane refused to answer and a controller heard a suspicious transmission from the cockpit, there was disbelief from his superiors that it even could be a hijacking. There hadn't been a hijacking of US aircraft in almost 20 years. There is confusion on anything and everything and an amazing inability to compile accurate data on the whereabouts of Atta's plane. Hijackers don't normally turn off the ability to track their plane. No one had even seen this before - because no one had ever done it before. There was no rule book for this kind of hijacking.

When the President was told a second plane had hit the World Trade Center and we were under attack, there was literally nothing - nothing - he could have done to change anything. The first plane attack was still considered an accident - by some reports by a small, single engine plane - until the 2nd plane hit. By that time, the murderers plans had succeeded and any action we could have taken would have made no difference.

Al Qaida's simultaneous attack plan brought confusion and an inability to react effectively. There plan is this - once your enemy realizes he's actually under attack - it's over. Sheer, simplistic genious.

Those 8min will always be used to haunt President Bush but he should feel no shame or regret. It would have made no difference whatsoever. Did you know the govt. didn't even realize Flight 93 was a hijacking until 4min after it had already crashed? Did you know, the military couldn't get clearance from the FAA to move in and protect NYC airspace after the second plane attack? That most air traffic centers and the military learned of the attacks from CNN?

It was only by sheer luck that United 93 was delayed out of Newark allowing the passengers time to realize who their hijackers were and what their mission was. They were only ones given any time to do something.

Therein lies the strength of this film. It shows what we as Americans will do if faced with the choice of life or death - we'll die fighting. Those brave souls knew the risks and took the only avenue they had - they fought for their lives. The passengers on the other three doomed flights never knew their fate or I am sure they would have done as the people on United Flight 93 did. Fight.

Go see "United 93". It's important.

Why Gas Prices are High and the Hybrid Myth

2006-04-27T01:15:00.000-04:00

Did you know that a new oil refinery hasn't been built in the United States in the past 30 years? Or that environmentalists have blocked new oil drilling virtually everywhere in the country? And since oil isn't an option, what about nuclear power? Nope, environmentalists have blocked that too. Even wind farms are out of vogue; the great environmentalist Kennedy clan helped kill a wind farm project in the Nantucket Sound that might have marred the view from their Hyannisport compound. In other words, many of the people using the high price of gas to push for government intervention in the economy are the very people who created the energy supply shortfall in the first place.

But that doesn't let the Republicans off the hook. In fact, it makes it more important to take them to task for their irresponsible economic rhetoric. I expect Democrats to employ socialist arguments; it's what they do. But when Republicans join them, it makes me wonder what the point of voting Republican is. I doubt I'm alone in feeling this way, and if so, the Republicans have a reason to worry about the election in November. They are supposed to be the party that understands basic economic laws like supply and demand. Maybe a good old-fashioned electoral ass-whoopin' is what the Republicans need to remind them of that.

Hybrid Myth:
The Toyota Motor Corporation won't address certain misconceptions that have arisen about thier Toyota Prius model, which they are proud to note is driven by many celebrities, including Prince Charles and HBO's Larry David. Their pioneering gasoline-electric hybrid, introduced in 1999, has become an object of adoration to the world's enlightened car buyers. Their competitors, including America's Big Three, are rushing out hybrid vehicles of their own. Unconfirmed media reports say that Toyota intend to double their hybrid output to 500,000 vehicles next year. Along with other members of the auto industry, I'm sure they'll be lobbying for tax breaks and HOV privileges for hybrid vehicles. However, any romance entering its seventh year tends to go stale. Some purchasers have begun to question the practical value of our Hybrid Synergy Drive technology.

You may be aware that a survey by Consumer Reports found that their vehicles achieve considerably less mileage (some 26% less) than the sticker rating implies. This has led to some unflattering media stories. Prius remains one of the most fuel-efficient cars on the road and I'm sure Toyota applauds your willingness to spend $9,500 over the price of any comparable vehicle for the privilege of saving, at current gasoline prices, approximately $580 a year -- and should the price of gasoline rise to $5, after 10 years and/or 130,000 miles of driving, you might even come close to breaking even on your investment in hybrid technology. Customers have an 'emotional' relationship with their vehicles. that transcends the regrettable truth that driving a fuel-efficient car does not yield any substantial benefits for society if it doesn't save the owner money. Contrary to any loose statements made by marketing partners in the environmental community and media, petroleum not consumed by Prius owners is not 'saved.' It does not remain in the ground.

It is consumed by someone else. Greenhouse pollutants are released. The warranty and owner's manual says nothing about reducing America's dependence on foreign oil. This is not an oversight. The Prius is an 'oil-dependent' vehicle. It runs on gasoline, supplied by the same world market that fuels other vehicles. I share the belief that the days of the internal combustion engine are numbered. Economists suggest this will happen when the price of gasoline rises high enough to make alternative technologies cheaper than gasoline-powered cars.

Take Toyota's new hybrid SUV, which produces 38 more horsepower but gets the same mileage as their conventional version. A New York Times reviewer wrote, 'One question lingers after driving the 2006 Lexus RX400h: How did it come to this, that Toyota is now selling a hybrid gas-electric vehicle with no tangible fuel economy benefits?' We makes me question their latest slogan ('Commute with Nature'). Hybrid technology is not 'green' technology. Like heated seats or flashy exterior trim, it's merely an expensive option that generates large markups for the Toyota Corporation and its dealers.

General Motors, has suggested that hybrid technology is best deployed in city buses, where large fuel consumption and stop-and-go driving might actually make it economically sensible.

Now that's someone thinking on his feet. But clearly not walking with them.

re: More "Flight 93" thoughts

2006-04-04T22:43:00.000-04:00

For all of you people out there who are offended by the trailer or the whole concept of the movie, United 93, I was offended by the airing of the Abu Ghraib pictures. I thought it was a little too soon to air those pictures. I thought it was offensive to some people. It harmed our effort to win the war, and that's why you loved it, you bunch of leftist sludge.

I was offended, deeply offended by those pictures. I thought it was a little too soon. I wanted the media to stop showing them. But of course nobody listened. But now we've pressured some movie theater operators into not playing the trailer for this movie.?

Wail 'till the movie hits. It's only going to make the movie bigger and bigger and bigger.

re: Whiny New Yorkers Blinded by the Truth

2006-04-03T23:35:00.000-04:00

Dateline: April 2006, Upper West Side, NYC

They showed a trailer of the upcoming movie about United 93, about 9/11. The AMC Loews theater on 66th Street took the rare step of pulling the trailer for the upcoming movie "United 93" about 9/11 from its screens after several complaints. "'One lady was crying,' says one of the theater's managers, Kevin Adjodha. 'She was saying we shouldn't have [played the trailer]. That this was wrong ... I don't think people are ready for this.'"

When the trailer played before 'Inside Man' last week at the famed Grauman's Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, audience members began calling out, 'Too soon!'

This story has to be told to honor the passengers and crew for what they did. But more than that, it raises awareness. Our ports aren't secure. Our borders aren't secure. Our airlines still aren't secure, and this is what happens when you're not secure. That's the message I think people need to be reminded of - NOW.

Can you believe this crap?

The networks will still not show pictures of that day, 9/11, we're in the midst of an argument in this country over whether it is worthwhile to prevent another such attack. The Democrats in this country are doing everything they can to stop the President from finding out via the NSA spy program. Censure and future impeachment movement if they win back the House, is one thing they're targeting.

The same people that are telling movie theaters on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, 'Don't show me; it's too soon,' are probably the same bunch who couldn't wait to go see Fahrenheit 9/11 two or three times.

I will guarantee you that the vast majority of the residents on the Upper West Side are the same people who think it's silly that we're doing what we're doing in Iraq and that it's silly that the war on terror is being fought the way it is. And yet Bush lied about all this, Bush knew about it, he was going to let it happen. And yet the very event that has made this a reality for us and our lives today, they don't have the guts to look at, they don't have the courage to look at it, too soon, too soon.

I think there are too many people that want to pretend that 9/11 didn't happen; they want to go through life and forget it. Democrats have been playing on that by trying to create this pre-9/11 world and mentality. I think people need to be shocked back to realty.

Too soon? It's been too long! People have forgotten what it's all about. This movie would serve the purpose of reminding everybody why we are in the posture that we're in, why we have to assume the responsibilities, and why it's crucial who leads the nation in future years in this effort.

French Protesting Instead of Working

2006-03-29T00:09:00.000-05:00

I love this French protest stuff. Right in front of our eyes we see evidence wherever we want to look in the world that socialism doesn't work. That big-governmentism doesn't work. That all the derivatives of communism don't work.

sweet.

re: Third Anniversary of Iraq War Protests

2006-03-21T19:18:00.000-05:00

40 thousand protest war anniversary worldwide

5.999 billion stay home.

'nuff said.

Review: "V" stands for "Vapid"

2006-03-21T19:10:00.000-05:00

Review: "V" stands for "Vapid"

The names of many things start with "V." In fact, one of my FAVORITE things starts with a "V." After watching "V for Vendetta," I felt just like my favorite thing after a wild drunken Saturday night. How is that, you say? Well, my friends, after watching "V" I felt royally f*cked and violated.

This movie is not just bad, it is worse. I am changing the English language to allow the statement "this is a worse movie," for "V" is and will be worse than any movie anyone anywhere might make in the future.

But enough of the name calling -- let's get to the film (without revealing too many plot details). In future England (approximately 2015?), the Government controls the news media, the Koran is outlawed, and homosexuals are wantonly murdered for their sexuality. Terrorists are freedom fighters, military personnel are murderers, and mention is made of the Iraq and Afghani conflicts, as well as new ones in Syria.

In one classic moment of propaganda, a homosexual character shows Natalie Portman his hidden chamber of anti-Government paraphernalia, and we see an anti-war poster. It is the English flag with a swastika in the middle and the words "coalition of the willing" written upon it! Now, where have I seen that phrase before?

In the end, this film is the typical liberal propaganda piece, in which victimhood is taken to new heights. In the world we live in now, the media tries to control our Government (Dan Rather and Ted Turner anyone?) and Muslim terrorists blow up subway stations while the Koran is protected with armed guards. How the current world morphed into one in which the Koran, gays and lesbians are outlawed and the Government controlls the media is beyond me.

Let me tell you all a more interesting and frightening story. In the real future England, taxes are high, Muslims are gaining control, the media is subversive and in control of the Government, Gays and Lesbians are still powerful but wary of the Islamic movement, and the rest of the people are depressed.

I give "V for Victims" four hammer and sicles for propaganda value.

- reprint from thepeoplescube.com

re: No Liberal Media??

2006-03-10T03:38:00.000-05:00

No liberal or leftist media you say? Just look at this photo published today by Reuters (a well known, left leaning media outlet). Now this photo isn't cropped this way by accident. They're trying to send a subliminal message here.

Just like the Devil-eyed altered photo of Condoleeza Rice, this is purely intentional. When will the Press (right, left or center) learn that they'll always get caught doing crap like this?

re: Hillary and the Ports Deal

2006-03-06T23:38:00.000-05:00

What is it that Hillary and the Democrats say about George W. Bush? "How could he not have known about the ports deal until it happened?". Well, how in the world could Hillary not know that her husband was paid hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- as a consultant to Dubai?

kinda makes you go "hmmm". doesn't it?

re: A UAE Ports Deal Question

2006-03-02T01:03:00.000-05:00

Democrats are so worried about this deal, and they want the extra 45 days of scrutiny. How long has t been, two weeks since Al Gore went over to Saudi Arabia and said that Bush was playing into Al-Qaeda's hands? Because the worst thing we could do was cut off friendship and mutual understanding between Saudi Arabia / Arab countries.

Gore also said that we were rounding up Arabs, and we were holding them without charges, and without lawyers for indeterminate periods of time. He was ginning up all this hate for his own country on the basis of the way we treat Arabs. Now his own party is engaging in a similar type activity. Basically saying we can't trust these people, this is too big a risk, this is symptomatic of the Bush administration's problem with lack of openness, too much secrecy going on.

So where do we stand Al Gore and the Democrats? You can't have it both ways.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are a significant number of members of Congress who do not know that it's the Chinese Communists who own extensive port operations on the left coast and both the Pacific and Atlantic entrances to the Panama Canal.

re: The UAE Port Deal

2006-02-25T15:40:00.000-05:00

OK I've been holding back posting on this but here goes some facts:

1. The United Arab Emirates bought US jet fighters from President Clinton. Did any one object? And this was pre-9/11 when the UAE recognized the Taliban as the legitimate govt. of Afghanistan. Shall we ask for them back now cause you know they're "a terrorist haven" as the left would have you believe?

2. The UAE donated $100 million to Katrina relief. I guess we have to give that back right? It's obviously tainted. You know how powerful 'those people' are. Who knows how it's contaminated.

3. The US Govt is NOT selling anything to the UAE. The British company that owned the port terminals beforehand are selling them to the UAE. We either give approval or disapproval or voice or concerns over the sale since its on our soil. They are not buying "ports" but a few terminals in these ports.

4. Does anyone think we'd allow this sale if we certain that security and all safety concerns would stay in place? Does anyone think we'd simply turn a blind eye to security under UAE ownership. If anything MORE eyes would be on them than when the British company owned them.

5. The UAE would not be responsible for hiring or firing employees. That belongs to the US unions who work there. The UAE would simply be writing the checks for the costs of the terminals and reaping any profit from the use of them. The same as the British company did.

6. The UAE does not have to spend upwards of $8 Billion - BILLION - on buying these terminals to conduct terrorist activities. It can be done right now for FREE. Security in these ports is so lax as it is that anyone can smuggle stuff in or out with little or no problem.

7. Almost ALL smuggling or contraband captures within shipping containers in US ports are from TIPS. Not investigative work or diligent, strict control of the ports. Someone phones in and says "you'd better have a look at this shipment". How sad is that? That pathetic fact comes from an ex-US Port security consultant firm rep I saw interviewed on CNN.

8. The UAE provided the US Military with precise intelligence and bombing coordinates for our initial attacks against the Taliban after the 9/11 attacks. They spied on the Taliban for us to provide with that intel. They also spied and gave us intel on Bin Laden training camp locations for us as well.

The Liberal left for 4 years has been spouting that our biggest terrorist enemy wasn't Saddam. Some have even said it wasn't the Taliban. That we have "made our enemies" by invading Iraq and Afghanistan, or even Liberal darling Michael Moore who claimed there was no terrorist threat and that it's all been exaggerated by the Right to stoke up fear in the American people. Now all of a sudden, they hear of this deal and VIOLA! we have a terrorist threat. Well thanks for joining the rest of us who have been screaming this pre and post 9/11. And the Left picks the UAE of all countries. Who have been one of our staunchest allies in the fight against terrorism in that region.

Granted, I am a little concerned that the President wasn't kept a bit more informed of this deal in it's earlier stages. President Bush, in my opinion, delegates to much to subordinates and lets them do things without his approval. President Reagan NEVER let any of his people take actions that he did not know about and approve/disapprove of. Unless it was a covert action and meant to keep him out of the loop and from responsibility - ala "Iran/Contra". Bush is a family guy who takes great pride in his relationship with friends and coworkers. The only problem with that is that things can have a tendency to run away from you. When you have too many people making decisions below you, because you don't demand to be kept informed about everything done under your administration, things like this Port deal can go on until it blows up in your face.

Trust is a wonderful thing to have in the people around you but you must also exert some kind of control on that trust. You can have faith that the people you appoint will do right by you, but you should NEVER go uninformed about the things going on around you. Especially if you're the one who ultimately falls under the sword if it goes awry.

re: Random Thoughts

2006-02-15T02:36:00.000-05:00

Pakistan: On Wednesday, police clobbered stone-throwing protesters with batons and fired tear gas to break up a demonstration in the northwestern city of Peshawar. Witnesses said some of the thousands who gathered at a busy traffic intersection chanted "Death to Denmark" and "Hang those who drew the insulting cartoons."

*Is anyone else seeing what I am seeing here? This is over cartoons first published 6 months ago. Let's go over it again and see if you can follow me here;
1. Cartoons
2. First published 6 months ago
3. Riots, vandalism and calls of death to cartoonists.

And this is from people who supposedly follow "the religion of peace"? No, they are not.

What we are seeing here is truly who these people are and what this religion stands for. This is how Islam was spread throughout the centuries - through violence. Out of ALL the religions still practiced today, Islam is the most problematic. You see, every religion (except Islam) has evolved over the course of time to adapt to societal evolution. Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, even the non-religion, religion Scientology has evolved over time.

Why has Islam not adapted over time? Because the Koran states that Islam is the ONLY true and perfect religion and the Koran is the undeniable word of God spoken to the prophet Muhammad. It has no need to be changed or altered because it is the "perfect word of God". Only problem is, this is the 21 century and Islam is stuck in a 9th century mentality. Islamics are taught that they follow a religion that is perfect and that because they follow Islam they are better than anyone who does not.

BUT Islamics find themselves lost in time. A time where modern, Western (non Muslim) civilizations rule the world. And they can't understand how this is possible. Islam has not adapted to a changing world. Until Islam evolves to a modern world, the violence and outrage we are seeing over simple cartoons will only escalate.

I feel a Crusades Part 2 is inevitable. But this time it will be Western Freedom vs. Isalmo Fascism.
This has only just begun.

------

Dick Cheney and the hunting accident:
Has anyone else pondered the plight of the guy who got shot? All the press is fixating on VP Cheney but what about this 78 yr old Whittington. Picture this, you've got a bunch of over 60 hunters - with guns - hunting in deep brush. The guys with the guns are about to flush out some Quail and this Whittington fellow is re-approaching the group - from behind - without giving them any warning. And what happens? He gets a face and chest full of birdshot. Now who is more to blame here? The guy who fired the gun, or the moron who snuck up behind old guys with guns in their hands without any warning? Seems to me Harry Whittington may not have been "the brightest bulb in the pack" if you get my drift. Just because he's a lawyer doesn't mean he has much common sense. I know plenty of smart guys who do really stupid things from time to time.

Now I don't want to diminish the guys injuries but it seems to me that if you sneak up behind people with guns, you're bound the get hurt. The NRA states that over 80% of hunting accidents are the fault of the person who gets shot. Not the person who pulled the trigger. But of course the liberal Bush/Cheney hating press jumped at this story to make something out of nothing. The Cartoon riots story just isn't cutting it any more.

Now a lot has been said about the time lime in reporting this story to the press. Given the current state of hatred toward this administration, and Cheney in particular by the Liberal press, do you really blame them for waiting to release the story to them? I do relinquish that we should have had a personal statement from Dick Cheney within 24 hours of it being reported - or at best by now. Third party statements just don't cut it and it just lends more fodder to the presses labeling of Cheney as "secretive". Bad call Mr. V.P. Do it in person and on camera.

But like all non-stories made out to be stories, this will run it's course in a week, or at least until a jetliner goes down or something that is a real news story. These are the same people in the press that went out of their way to defend Clinton delaying the truth of his rendezvous with Ms. Lewinsky for six months. This just illustrates the stark differences that exist today in the press, depending on who is occupying the Presidency.

re: The Mohammad Cartoons

2006-02-09T02:46:00.000-05:00

In the continuing fight for Free Speech, below are the cartoons published in Denmark's Jyllands-Posten.
Click each image to enlarge.

re: Muslims and their "peaceful religion"?

2006-02-05T19:37:00.000-05:00

Ok so I guess all that talk of Islam being a "peaceful" religion can go right out the window now huh? So much for "the tolerant religion". Can anyone imagine if the Catholics behaved this way each time Christianity is ridiculed, denounced, insulted etc. etc. etc.??? But of course to most left wing, anti-God nuts, Christianity is somehow the great "evil" of the world. Come again? I think that perception could begin to change now huh? The day the Vatican calls for the "death" of anyone who dare ridicule Catholicism or Jerry Falwell starts chopping people's heads off is the day I'll start worrying about Christians.

I feel this situation is either going to escalate into a world war between Western civilization and Islam (aka Crusades Part II) or they'll get out their infantile aggressions for a couple of weeks then realize that for all their outrage NOTHING changes. This is not anything new with these people. This is who they are. And people actually out there think you can talk peace with these people. These are not rational minds. The slightest slur and your head should roll...literally. This is tolerance? This is acceptance?

These people need to come into the 21 century and get out of this 9th century mentality. If they want to exist in a modern world, they're going to have to learn how to take criticism. Everyone else has.
Christianity and Judiasm take assaults on a daily basis from anti-western/socialist/communist countries right down to stand-up comedians. If I hear one more "Catholic priest molesting young boys" joke I'm gonna puke. But you don't hear the Cathlic church sending out hordes of protestors to burn down comedy clubs or call for the death of comedians everywhere now do you?

The biggest problem with all of this is the Prophet Muhammad had depictions made of him during his lifetime! Where is the outrage about that? They LOVE to live in the past, so why not start your protesting there and work your way into 2006 OK? We'll see you in a few decades.

Societies that relish peaceful coexistence, tolerance and freedom of expression rule the world. Always have, always will. Get used to it Islam. OK?

re: Just some random thoughts

2006-02-05T18:34:00.000-05:00

Since I am totally uninterested in anything "Superbowl" or any team sports for that matter, I was thinking...

1. How about these cartoons in Denmark that are caricaturing the prophet Mohammed? There's more outrage over these cartoons in the Arab world than there is over the use of Arab children by Hamas and others to blow themselves up along with Jewish kids.

2. Julian Bond told an audience that this White House's lies are more serious than Clinton's lies because his lies didn't kill people. Clinton's lies didn't kill people? I keep thinking of the Waco invasion.

3. The left is worried now with the death of Coretta Scott King and Rosa Parks that they have no future icons. They've got plenty of them: Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice.

The Socialist Brain of a Liberal Democrat

2006-02-02T14:10:00.000-05:00

Click Photo to Enlarge

re: Leading the fight against Muhammad

2006-02-02T02:02:00.000-05:00

In September the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published several cartoons showing the prophet Muhammad as a fundmentalist and a bomb-wearing mullah , among other things. They did this, they said, to show Muslim immigrants that the West has such a thing as freedom of the press and freedom of speech after an illustrator complained that he could get no one to illustrate his book on Muhammad.

In a predictable reaction, angry adherents to the Religion of Peace living in Denmark began sending death threats to the illustrators responsible for the cartoons. When those threats didn’t work, ambassadors from 10 Muslim countries demanded the Danish government do something about this outrage.

Editors of Jyllands-Posten refused to apologize. “Religious feelings,” said cultural editor Flemming Rose, “cannot demand special treatment in a secular society. In a democracy one must from time to time accept criticism or becoming a laughingstock.”

What better statement could one make regarding the role of newspapers in a secular and democratic society right? This guy should be hoisted on a pedestal, not subjected to verbal stoning. But where is his support on this side of the pond? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. Except for bloggers and right-wing Web sites, no one seems concerned about the Muslim version of the Salem Witch Trials going on in Denmark.

This week Jyllands-Posten finally got some support. On Tuesday both France-Soir in France and Die Welt in Germany ran the cartoons as a show of support for their Danish collegues. Rumor is that more newspapers in Europe are going to follow suit.

Editors of France Soir said: “The publication of 12 cartoons in the Danish press has shocked the Muslim world for whom the representation of Allah and his prophet is banned. But because no religious dogma can impose its view on a democratic and secular society, France Soir publishes the incriminated cartoons."

Editors of Germany’s Die Welt expressed a similar sentiment: “Democracy is the institutionalized form of freedom of expression. There is no right to protection from satire in the West.”

For all their courage, however, these papers weren’t the first to show solidarity with Jyllands-Posten. On January 10, the Norwegian Christian newspaper Magazinet printed the cartoons as a show of defiance against Islamic fundamentalist threats.

What about The New York Times and The Washington Post? No word from them. What about the American journalistic establishment? You know, the one that became apoplectic about press freedom when reporters were jailed and questioned for withholding sources in the Plamegate incident, that railed about press freedom when The New York Times published classified information that outed a CIA air courier service and an NSA terrorist surveillance operation. Surely their concern for freedom of the press doesn’t stop at the shores of the Atlantic Ocean. Sadly, apparently so.

Last week Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Denmark to protest the publication of the cartoons by Jyllands-Posten. Will they also recall their ambassadors from France, Germany and whatever other European countries have newspapers brave enough to reprint the cartoons? I guess we’ll see.

Republicanism Caused By Brain Disorder, Mutation

2006-01-31T17:19:00.000-05:00

Scientists have finally identified a fatal brain disorder responsible for the behavior of Republicans, Conservatives, and other capitalist class enemies.

After the Washington Post reported on a revolutionary study, in which progressive researchers scanned Republican brains for signs of deformation, we contacted the institute that conducted the study, the Karl Marx Treatment Center. The Center provided us with blood-chilling CAT images that show what happens to a brain that is allowed to grow without the caring guidance of the progressive establishment. The composite sketch (below) is final, undeniable proof that Republicanism is a direct result of a degenerative brain mutation.

In a deformed Republican (capitalist) brain, areas that normally control life-sustaining processes (the Guilt Gland, the Envy Center, or the Everything for Free Lobe, etc.) are miniaturized - while other regions become bloated out of proportions (the Personal Responsibility Lobe, the Self-Interest Cluster, or the overdeveloped and inflexible Spinal Cord that is connected to the Absolute Morality Lobe).

Symptoms of a Republican brain mutation include delusional ideas that democracy is the best known form of government, that capitalism creates wealth, that American culture stems from Judeo-Christian tradition, that people all over the world desire liberty and prosperity, that Third World countries should be self-reliant, that moral standards are absolute and objective, that the individual supersedes the collective, that parents should teach children values and have a wide choice of schools, and similar incoherent ramblings that mimic the speech of the insane. Everyone knows that the complete opposite is true.

As of yet, there is no cure for this disorder, which transforms the entire brain into a regressive biological structure. Fearing that this ailment can be contagious, doctors recommend quarantine and a warning for the public.

Karl Marx Treatment Center researchers are optimistic about finding a vaccine that will prevent this degenerative anomaly among children and the marginally afflicted, allowing their brains to be equal in structure, size, and content with those of healthy progressive individuals. A Center spokesperson indicated that the following therapies have proven effective in clinical trials, and will benefit those in need of treatment:

A class in Social Studies at Columbia University.
Regular intake of unbiased NPR programming (e.g., Fresh Air or News Hour)
Exposure to a healthy and nourishing culture, including heavy doses of the Vagina Monologues, or any of the award-winning movies and documentaries (Brokeback Mountain, Transamerica, Syriana, Good Night and Good Luck, etc.) produced by progressive Hollywood filmmakers.
"Tough love" employment practices that will deny patients career advancement and higher-education opportunities while their brains self-heal to a normal progressive state.

If the above doesn't work, the researchers recommend that the afflicted receive a free trial subscription to The New York Times. If they renew, they will be considered cured.

A composite sketch of a socialist liberal Democrat brain is on the way. Stay tuned.

Bob Woodruff and Stupidity

2006-01-31T11:18:00.000-05:00

CNN'S CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: 'IRAQ WAR HAS BEEN A DISASTER'
Mon Jan 30 2006

CNN's top war correspondent Christiane Amanpour now says the Iraq war has been a disaster and has created a "black hole." Amanpour made the comments Monday evening on the all-news network.

"The Iraq war has been a disaster, and journalists have paid for it," Amanpour explains to Larry King, a day after ABC NEWS anchor Bob Woodruff was injured by a bomb.

"This is not acceptable what's going on there and it's a terrible situation."

AMANPOUR: "It's a spiraling security disaster... And by any indication whether you take the number of journalists killed or wounded, whether you take the number of Iraqi soldiers killed and wounded, contractors, people working there, it just gets worse and worse."
- - - - - - - - -

Okay, let me get this straight, the Iraq war only becomes "real" to journalists like Christiane when a fellow journalist like Bob Woodruff is wounded? Huh? Not when US or Coalition soldiers are killed makes it real for them. Talk about self-centeredness.

I am no way lessening the tragedy of any civilian who gets hurt or killed in any conflict. Its a tragic thing. But its nothing new in War. Why the shock and outrage? If you read the specifics of what happened to Bob Woodruff, you learn he was traveling in a US & Iraqi military convoy and was in a cozy, by less news worthy, rear position in the convoy but then chose to get in the lead vehicle and ride exposed in the open turret. Anyone played "whack-a-mole"? The enemy is going to zero in right on you if you're sticking your head out like that. The soldiers were smart enough to know as they were all inside their vehicles NOT giving the enemy a target. But "stupid is as stupid does".

Which brings me to another point.
What is it with these journalists who takes every stupid opportunity to try re-enact their own version of Edward R. Murrow's famous broadcasts from the London rooftops during the blitzkrieg of WWII? You see these jacksasses all the time during every hurricane, standing outside in the torrential rain and wind, doing their best imitation of a mime "walking against the wind"? Haven't we had enough of this already?

But then again I guess if they weren't out in the field actually witnessing the story they'd have to do what the a lot of their colleagues do...make the stuff up.

re: Google this Commies!

2006-01-29T02:21:00.000-05:00

The be all and end all of internet search engines "Google" has decided it will comply with the government of China's request that Google censor content it deems "subversive".

Okey dokey.

May I take this opportunity to applaud Google's decision on accepting technical guidance from the Communist Party of China in their creative "Google China Project", and to extend my admiration for their recognition that search technologies are best left in the hands of responsible government entities (the U.S. imperialist government doesn't fall into that category, of course). Don't get me wrong, I fully approve of their absolutely correct Orwellian revisionism when it comes to such running-dog capitalist organs as Front Page Magazine or National Review Online - they deserve to be erased from history and the people's minds right?

I agree whole heartedly, especially in light of Google's recent decision to resist the United States Government's requests for assistance in tracking down so-called "terrorists." As we all know, the only terrorists are in The White House, and we are gratified that Google is taking a principled stand against this truly oppressive government.

I suggest that the Chinese guidelines be applied to the rest of their international search sites too. For example, in the United States, when a Google search is done on "liberty," the American Civil Liberties Union does not even appear in the results! Instead, the first result is for a fundamentalist Baptist University! Doesn't that give you second thoughts about Google's ability to conduct first-rate searches? Certainly, the guiding hand of a benevolent government can vastly improve their services everywhere. I think it would be prudent for Google to request that the Communist Party of China provide Google with all international search guidance.

I kid...I kid.

re: Al Gore and Global Warming

2006-01-28T09:06:00.000-05:00

So...Al Gore has made a "documentary" on global warming called "An Inconvenient Truth". The only probably with that title is most of the film is speculation and conjecture based on pseudo-scientific principles and non-sequitur fact correlation.

One glaring claim in this film is that "humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from the mass destruction of global warming". Uh huh. OK lets go back to 1985 when Ted Danson of "Cheers" fame proclaimed that we only had 20 years left before the oceans were useless to us if we didn't undertake a massive cleanup policy. Well, here we are 21 years later and not only are the oceans still full of life and vitality, they're actually cleaner than they've ever been. No huge change in policy regarding oceanic cleanup happened and in fact within those 20 years, we've had two major oil spills in our oceans. How is this possible?

Another "myth" constituted in Al Gore's film is that "hole" in the Ozone layer is a direct symptom of green house gas emissions and global warming. Unfortunately the facts don't bear this out. For one thing, no one knows how long the hole in the ozone layer has been there, why it's primary residence is over the Antartic nor why in some instances it has shrunk and expanded over time. You see science only discovered the hole within with the last 20 years. We didn't have the technology to detect it before then so who knows how long its been there or even if it is actually a natural occurrence. We simply don't know for sure. Another fallacy is that somehow we can destroy ozone forever with gas emissions, industry smoke and smog etc. Well, here is scientific fact. Ozone is created by the heat and light of our Sun. In order for us to destroy ozone permanently we'd have to block out the Sun. As long as it burns hot in space we'll have ozone.

Courtesy NASA/TRACE
The real culprit in "global climate change" is the sun: Long-term studies document that fluctuations in the intensity of solar radiation are closely correlated with warming and cooling trends in the Earth's temperature. These facts are scrupulously ignored by those determined to use the "global warming" myth to destroy industrial civilization.

Another glaring scientific fact the members of "the sky is falling" crowd fail to realize is that we humans exist on a living and constantly changing planet. The Earth is not some dead lump of rock that spins in its orbit like the Moon. Our planet is in a constant state of flux. Forever turning itself inside out, adapting to changes on the surface etc. Did you know that we humans only occupy 2% of the planets surface? That's right...2%. Do we have so much gall that we honestly believe we can affect change on a global scale that is irreversible? Not quite. Sure we can affect the environment on a local scale by polluting rivers, streams, wetlands, deforesting etc. But on a global scale? C'mon, lets be real.

Think about this. What happens to human civilization when hurricanes, floods, tsunamis, earthquakes, landslides, avalanches, wildfires happen in populated areas? Things get destroyed on a massive scale and people die. What power do we have to stop any of those? None. All we puny little humans can do is try to minimize the damage and loss of life through preparation and warnings. We are powerless compared the awesome power of this planet. Now take that in comparison to the doom sayers who say that every time we drive to the mini-mart in our gas powered vehicles, the Earth shudders at our thoughtlessness. The Earth, if it wanted to, could shake us off like a bad case of fleas and never miss us.

If there is one thing the Earth is, it's resilient to a fault. The accident at the Russian nuclear plant in Chernobyl spewed a toxic cloud into the air that roamed the planet. It took the Earth 7 years, just seven, to rid itself of it. We're talking nuclear clouds here! The eruption at Mt. St. Helens in 1980 spewed more toxins into the atmosphere in a couple of days than we have in 100 years of industrialization. And it took the Earth just 8 years to correct that imbalance. Predictions were 15 years but the Earth did it in eight. Not bad huh? If you cut down more trees than normal in one area of the planet, trees grow more dense in other parts of the globe. You see the Earth always seeks balance. It has done so for 3 billion years. With or without our interference.

I'm not saying we shouldn't recycle or try to do everything we can to minimize pollution and waste. Anything we can do to help the planet do what it does naturally is just smart. But to think we have some kind of power over the life and death of the Earth is just preposterous. People like Larry David and Al Gore are doing just what they accuse the Republicans of doing..."fear mongering".

My point here is that no matter what we throw at the Earth, it handles it just fine. The Earth has survived a lot worse than us measly humans in its history. It was here long before us and will be here long after us.

re: Bin Ladin's Treaty Oh yeah!

2006-01-21T01:21:00.000-05:00

First a history lesson Al Qaeda

Al Qaeda has at the very least, since the 1990's, killed American soldiers and desecrated their remains in Somalia; urged the murder of all Americans - civilians and military alike - wherever on the globe they may be found; conducted simultaneous sneak attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, resulting in the mass murder of over 240 civilians (the vast majority of them Muslims and non-Americans); killed 17 American seamen in an attempt to blow up the destroyer, the U.S.S. Cole; murdered 3,000 Americans in hijack attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon; and spearheaded guerrilla wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that have killed well over a thousand American military personnel and countless civilians.

In addition to killing civilians in sneak attacks - commonly, detonating bombs within nondescript cars parked or driven in broad daylight in densely populated areas - they also secrete themselves among their once and future victims. They wear no distinguishing insignia to segregate themselves as a militia. They use mosques and schools and hospitals to plan and store weaponry. They feign surrender and then open fire on unsuspecting coalition forces attempting the civilized act of detaining, rather than shooting, them. As for treatment of their own detainees, their practice ranges from execution-style homicide to beastly beheading - usually captured on film and circulated on the Internet to buck up the other savages while scaring the living hell out of everyone else. So here's an idea: Let's make a treaty with them! Yeah! Let's reward this behavior with a grant of honorable-combatant status. Let's give them the same kind of benefits the Geneva Conventions reserve for soldiers who play by the rules: who identify themselves as soldiers; who don't intentionally murder civilians; who do not threaten schools, hospitals, and houses of worship by turning them into military targets; who grant quarter honorably; and who treat their captives with dignity and respect.

Of course, we'll have to find someone from al Qaeda able to sign the treaty, which is no small issue. Leaving aside the whole fugitive-on-the-lam problem, treaties, you see, are signed between and among nation states.

Now name for me the first senator who will vote for a treaty with Al-Qaeda? Kennedy? Kerry? Feinstein? And then after this vote is taken, and let's say there are 67 votes -- even though there wouldn't be one but let's just play the hypothetical game -- let's then go find somebody in Al-Qaeda to have the big signing ceremony with. Do we bring the Al-Qaeda representative to the White House? Do we have a big fanfare and a state dinner where we announce the signing of the treaty like we did when Gorbachev and Brezhnev and Khrushchev and all these other worthless scoundrels from the Soviet Union showed up?

Can we envision this, ladies and gentlemen? Maybe we go find bin Laden. That's what we need to do! Sign a treaty with bin Laden granting them the status of the Geneva Conventions, even though we don't require them to put on uniforms, to be members of a nation state. They exist exactly as they are, and they don't have to change a thing they're doing. They can still try to blow up buildings, hijack airplanes, attack the U.S. military. We're just going to have a treaty with them where we grant them Geneva Conventions POW status.

So let's do. Let's make it official. Let's try to get a treaty with Al-Qaeda. Big signing ceremony in Washington. Everybody will feel better. Liberals always love treaties, especially treaties made with lying skunks who have no intention of upholding their end of the deal. Liberals like treaties even when the nation that signed the treaty no longer exists. The old Soviet Union signed all these SALT treaties (Strategic Arms Limitations Treaties). When the Soviet Union disbanded and became Russia again, Bush said, "We're going to tear that one up. It doesn't apply." The liberals went nuts. "You can't tear up an arms treaty!" Bush said, "Watch me." He tore it up. Libs are still fuming over that. So they love treaties. Let's have one, with bin Laden. I hope I'm invited to the state dinner.

re: A Plantation and a Chocolate City?

2006-01-18T18:48:00.000-05:00

So Hillary Clinton thinks the House of Representatives is being "run like a plantation." And, she added, "you know what I'm talking about."

First of all: Think about what a weird coincidence it is that Hillary would have made these remarks in a black church in Harlem on Martin Luther King Day. What are the odds? Did she even know it was a holiday? Bravely spoken, Senator. I haven't been this surprised since finding out Hollywood likes a movie about gay cowboys.

And New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagen wants New Orleansto be a very "chocolate" city. Huh?

I shake my head with disbelief.

re: Band News

2006-01-12T02:11:00.000-05:00

The new Harder Faster has booked it's first gig. Yahoo!
Thursday, March 2nd at "Coda" in NYC.

We're all very excited about it. Our guitarist Casey is running this as an after party for a corporate function his company does every year for their clients. He has done one the past two years to great success so we're hopeful for a good turnout. Even though it will be guys in suits and women in dresses from the corporate field, we're ready to kick their butts with some high octane Rock 'n Roll.

BUT now comes the hard part - preparing for this shindig. It's work, work, work for the next 6 weeks. I spent a couple of hours tonight compiling a list of potential songs from our playlist. Now its down to arranging them into two 45min sets and working out bridging one song to another, building and maintaining a flow to the show and all that fun stuff.

And you thought bands just came up with set lists an hour before the show.
Oh contrare mon ami.

re: New Years Predictions Already Happening

2006-01-12T01:56:00.000-05:00

Someone commented on my 2006 predictions as being stupid and I should pull them and post something else. Well I said, "let's see how stupid they are by how many I get right over the course of the year". Well, chalk one up correct already and its not even 15 days into 2006!

Prediction #12 from my "2005 comes to a close" entry. >>People getting fatter and lazier.

AFP story Jan. 11, 2006:
"Jeans giant Levi's is hoping to woo fashionistas and music aficionados alike with its new iPod-compatible RedWire DLX jeans, due out this fall. With a joystick remote control built into the watch pocket, the new jeans will allow wearers to play, pause, track forward or back and adjust the volume on their iPods without having to take them out of their pockets."

They just got lazier.

re: What the hell are we waiting for?

2006-01-06T00:30:00.000-05:00

Thu Jan 5, TEHRAN, Iran -
Iran's president said Thursday he hoped for the death of Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon, the latest anti-Israeli comment by a leader who has already provoked international criticism for suggesting that Israel be "wiped off the map." "Hopefully, the news that the criminal of Sabra and Chatilla has joined his ancestors is final," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency.

Huh? Will somebody PLEASE give Ted Nugent the go ahead to travel to Iran and take this little Hitler out already. I mean, what the hell are we waiting for?

~ K

re: 2005 Comes to a Close

2005-12-27T10:34:00.000-05:00

With the Christmas holiday behind me and nothing to look forward to but the overly blown and ballyhooed New Years Eve celebration I offer this for the new year.

Things I predict we'll see again in 2006:
1. Democrats trying to find another President Bush scandal.
2. Iraq war bashing and calls for a pullout after 5 or more servicemen get killed..
3. Immensely untalented entertainers making tons of cash.
4. More Natural disasters.
5. Bono.
6. Another Woody Allen film no one will go and see - even though it's really good.
7. More great "American Idol auditions gone bad".
8. A stupid clothing fad.
9. A sixth year of the "KISS Farewell Tour".
10. Another great season of both "24" and "Lost".
11. Saddam Hussein found guilty.
12. People getting lazier.
13. The media going crazy over celebrity hook ups and break ups.
14. Terrorist attacks somewhere but not in the United States.
15. People will lose their jobs while others will be hired.
16. Celebrities doing and saying more stupid things.
17. Sports figures being paid far too much money to play A GAME.
18. Gas prices rising and falling and people somehow being surprised by it.
19. Clay Aiken will manage to get even more gay and bitchy.
20. "Saturday Night Live" will suck.

21. Mankind improving on everything but itself.

In other words, another year of the same old crap.
Have a Happy 2006.

re: Daily noodling

2005-12-18T23:07:00.000-05:00

Had band rehearsal today and I am really glad things are coming along very well. The band is getting tighter and we're gelling alot better than before. We're getting to know each others styles a lot better. The vocals are coming along much better than I had imagined. I am always optimistic about such things but this has surpassed my expectations. The 3 part harmonies between Brett, Pete and myself are quite impressive - and I'm hard to impress. It's taking a bit to get used to with all of us relinquishing some vocal control to others but we're realizing it's actually sounding better than we hoped that way. We were all uneasy about combining the remnants of two different bands but my vision (yes it was MY vision) seems to be coming to fruition. Our hope is that our first gig will be sometime in March. Fingers crossed.

re: The things I do for love

2005-12-16T14:34:00.000-05:00

Love of music that is. Last night I spent many hours compiling a DVD of performances of songs my cover band is doing so that guys can see and hear the pros play them. In hope that they'll pick up some pointers about playing the songs and live song endings. My experience tells me that this always helps motivate and inspire players. It has always inspired me to play. There's almost nothing better musically than a live band that's spot on and working it.

When I was done I felt a great deal of accomplishment then feelings of awe and shame fell over me. I have all this on video? My God, I need another hobby that doesn't take up as much room!

re: King Kong

2005-12-15T01:27:00.000-05:00

Ok everyone will be talking about this film in a week, but I have seen it twice now (Once at the premiere on 12-5 and again at a preview screening on 12-12) and I have a few things about this film to say. It HAS to be said.

This is probably the finest film I have seen since 1997's "Titanic", if not the finest film I have seen - EVER. I have not been this emotionally affected over a film since I saw "Jaws" in 1975 at the age of 10. Similar in scope to "Titanic" (3 hour running time) and emotion (love & tragedy) Peter Jackson's "King Kong" proves that someone, somewhere out there making movies is in touch with what people really want in a film. Action, thrills, laughs and soul. This "King Kong" has all of these traits in spades. Peter Jackson saw the original 1933 "King Kong" when he was 9 years old on TV and it changed his life. It inspired him to become a film maker. So here we are 30 years later and one can imagine that Jackson has been brewing this film in his head all that time. Every detail he's ever wanted. So how could he mess it up? By succumbing to Hollywood pressure that's how. Luckily for us Jackson lives in New Zealand. And thanks to The Lord of the Rings Trilogy success he can write his own ticket without any need for Hollywood interference. Otherwise this "Kong" wouldn't be probably one of the finest films ever made.

People may balk at the 3 hour running time but once you see the film you'll realize why it has to run that length. The scope in which Peter Jackson chooses to flesh out the story of Ann Darrow, Carl Denham, Jack Driscoll and Kong himself is so fully realized it has to take 3 hours to do it. Jackson wants you to know who these characters are and why you should either love them, pity them or hate them. The second hour is reserved for the real crux of the story of this film. The story of Kong and Ann Darrow. In the original and the campy 1976 remake, the story of Kong's time with Ann is glossed over to get to the action and the end. But Jackson takes the time to show you exactly who this Kong is inside and why he and Ann develop such closeness to each other. It's absolutely brilliant story telling.

Kong is the undisputed King of Skull Island but he's an old, lonely, bored and withdrawn gorilla. He is the last of his race and has spent many years by himself, fighting off beasts of all kinds just to survive. Jackson drives that point home by showing Kong as a graying, battle scarred ape. He's not some pretty, pristine young simian - he's been around the block a few times. But then along comes Ann Darrow and she literally melts his heart. Ann captivates him, stands up to him and offers him something solely missing in his life. Companionship. I was glad to see Jackson chose to eliminate the sexual undertones of Kong towards Ann hinted at in the original and more overtly suggested in the '76 Jessica Lange version. This Kong just needs a friend. In one very poignant scene where Kong takes Ann to his cliff side lair overlooking the ocean, Ann wants to entertain Kong (which I believe, she believes will keep her alive) and all Kong wants to do is look at the sunset. This Kong appreciates a beautiful sunset. The interaction between Ann and Kong here is truly heart warming. This interaction plays itself out again later in the film with even more heart breaking appeal. This is not a mindless, brute of a gorilla like in the original, but an ape with a heart, a soul and a fierce sense of loyalty.

Then there are the special effects. Jackson, using his own visual effects comnpany has truly raised the bar for visuals in filmmaking. The "look" of this film is nothing short of spectacular. From the breathtaking jungle scenes to the painfully detailed 1933 New York, Jackson has taken the fantasy film into new dimensions. Two blaring examples of over the top visual effects are the end fight between Kong and the biplanes and the fight between Kong and the T-Rex's.. The biplane fight last all of two minutes in the 1933 version, but Jackson takes this one up several notches by stretching it out and evoking a dizzying sense of height and vertigo. You really get a sense of what it must be like to stand at the top of the Empire State Building. It's absolutely thrilling. The T-Rex fight is mindblowingly, brilliant. It's a relentless 15min fight that goes from one heart stopping moment to another. Both spectacular scenes will have you routing for Kong all the way. Which makes the end of this story so tragically sad. If you aren't weeping or seriously choking back a tear for Kong at the end you are emotionally dead. I am proud to say I am not. There I said it.

Again like "Titanic" we all know how this story ends. But it's how the story is told that makes it all worthwhile. Jackson has taken his boyhood dream and has reimagined "King Kong" in such a way that the only comparison you could make to the original story are the key plot points. It's truly an entity upon itself. He has not only made a film for all ages but a movie for all time.

I have a feeling Peter Jackson is going to get a good chunk of my money and my time watching this masterpiece several times more. This is not a film you can see just once. And deservedly so.

re: This Day In Beatles History

2005-12-08T03:12:00.000-05:00

1980
3:00pm. John and Yoko give an interview to Dave Sholin for the RKO Radio Network. 5:00pm. John and Yoko leave the Dakota and go to the Record Plant Studios. 10:50pm. John and Yoko return to the Dakota Apartments.
10:51pm. John Lennon is shot 5 times in the back by Mark David Chapman. 11:07pm. John Lennon is pronounced dead.

God Help Us All.

re: Saddam a No Show ???

2005-12-08T02:52:00.000-05:00

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Saddam Hussein refused to enter court on Wednesday, bringing his often chaotic trial to yet another halt until the judge decided to press on without him.

After telling the court to "go to hell" the night before, the former president effectively boycotted the fifth session of his trial after spending most of the day in talks with lawyers in a battle of wills with the Kurdish presiding judge.

>> What the hell is this about? Why wasn't he dragged to court in handcuffs? While I'm glad the judge proceeded without Saddam there, this kind of behavior should not be tolerated. Why not treat Saddam with the same inconsideration he gave his enemies? Drag him out of bed and into court in chains. I'm sure none of the people killed by his whim were given the chance to "boycott" going to jail, the torture chamber or their grave. While I agree that Saddam should get something his enemies did not...a fair trial...mere defiance cannot be excused without penalty. This is just stupid. Take control of your prisoner judge!

Its All Upside Down Thinking

2005-11-29T00:17:00.000-05:00

I have come to the conclusion that there are a significant number of people in this country who still don't get it. It's going to take a couple or three more 9/11s, and I'm not kidding.

Reality is reality, and this is what I don't think enough people are facing. The reality is that we're at war with a worldwide enemy that is intent on as many more 9/11s as possible. But I think people either don't believe that it's that bad or don't want to believe it, so they put their heads in the sand.

All this is upside down. We're spending all this time worried about the enemy, post-9/11. Why do we never hear the American left and the American media talk about the barbarian acts of torture that are created and performed by our enemies? You never hear a bad thing about these people at all. They're just a bunch of disadvantaged, misunderstood, misled people. They believe nonsense like "If we could just sit down and talk to them, we could straighten them out". People like John Kerry and Cindy Sheehan could do this in their minds. And I'm telling you, it's upside down.

First Posting on this Thanksgiving

2005-11-24T12:04:00.000-05:00

On this day of Thanksgiving, there's going to be a lot of eating, drinking and watching football but not a lot of contemplation about how this all began. This is the true story of Thanksgiving.

I will enter here in a VERY abridged version. You see, the Plymouth Rock settlers, (also known as the Mayflower 2 travelers) landed in the New World seeking a place to carry on their Puritan and religious beliefs. Not their fortune as is told in some school textbooks. But the settlers were unprepared for the rigors of a new life in this untamed and uncharted land. They quickly ran out of food and succumbed to illness and death in the first winter. Where their numbers were over a hundred, by winters end they were down to 46.

Luckily for them an English speaking Native American took pity on the settlers and brought them skins to wear and food to eat. But even HE knew that wouldn't sustain them for long. He offered to stay with the settlers through the following year to teach them how to live off the land. He showed them how to hunt, plant and fertilize crops, extract maple sap from trees, find medicinal plants in the woods and skin beaver to provide warm clothing for the winter months. Eek Gad! They hunted, skinned and ate animals? Yes, the Plymouth Rock settlers were not very politically correct - or vegetarians.

Here is where the story of Thanksgiving often diverts depending on the bias of the writer, historian or revisionist.

You see, AFTER the pilgrims were shown how to fend for themselves by the Indians, they settled into a sort of communal lifestyle reminiscent of the Hippie Communes of the 60's and 70's. But even the early settlers of America found that communal or Socialist living doesn't work. After a period of time where everyone was working and sharing the fruits of their labors with everyone else in the commune, they found that some didn't work as hard as the others. That some benefited from others hard work by not working hard at all. Sound familiar? Well you see without PERSONAL incentive some found it easier to just let others do the work and they would sit back and take the hand out from everyone else.

Well the crops diminished and soon they were on the verge of starving again as a few hard working people cannot support a community by itself if others are unwilling do for themselves. Sounding familiar yet? It wasn't until they gave each family their own plot of land where they were responsible for it and in order to survive they HAD to build a home, they HAD to plant crops to sustain themselves. Well, guess what happened? Faced with starvation and death from the elements, ALL the settlers began building homes, starting business and planting crops. Commerce began to arise and people sold and traded their goods. And lo and behold what happened? Come the following harvest they had so much bounty they decided to honor it with a glorious feast. Since the fruits of their labor were in part because of the help of the Indians, they invited them to the feast to help celebrate their good fortune. A feast that lasted 3 days.

The moral of the story?
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime. Socialism doesn't work. Without personal incentive and personal responsibility for oneself, people wither and die. So do societies. Just ask FORMER Communist Russia.

And that is the true story of Thanksgiving.