In honor of the Chosen One's 100th day in office I'm reprinting a thank you letter from a group of his very special friends. Enjoy.
A Thank You Note
transcribed by Roadie on behalf of Benevolent Leader's special friends
Dear President Obama,
Just a note to say thank you for your tireless effort in supporting our cause. As I'm sure you know, our organization has been around for a long time, and we've had many obstacles along the way. Though we have many members not everyone is "on board" with our program. Some are just not as receptive to our agenda as others. This alone has made our success more difficult and challenging, but our persistence and resolve has carried us a long way. Now, with your help, many of the hurdles we've encountered over the years have been removed in most cases, or reduced in others. Your predecessor was not "down" with our cause and proved to be a major impediment to our goals. Whenever we would try to put together a new project, he would find some way to throw the proverbial "wrench" into our works. It seemed that no matter what direction we would turn, he and his associates would be there waiting to deter our progress.
When we heard of your election, it was like a breath of fresh air. A collective sigh of relief could be heard throughout our organization. We knew our efforts to ensure your election were not in vain, and we regret we could not do more to help your campaign. Thanks to the policies that you have already instituted our group has seen a major resurgence in both recruiting and "R & D". Your proposed policies have given us the shot in the arm we've needed for some years now, and our hopes for the future have never been brighter. Your cabinet appointments along with those of other key positions are nothing less than a Godsend to us. It's so nice to finally have people in [the] American government who are willing to get out of our way and let us do our work without...interference.
Rather than detail our plans for the immediate future, we thought it would be more entertaining to implement them unannounced. We can only hope that you will be able to witness our plans coming to fruition personally. We want you to experience the result[s] of your cooperation first hand.
In closing, we are finding it hard to put into words our eternal gratitude for your help in regenerating our hopes and allowing us to work harder to meet our goals. So we would simply like to say "thank you" from the bottom of our hearts.
Sincerely,
Al Qaeda
Reprinted post. Originally published April 23 on Roadhouse Blog.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
I'd Love To Be Waterboarding
Torture! Torture! Torture!
For over seven years the American Left has had more fun than the law allows flinging the above accusation at the Bush admininstration's enhanced interrogation techniques. Now the Obama admininstration has released various "torture" memos and the Left's desire to punish Bush for protecting America has been enflamed. Obama, ever the consummate leader, waffled on the punishment issue. First he claimed no interest in prosecuting Bush officials then, under pressure from his far-left base, Obama said prosecutions weren't off the table and then, after polls showed most Americans opposed any prosecutions of Bush officials, Dear Leader returned to his original position. It remains to be seen if this will be Obama's final stand on this emotional issue. But I'm not really concerned about that. What concerns and appalls me is what the zealous desire for prosecutions reveals about the Left.
As I've watched and listened to the "torture" controversy on tv I've become more convinced than ever that progressives simply oppose the defense of this country. That's the only thing that explains their militant commitment to punishing the people who successfully protected us from terrorism for seven years.
I've listened to the liberals' side of the story. I've heard their assertions that Bush's policies made America less safe by ruining our image abroad and providing a recruitment tool to the terrorists. I've heard their claims that Bush violated the Constitution and that, as a nation of laws, America must bring the Bush-era perpetrators of "torture" to justice. I've listened to this stuff and I can't believe it's asserted by what are supposed to be intelligent people. Here's my rebuttal.
Yes, America is a nation of laws and a nation that DOES NOT TORTURE. What was done to the enemy combatants at Gitmo wasn't torture. If the lefties would get off the Kool-Aid they'd know from the "torture" memos themselves that the United States went to great lengths to ensure the detainees suffered no lasting physical or emotional damage from the interrogation techniques. That's not what you do when you're really torturing people. When you torture your aim is to inflict horrendous pain and suffering on the prisoner to make him talk. You're not trying to simply make him uncomfortable.
The Gitmo interrogators certainly wanted the detainees to be more than just uncomfortable. They wanted the enemy to feel pain, but not horrendous pain. The interrogators used relatively mild techniques such as sleep deprivation and the now notorious waterboarding. They didn't pull out detainees' finger nails, electric shock their genitals, burn them, feed them to lions, inject gasoline into their veins, or gang rape their wives and daughters in front of them. Our disciplined interrogators did none of those things but you wouldn't know that from the cacophony of condemnation heaped on them by progressives. Which leads me to my next point.
I'm actually frightened of the strident anger progressives have over the "torture" that occurred at Gitmo. A grand total of three Gitmo detainees were waterboarded and the Left is apoplectic about it. Yet I don't remember them getting this worked up over the beheading of Daniel Pearl. I don't remember them getting this incensed over the beheading of Nicholas Berg. Even 9/11 didn't produce the amount of outrage among liberals that the waterboarding of those three Muslim fanatics has. This tells me that leftists just don't value American lives. In their paradigm it's worse for an American to "torture" a terrorist than it is for a terrorist to actually murder an American. I truly believe that view is what's really driving progressives' obsession with Gitmo and their malevolent desire to prosecute the patriots who protected us. Liberals just don't believe that America is entitled to defend herself. They don't believe that America has a moral right to be right. That's what's really going on here.
And the Left's assertion that the enhanced interrogation techniques at Gitmo ruined America's image and gave the terrorists a recruitment tool is just ludicrous. Ill will toward America existed long before Gitmo opened and it will continue long after Gitmo is closed. America has been called the Great Satan--about as low as you can go on the popularity totem pole--by Iran for decades. Millions of non-Iranian Muslims heartily share that sentiment. Muslim terrorists have been attacking America and American interests at least since Sirhan Sirhan assasinated RFK in 1968, decades BEFORE the Bush presidency. And they were able to recruit followers to their cause without the benefit of "torture" at Gitmo. Maybe the only recruitment tool Islamofascists need is Islam itself.
I'm sickened by liberals' obssession with prosecuting Bush administration officials. This isn't about justice or principle; it's about weakening America from within. As stated above, the Left believes America has no moral right to self-defense. Undermining our ability and willingness to fight is simply part of that belief. The objectives of our enemies are irrevelent; for progressives the only real enemy is America, and she must be stopped. And that's what their manufactured outrage over "torture" is really about. They're trying to handicap America with a false morality. The American people don't want politicized prosecutions and show trials. They want to be protected from those who would kill us. I'm one of those people. The progressives can work to tear down our defenses; they can cling to their delusion that Bush is the enemy, but I know who the real enemy is and I'd love to be waterboarding.
For over seven years the American Left has had more fun than the law allows flinging the above accusation at the Bush admininstration's enhanced interrogation techniques. Now the Obama admininstration has released various "torture" memos and the Left's desire to punish Bush for protecting America has been enflamed. Obama, ever the consummate leader, waffled on the punishment issue. First he claimed no interest in prosecuting Bush officials then, under pressure from his far-left base, Obama said prosecutions weren't off the table and then, after polls showed most Americans opposed any prosecutions of Bush officials, Dear Leader returned to his original position. It remains to be seen if this will be Obama's final stand on this emotional issue. But I'm not really concerned about that. What concerns and appalls me is what the zealous desire for prosecutions reveals about the Left.
As I've watched and listened to the "torture" controversy on tv I've become more convinced than ever that progressives simply oppose the defense of this country. That's the only thing that explains their militant commitment to punishing the people who successfully protected us from terrorism for seven years.
I've listened to the liberals' side of the story. I've heard their assertions that Bush's policies made America less safe by ruining our image abroad and providing a recruitment tool to the terrorists. I've heard their claims that Bush violated the Constitution and that, as a nation of laws, America must bring the Bush-era perpetrators of "torture" to justice. I've listened to this stuff and I can't believe it's asserted by what are supposed to be intelligent people. Here's my rebuttal.
Yes, America is a nation of laws and a nation that DOES NOT TORTURE. What was done to the enemy combatants at Gitmo wasn't torture. If the lefties would get off the Kool-Aid they'd know from the "torture" memos themselves that the United States went to great lengths to ensure the detainees suffered no lasting physical or emotional damage from the interrogation techniques. That's not what you do when you're really torturing people. When you torture your aim is to inflict horrendous pain and suffering on the prisoner to make him talk. You're not trying to simply make him uncomfortable.
The Gitmo interrogators certainly wanted the detainees to be more than just uncomfortable. They wanted the enemy to feel pain, but not horrendous pain. The interrogators used relatively mild techniques such as sleep deprivation and the now notorious waterboarding. They didn't pull out detainees' finger nails, electric shock their genitals, burn them, feed them to lions, inject gasoline into their veins, or gang rape their wives and daughters in front of them. Our disciplined interrogators did none of those things but you wouldn't know that from the cacophony of condemnation heaped on them by progressives. Which leads me to my next point.
I'm actually frightened of the strident anger progressives have over the "torture" that occurred at Gitmo. A grand total of three Gitmo detainees were waterboarded and the Left is apoplectic about it. Yet I don't remember them getting this worked up over the beheading of Daniel Pearl. I don't remember them getting this incensed over the beheading of Nicholas Berg. Even 9/11 didn't produce the amount of outrage among liberals that the waterboarding of those three Muslim fanatics has. This tells me that leftists just don't value American lives. In their paradigm it's worse for an American to "torture" a terrorist than it is for a terrorist to actually murder an American. I truly believe that view is what's really driving progressives' obsession with Gitmo and their malevolent desire to prosecute the patriots who protected us. Liberals just don't believe that America is entitled to defend herself. They don't believe that America has a moral right to be right. That's what's really going on here.
And the Left's assertion that the enhanced interrogation techniques at Gitmo ruined America's image and gave the terrorists a recruitment tool is just ludicrous. Ill will toward America existed long before Gitmo opened and it will continue long after Gitmo is closed. America has been called the Great Satan--about as low as you can go on the popularity totem pole--by Iran for decades. Millions of non-Iranian Muslims heartily share that sentiment. Muslim terrorists have been attacking America and American interests at least since Sirhan Sirhan assasinated RFK in 1968, decades BEFORE the Bush presidency. And they were able to recruit followers to their cause without the benefit of "torture" at Gitmo. Maybe the only recruitment tool Islamofascists need is Islam itself.
I'm sickened by liberals' obssession with prosecuting Bush administration officials. This isn't about justice or principle; it's about weakening America from within. As stated above, the Left believes America has no moral right to self-defense. Undermining our ability and willingness to fight is simply part of that belief. The objectives of our enemies are irrevelent; for progressives the only real enemy is America, and she must be stopped. And that's what their manufactured outrage over "torture" is really about. They're trying to handicap America with a false morality. The American people don't want politicized prosecutions and show trials. They want to be protected from those who would kill us. I'm one of those people. The progressives can work to tear down our defenses; they can cling to their delusion that Bush is the enemy, but I know who the real enemy is and I'd love to be waterboarding.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Bill Clinton Redux
Do you remember Bill Clinton's presidency? I do. And one thing I remember most is his habit of governing by polls, or at least his being accused of that. The charge was that Clinton would put his finger in the air and then declare his support for which every way the wind was blowing. This wasn't the whole truth, of course, but it was somewhat accurate of Clinton's governing style. Now we have Obama taking a page out of dear ol' Bill's book. Take a look at this.
I saw on Yahoo! News yesterday that, in his weekly radio address, Obama pledged to cut dozens of wasteful government programs. This had to be done, Dear Leader insisted, because "ever-expanding deficits and debt" were "unsustainable". Also, America's future depended on "restoring a sense of responsibility and accountability to our federal budget". Oh really? Where was Obama's concern for fiscal responsibility and unsustainable debt when he was pushing his porkulus bill and gargantuan budget through Congress? And why does he suddenly have such a pressing concern for those things now? Could it be what happened on Wednesday?
On Wednesday, hundreds of thousands of Americans took to the streets in Tea Parties to show their displeasure with Obama's reckless spending. While the mainstream media tried it's hardest to smear the protestors, their collective voice could not be silenced. It reached all the way to the White House, it seems. And Obama knew he had to do something.
Now Obama is a liberal. The only thing he loves more than taking the people's money is spending it. But he saw on Wednesday that a huge swath of the American people is MONUMENTALLY ANGRY about his profligate ways. So the Messiah gave a sop to their ire by promising to cut government programs. The catch is that cutting programs does NOT automatically mean there'll be less spending. It could only mean the SAME amount of money will be spent on fewer programs. I think the Big O is counting on Americans to assume that cutting wasteful federal programs will also mean reducing spending and, consequently, taxation. Such an assumption could blunt the anger over Obama's economic sinkhole and help present him as a centrist. A win-win situation for the Chosen One. There's only one problem. The American people aren't that stupid.
The hundreds of thousands who participated in the Tea Parties, and the millions who supported them, may have been ordinary working stiffs but they use their brains. They can see through attempts to bribe them with political tricks and worthless promises. If Obama wants to get back into the good graces of the anti-tax protestors he'd better stop treating them like dumb rednecks. Instead, he should try the engagement he's so keen on using with our enemies. If he can shake hands with Hugo Chavez he can shake hands with Tea Party America, too.
I saw on Yahoo! News yesterday that, in his weekly radio address, Obama pledged to cut dozens of wasteful government programs. This had to be done, Dear Leader insisted, because "ever-expanding deficits and debt" were "unsustainable". Also, America's future depended on "restoring a sense of responsibility and accountability to our federal budget". Oh really? Where was Obama's concern for fiscal responsibility and unsustainable debt when he was pushing his porkulus bill and gargantuan budget through Congress? And why does he suddenly have such a pressing concern for those things now? Could it be what happened on Wednesday?
On Wednesday, hundreds of thousands of Americans took to the streets in Tea Parties to show their displeasure with Obama's reckless spending. While the mainstream media tried it's hardest to smear the protestors, their collective voice could not be silenced. It reached all the way to the White House, it seems. And Obama knew he had to do something.
Now Obama is a liberal. The only thing he loves more than taking the people's money is spending it. But he saw on Wednesday that a huge swath of the American people is MONUMENTALLY ANGRY about his profligate ways. So the Messiah gave a sop to their ire by promising to cut government programs. The catch is that cutting programs does NOT automatically mean there'll be less spending. It could only mean the SAME amount of money will be spent on fewer programs. I think the Big O is counting on Americans to assume that cutting wasteful federal programs will also mean reducing spending and, consequently, taxation. Such an assumption could blunt the anger over Obama's economic sinkhole and help present him as a centrist. A win-win situation for the Chosen One. There's only one problem. The American people aren't that stupid.
The hundreds of thousands who participated in the Tea Parties, and the millions who supported them, may have been ordinary working stiffs but they use their brains. They can see through attempts to bribe them with political tricks and worthless promises. If Obama wants to get back into the good graces of the anti-tax protestors he'd better stop treating them like dumb rednecks. Instead, he should try the engagement he's so keen on using with our enemies. If he can shake hands with Hugo Chavez he can shake hands with Tea Party America, too.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Party Time!
Well, it went off great! Yesterday was not only the dreaded tax day but also the day for the grassroots, anti-tax Tea Party protests, and I went! And it was wunderbar, as the Germans say.
This was the first protest I've ever attended. I have my opinions and beliefs and I defend and promote them on my blogs but I've never been an activist. I've always been more of the lone wolf type. But the outrageous spending and economic power grab by Obama infuriated me. I just had to DO something this time, and I did. Instead of going home after work and relaxing in front of my laptop, I headed out to my hometown's minor league baseball stadium for an all-American protest.
I admit I was worried about what the turn out would be, but I shouldn't have. Cars were lined up blocks away from the stadium. When I finally got up to the entance, cars were being directed to a second section of the parking lot because the first was full. A news helicopter buzzed over head as people walked toward the stadium entrance carrying flags and signs. It was exciting!
When I finally got into the stadium it was even more exciting. There was such, well, EXCITEMENT in the air. Nearly five thousand people, ranging from senior citizens to young couples with toddlers, attended the Tea Party. You could tell they really believed in the cause that brought them out on a Wednesday night when they could've been sitting comfortably at home. They were all ordinary, working class folks; the kind of people who shop at Wal-Mart. Common people, whom liberals believe they carry around in their pockets like loose change. Not! Last night the forgotten men and women of my Texas hometown joined hundreds of thousands of other fed up Americans to tell Washington, ENOUGH!
For about 90 minutes I and my fellow Texans listened and cheered as various speakers voiced their and our frustrations and fears over a bloated, spendthrift, and arrogant government. Gov. Rick Perry was an early speaker and wowed the crowd but the best speakers, to me, were a small businessman and a high school senior. They both spoke with great passion and conviction. The high school senior was especially heartening because he was proof that not all young people are mindless liberals. The crowd adored him and got a big kick out of his reference to "that fool Barney Frank". The kid was great! The music was great, too. It was so refreshing to hear protest songs for America instead of against America. Take that, Hollywood! Unfortunately, all good things must come to an end. The Tea Party started winding down around 8 and I left around 8:30, feeling more American than I have in quite a while.
I'm really glad I went to that protest. It was peaceful, orderly, and positive, the epitome of citizens petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. And spending our great nation into the poorhouse is certainly a grievance. My fellow protestors and I sent a loud and unmistakable message to the arrogant powers that be in Washington. If they don't listen, we'll do it again. In fact, we need to do it again even if they do listen just to remind them who's really in charge in America. We don't work for the government; the government works for us, no matter what the liberals say. It's OUR country. Power to the people! And God bless America!
This was the first protest I've ever attended. I have my opinions and beliefs and I defend and promote them on my blogs but I've never been an activist. I've always been more of the lone wolf type. But the outrageous spending and economic power grab by Obama infuriated me. I just had to DO something this time, and I did. Instead of going home after work and relaxing in front of my laptop, I headed out to my hometown's minor league baseball stadium for an all-American protest.
I admit I was worried about what the turn out would be, but I shouldn't have. Cars were lined up blocks away from the stadium. When I finally got up to the entance, cars were being directed to a second section of the parking lot because the first was full. A news helicopter buzzed over head as people walked toward the stadium entrance carrying flags and signs. It was exciting!
When I finally got into the stadium it was even more exciting. There was such, well, EXCITEMENT in the air. Nearly five thousand people, ranging from senior citizens to young couples with toddlers, attended the Tea Party. You could tell they really believed in the cause that brought them out on a Wednesday night when they could've been sitting comfortably at home. They were all ordinary, working class folks; the kind of people who shop at Wal-Mart. Common people, whom liberals believe they carry around in their pockets like loose change. Not! Last night the forgotten men and women of my Texas hometown joined hundreds of thousands of other fed up Americans to tell Washington, ENOUGH!
For about 90 minutes I and my fellow Texans listened and cheered as various speakers voiced their and our frustrations and fears over a bloated, spendthrift, and arrogant government. Gov. Rick Perry was an early speaker and wowed the crowd but the best speakers, to me, were a small businessman and a high school senior. They both spoke with great passion and conviction. The high school senior was especially heartening because he was proof that not all young people are mindless liberals. The crowd adored him and got a big kick out of his reference to "that fool Barney Frank". The kid was great! The music was great, too. It was so refreshing to hear protest songs for America instead of against America. Take that, Hollywood! Unfortunately, all good things must come to an end. The Tea Party started winding down around 8 and I left around 8:30, feeling more American than I have in quite a while.
I'm really glad I went to that protest. It was peaceful, orderly, and positive, the epitome of citizens petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. And spending our great nation into the poorhouse is certainly a grievance. My fellow protestors and I sent a loud and unmistakable message to the arrogant powers that be in Washington. If they don't listen, we'll do it again. In fact, we need to do it again even if they do listen just to remind them who's really in charge in America. We don't work for the government; the government works for us, no matter what the liberals say. It's OUR country. Power to the people! And God bless America!
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
"Presidents Don't..."
Here's another great post from my friend Roadie. Enjoy it y'all!
Presidents Don't...
by Roadie
Presidents don't go on late night tv shows.
Presidents don't "reach out" to terrorists.
Presidents don't enter the Oval Office without a jacket and tie.
Presidents don't complain about being "cooped up" in the White House, especially in their first few weeks in office.
Presidents don't flub the oath of office.
Presidents don't even consider making soldiers pay for their own medical care.
Presidents don't have time for "brackets".
Presidents don't plan to cut military spending in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't plan to cut weapons development in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't publicly blame previous administrations for their problems.
Presidents don't "market" their policies via tv and radio commercials.
Presidents don't encourage class envy or threaten the use of their office to get back privately contracted bonuses from private citizens, especially when they knew about them beforehand.
Presidents don't embarass the nation by giving a gift of DVDs to British Prime Ministers.
Presidents don't advocate socialism (nationalized health care, banks, car manufacturers, insurance companies, etc., etc.,).
Presidents don't promote hoaxes like man-made global warming.
Presidents don't grant constitutional rights to foreign terrorists.
Presidents don't take constitutional rights from babies in or out of the womb.
Presidents don't spend the tax payers' money as if it were in limitless supply.
Presidents don't spend more time in front of the camera than in front of their desk.
Presidents don't believe in "spreading the wealth" from the achievers to the slackers.
Presidents don't appoint tax cheats to any position.
Presidents don't giggle about America in recession.
Presidents don't need to have the media hold their hand and wipe their noses for them.
Presidents don't institute socialism they destroy it.
Presidents don't distrust the free market.
Presidents don't assume the government is smarter than the American people.
Presidents don't do anything of these things...until now.
Reprinted post. Originally pulished March 28 on Roadhouse Blog.
Presidents Don't...
by Roadie
Presidents don't go on late night tv shows.
Presidents don't "reach out" to terrorists.
Presidents don't enter the Oval Office without a jacket and tie.
Presidents don't complain about being "cooped up" in the White House, especially in their first few weeks in office.
Presidents don't flub the oath of office.
Presidents don't even consider making soldiers pay for their own medical care.
Presidents don't have time for "brackets".
Presidents don't plan to cut military spending in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't plan to cut weapons development in a time of war...or a time of peace.
Presidents don't publicly blame previous administrations for their problems.
Presidents don't "market" their policies via tv and radio commercials.
Presidents don't encourage class envy or threaten the use of their office to get back privately contracted bonuses from private citizens, especially when they knew about them beforehand.
Presidents don't embarass the nation by giving a gift of DVDs to British Prime Ministers.
Presidents don't advocate socialism (nationalized health care, banks, car manufacturers, insurance companies, etc., etc.,).
Presidents don't promote hoaxes like man-made global warming.
Presidents don't grant constitutional rights to foreign terrorists.
Presidents don't take constitutional rights from babies in or out of the womb.
Presidents don't spend the tax payers' money as if it were in limitless supply.
Presidents don't spend more time in front of the camera than in front of their desk.
Presidents don't believe in "spreading the wealth" from the achievers to the slackers.
Presidents don't appoint tax cheats to any position.
Presidents don't giggle about America in recession.
Presidents don't need to have the media hold their hand and wipe their noses for them.
Presidents don't institute socialism they destroy it.
Presidents don't distrust the free market.
Presidents don't assume the government is smarter than the American people.
Presidents don't do anything of these things...until now.
Reprinted post. Originally pulished March 28 on Roadhouse Blog.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
America 3, Pirates 0
He's free!
Yahoo! News is reporting that Navy Seals staged a daring rescue of Richard Phillips, captain of the Maersk Alabama, an American cargo ship seized by Somali pirates five days ago. During the rescue Navy snipers shot to death three pirates who were holding Capt. Phillips on a lifeboat. A fourth pirate was on board a US Navy vessel for negotiations when the rescue occurred. There's no word on what his fate will be.
This is great news. I'm so proud of the Navy snipers for their flawless eradication of the pirate filth. I just wish they'd had a chance to get the fourth pirate scumbag, too. That guy should've been summarily executed and tossed overboard as soon as Capt. Phillips was freed. If that had happened, though, some liberal group would've howled that the guy's rights were violated. And Obama would've said that America was being arrogant again. He's already stated that the US needs help from other countries to deal with piracy and to hold pirates accountable. Hold them accountable? Boy, I bet that strikes terror into the hearts of those sea raiders!
Liberals are hopeless. They'll never understand that the only thing that pirates, terrorists, and their ilk understand is deadly force. Force like the kind delivered by our gallant snipers this Easter Sunday. That was a gift almost as wonderful as the original Easter present. Liberals don't get it but the rest of us certainly do. This country faced a thorny situation and we came out on top. We killed the enemy and saved our own. America 3, pirates 0! BOOOOOOYAAAAAAH!
Yahoo! News is reporting that Navy Seals staged a daring rescue of Richard Phillips, captain of the Maersk Alabama, an American cargo ship seized by Somali pirates five days ago. During the rescue Navy snipers shot to death three pirates who were holding Capt. Phillips on a lifeboat. A fourth pirate was on board a US Navy vessel for negotiations when the rescue occurred. There's no word on what his fate will be.
This is great news. I'm so proud of the Navy snipers for their flawless eradication of the pirate filth. I just wish they'd had a chance to get the fourth pirate scumbag, too. That guy should've been summarily executed and tossed overboard as soon as Capt. Phillips was freed. If that had happened, though, some liberal group would've howled that the guy's rights were violated. And Obama would've said that America was being arrogant again. He's already stated that the US needs help from other countries to deal with piracy and to hold pirates accountable. Hold them accountable? Boy, I bet that strikes terror into the hearts of those sea raiders!
Liberals are hopeless. They'll never understand that the only thing that pirates, terrorists, and their ilk understand is deadly force. Force like the kind delivered by our gallant snipers this Easter Sunday. That was a gift almost as wonderful as the original Easter present. Liberals don't get it but the rest of us certainly do. This country faced a thorny situation and we came out on top. We killed the enemy and saved our own. America 3, pirates 0! BOOOOOOYAAAAAAH!
Animal Rights Nuts Strike Again
I've said it once and I'll say it again. Animal rights (AR) activists, epitomized by the PETAniks, are a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Actually, they're a WHOLE LOT of sandwiches short of a picnic. And their latest antics prove it.
You see, back in December vice-president Joe Biden's wife got him a German Shepherd puppy as a post-election gift. Cool, right? You'd think so, but it was a travesty to the AR whackos. Upon learning that Mrs. Biden got her puppy from a breeder the AR nutjobs quickly launched into attack mode. Linda Brown, the poor breeder in question, was vilified, scorned, subjected to harassing investigations by dog wardens, and even had her life threatened. Needless to say, she's never selling another puppy to a high profile person again. But why the anger from the PETAniks and other AR creeps? I thought they wanted animals to have good homes. Here's where I learned something.
The devoted-to-animals-but-willing-to-kill-people crowd does want animals to have good homes, but only shelter animals. Their "reasoning" is that every animal bought from a breeder equals one less animal "adopted" from a shelter, resulting in one more animal euthananized. I know, I know; that's why I put the word reasoning in quotations. Even a child can see this isn't a zero sum game. I'm telling you these animal rights folks just aren't playing with full decks. I mean, think about it.
Even if every pet owner got his pet from a shelter animals would still be killed there. Why? Because, for one reason or another, some animals are always going to end up in shelters and there aren't always going to be enough people who can take them. Say you have an animal shelter with 100 animals in a village of 1,000 people, only 10 of whom want to own a pet. For a variety of reasons those 10 people won't be able to take in all 100 shelter animals. So, the "left over" animals will have to be, ahem, taken care of. Sad, but true, to quote Metallica.
Raising hell at puppy breeders won't solve the problem of too many shelter animals. Many people get their pets from neighbors, friends, or family members, bypassing both breeders and shelters. Are the animal rights weirdos going to attack those people, too? The AR crowd needs to wise up (I know, that's asking a lot). If a puppy, kitten, or some other animal finds a home, that's a GOOD thing. It doesn't matter where the animal came from. You'd think the supposed animal lovers would get that and just be happy. But then they'd have to use some logic. Ain't gonna happen.
You see, back in December vice-president Joe Biden's wife got him a German Shepherd puppy as a post-election gift. Cool, right? You'd think so, but it was a travesty to the AR whackos. Upon learning that Mrs. Biden got her puppy from a breeder the AR nutjobs quickly launched into attack mode. Linda Brown, the poor breeder in question, was vilified, scorned, subjected to harassing investigations by dog wardens, and even had her life threatened. Needless to say, she's never selling another puppy to a high profile person again. But why the anger from the PETAniks and other AR creeps? I thought they wanted animals to have good homes. Here's where I learned something.
The devoted-to-animals-but-willing-to-kill-people crowd does want animals to have good homes, but only shelter animals. Their "reasoning" is that every animal bought from a breeder equals one less animal "adopted" from a shelter, resulting in one more animal euthananized. I know, I know; that's why I put the word reasoning in quotations. Even a child can see this isn't a zero sum game. I'm telling you these animal rights folks just aren't playing with full decks. I mean, think about it.
Even if every pet owner got his pet from a shelter animals would still be killed there. Why? Because, for one reason or another, some animals are always going to end up in shelters and there aren't always going to be enough people who can take them. Say you have an animal shelter with 100 animals in a village of 1,000 people, only 10 of whom want to own a pet. For a variety of reasons those 10 people won't be able to take in all 100 shelter animals. So, the "left over" animals will have to be, ahem, taken care of. Sad, but true, to quote Metallica.
Raising hell at puppy breeders won't solve the problem of too many shelter animals. Many people get their pets from neighbors, friends, or family members, bypassing both breeders and shelters. Are the animal rights weirdos going to attack those people, too? The AR crowd needs to wise up (I know, that's asking a lot). If a puppy, kitten, or some other animal finds a home, that's a GOOD thing. It doesn't matter where the animal came from. You'd think the supposed animal lovers would get that and just be happy. But then they'd have to use some logic. Ain't gonna happen.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Quotable Quotes: On America
"It's not America which is dangerous, it's North Korea. It's not America which is arrogant, it's Iran." Newt Gingrich, responding to Barack Obama defaming America overseas, on "Hannity", Wednesday, April 8, 2009.
Friday, April 03, 2009
Obama Joke
I came across this in the comments section of my friend Robert's blog. It was written by The Hawg!. It tickled me; hope it tickles you.
Question: What's the difference between Obama and a drunken sailor on shore leave?
Answer: The sailor spends his own money.
Question: What's the difference between Obama and a drunken sailor on shore leave?
Answer: The sailor spends his own money.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Blacks Behaving Badly
I guess having a Black president just isn't enough for some Black folks. No, they have to go and raise a child rapist and cop killer to the level of a saint before they can feel good about themselves. What am I talking about? I'm talking about those huge wastes of DNA who marched in support of child rapist and cop killer Lovell Mixon in Oakland, CA.
To bring you up to speed, Lovell Mixon was a career criminal and all around monster who shot five police officers, killing four, in Oakland on March 22. Mixon was on parole for assault with a deadly weapon when he was pulled over for a routine traffic stop. He shot the two traffic cops then later shot three members of a SWAT team, killing two, while barricaded in an apartment. Mixon was killed in the shoot-out with SWAT. His death at the hands of cops instantly made him a hero to the mentally disturbed segment of the Black community in Oakland. That segment held a rally for Mixon after his much-appreciated-by-sane-people demise. This is sick.
If anyone wants to know what's wrong with the Black community just look at the rally for Mixon. Efforts have been made to rationalize this despicable display by claiming it's a reaction to police "terrorism". Now, I'm sure there's been police brutality in Oakland and maybe it's worse there than any place else in America, but turning a child rapist and cop killer into a heroic victim is the worst kind of race hucksterism. Mixon wasn't forced into a life of crime by police brutality, White racism, or anything else. He CHOSE such a life. And not only did he choose that life but he chose to victimize mostly members of his own community. Yet it was his fellow Oaklanders, the folks he terrorized, who marched in his defense. Again, if you want to know what's wrong with the Black community look no further than this.
Blacks need to wise up. Whatever the wrongs of renegade cops or White supremacists, the hard truth is that more Blacks are killed by their "homies" than by police or the Klan. Every day Blacks are sacrificed on the altar of thuggery by other Blacks. Every day the Black community is ravaged by its own. Blaming this on anyone or anything other than the garbage who is doing it accomplishes nothing. Social justice is NOT served by a mindless adherence to the doctrine of endless victimization. Making a hero out of Lovell Mixon assures the continued debasement of the Black community by sending the message to young Blacks that crime pays, if only after death. Why work, study, obey the law, and strive to succeed when it's the pond scum who get the glory?
The deification of Lovell Mixon is cause for deep embarassment and concern for every Black person. Mixon was a monster; there wasn't a redeeming thing about him. Getting killed by the cops is what he deserved. Getting shunned like the proverbial plague is what Mixon's worshippers deserve. Turning their backs on those racial radicals is the least decent, rational Blacks can do. Honoring true heroes, like Dr. Benjamin Carson or Colin Powell, is also an absolute must. Young Blacks MUST understand that thuggery is not the way to success and respect. They MUST understand that they are victims ONLY if they choose to be. Rallying around a child rapist and cop killer is an exercise in mean-spirited extremism and communal suicide. It has to stop. NOW!
To bring you up to speed, Lovell Mixon was a career criminal and all around monster who shot five police officers, killing four, in Oakland on March 22. Mixon was on parole for assault with a deadly weapon when he was pulled over for a routine traffic stop. He shot the two traffic cops then later shot three members of a SWAT team, killing two, while barricaded in an apartment. Mixon was killed in the shoot-out with SWAT. His death at the hands of cops instantly made him a hero to the mentally disturbed segment of the Black community in Oakland. That segment held a rally for Mixon after his much-appreciated-by-sane-people demise. This is sick.
If anyone wants to know what's wrong with the Black community just look at the rally for Mixon. Efforts have been made to rationalize this despicable display by claiming it's a reaction to police "terrorism". Now, I'm sure there's been police brutality in Oakland and maybe it's worse there than any place else in America, but turning a child rapist and cop killer into a heroic victim is the worst kind of race hucksterism. Mixon wasn't forced into a life of crime by police brutality, White racism, or anything else. He CHOSE such a life. And not only did he choose that life but he chose to victimize mostly members of his own community. Yet it was his fellow Oaklanders, the folks he terrorized, who marched in his defense. Again, if you want to know what's wrong with the Black community look no further than this.
Blacks need to wise up. Whatever the wrongs of renegade cops or White supremacists, the hard truth is that more Blacks are killed by their "homies" than by police or the Klan. Every day Blacks are sacrificed on the altar of thuggery by other Blacks. Every day the Black community is ravaged by its own. Blaming this on anyone or anything other than the garbage who is doing it accomplishes nothing. Social justice is NOT served by a mindless adherence to the doctrine of endless victimization. Making a hero out of Lovell Mixon assures the continued debasement of the Black community by sending the message to young Blacks that crime pays, if only after death. Why work, study, obey the law, and strive to succeed when it's the pond scum who get the glory?
The deification of Lovell Mixon is cause for deep embarassment and concern for every Black person. Mixon was a monster; there wasn't a redeeming thing about him. Getting killed by the cops is what he deserved. Getting shunned like the proverbial plague is what Mixon's worshippers deserve. Turning their backs on those racial radicals is the least decent, rational Blacks can do. Honoring true heroes, like Dr. Benjamin Carson or Colin Powell, is also an absolute must. Young Blacks MUST understand that thuggery is not the way to success and respect. They MUST understand that they are victims ONLY if they choose to be. Rallying around a child rapist and cop killer is an exercise in mean-spirited extremism and communal suicide. It has to stop. NOW!
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
"Life Is Cheap"
My blogging friend Roadie over at Roadhouse Blog--you can find him in my blogroll--is a great writer and has published lots of posts that I really like. He graciously gave me permission to reprint a couple of his posts and I'm reprinting the first one here; it's about stem cell research. Roadie has about the clearest layman's explanation of this issue that I've read. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.
Life is Cheap
by Roadie
Not satisfied with merely peeking into Pandora's box, this week President Obama decided to go ahead and rip the lid off of it in yet another decision designed to show how sophisticated and compassionate he is in comparison to the evil President Bush. Yes, I'm talking about stem cell research. Part of the problem with this particular issue is the mass lack of education of the people on the topic. So here is a very basic tutorial to bring you up to speed.
Stem cells are like the building blocks that our bodies are made of. As technology advances, it is hoped that these cells can be programmed to regenerate faulty organs or even entire nervous systems. It is believed that the cures for cancer or even AIDS will be found via stem cell research. For the record, I believe this myself.
So, what's the problem? Well, there's a little problem with how you go about getting those stem cells. Stem cells can be found in more than one place. They can be found in living adult bodies by taking samples of skin tissue or even bone marrow, without harm to the donor of course. These are known as "adult stem cells". [Stem cells] can also be found in the blood [in] the discarded umbilical cords of newborns, also without harm to the donor. These are known as "cord blood stem cells". Sounds pretty cool so far...right? Now for the controversial part.
Another place [stem] cells can be found [is] in human embryos. These cells are called "embryonic stem cells". For all of you who slept through biology class, an emryo is a person in his/her earliest stages of life. Yes, I said "person". An embryo is not going to grow up to become a tree, a toaster, or an I-pod. It's going to grow to become a person, assuming there are no complications in development. At this point, the uninformed (liberals) might assume the stem cell controversy is just another case of "Bible thumpers" trying to define when life actually starts. Though that is an issue, it's not the issue...at least not for me. My issue is what I call "people farming".
A few years ago there was a moderately successful movie that starred Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johansson called "The Island". The premise was that there was a corporation whose clients would supply them with DNA in order for them to grow, stock, and "maintain" identical twins for later use as organ donors, according to the need of that client. These "donors" are kept alive in a facility and [are] completely unaware of their purpose thanks to eleborate system of lies and facades controlled by the corporation. As you can imagine, the corporation falls apart when the truth is discovered after the escape of Ewan's and Scartlett's characters. It was early into this movie that I realized that Hollywood had inadvertently provided us with a brilliant case against embryonic stem cells. Though the "big screen" version of the consequences of treating people as parts bins may be a tad exaggerated, it does vividly force you to consider the ethics of such a thing.
I would like to think that there are not people out there who would look at embryonic stem cell research as a way to make a fast buck...but I know better. I would like to think that there will be no pharmaceutical companies that will offer money for the embryos, or women willing to accept such offers...but I know better.
Now that we have decided that embryos are little more than "raw material" to be used at our disposal, I have to wonder what the next step will be. Where will the line be moved to next? Fetuses? Infants? Toddlers? Teens? At what next point do we decide [not] too old to be used as a guinea pig under the false premise of "the greater good" or "science"? Who will get the honor of making that decision?
Also, keep in mind that it is only the media and leftists politicians who imply that conservatives are against all forms of stem cell research. Truth be told, we are for stem cell research just not the type that requires the death of another person.
Reprinted post. Orginially published March 10 on Roadhouse Blog.
Life is Cheap
by Roadie
Not satisfied with merely peeking into Pandora's box, this week President Obama decided to go ahead and rip the lid off of it in yet another decision designed to show how sophisticated and compassionate he is in comparison to the evil President Bush. Yes, I'm talking about stem cell research. Part of the problem with this particular issue is the mass lack of education of the people on the topic. So here is a very basic tutorial to bring you up to speed.
Stem cells are like the building blocks that our bodies are made of. As technology advances, it is hoped that these cells can be programmed to regenerate faulty organs or even entire nervous systems. It is believed that the cures for cancer or even AIDS will be found via stem cell research. For the record, I believe this myself.
So, what's the problem? Well, there's a little problem with how you go about getting those stem cells. Stem cells can be found in more than one place. They can be found in living adult bodies by taking samples of skin tissue or even bone marrow, without harm to the donor of course. These are known as "adult stem cells". [Stem cells] can also be found in the blood [in] the discarded umbilical cords of newborns, also without harm to the donor. These are known as "cord blood stem cells". Sounds pretty cool so far...right? Now for the controversial part.
Another place [stem] cells can be found [is] in human embryos. These cells are called "embryonic stem cells". For all of you who slept through biology class, an emryo is a person in his/her earliest stages of life. Yes, I said "person". An embryo is not going to grow up to become a tree, a toaster, or an I-pod. It's going to grow to become a person, assuming there are no complications in development. At this point, the uninformed (liberals) might assume the stem cell controversy is just another case of "Bible thumpers" trying to define when life actually starts. Though that is an issue, it's not the issue...at least not for me. My issue is what I call "people farming".
A few years ago there was a moderately successful movie that starred Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johansson called "The Island". The premise was that there was a corporation whose clients would supply them with DNA in order for them to grow, stock, and "maintain" identical twins for later use as organ donors, according to the need of that client. These "donors" are kept alive in a facility and [are] completely unaware of their purpose thanks to eleborate system of lies and facades controlled by the corporation. As you can imagine, the corporation falls apart when the truth is discovered after the escape of Ewan's and Scartlett's characters. It was early into this movie that I realized that Hollywood had inadvertently provided us with a brilliant case against embryonic stem cells. Though the "big screen" version of the consequences of treating people as parts bins may be a tad exaggerated, it does vividly force you to consider the ethics of such a thing.
I would like to think that there are not people out there who would look at embryonic stem cell research as a way to make a fast buck...but I know better. I would like to think that there will be no pharmaceutical companies that will offer money for the embryos, or women willing to accept such offers...but I know better.
Now that we have decided that embryos are little more than "raw material" to be used at our disposal, I have to wonder what the next step will be. Where will the line be moved to next? Fetuses? Infants? Toddlers? Teens? At what next point do we decide [not] too old to be used as a guinea pig under the false premise of "the greater good" or "science"? Who will get the honor of making that decision?
Also, keep in mind that it is only the media and leftists politicians who imply that conservatives are against all forms of stem cell research. Truth be told, we are for stem cell research just not the type that requires the death of another person.
Reprinted post. Orginially published March 10 on Roadhouse Blog.
I'm Back...Again
Hey blogging friends! Remember when my internet connection went kaput way back in '08? Well, my broadband link went kaput for a week and I just got it fixed today. I'm glad to be back online and will be back in blogging action soon. And I'll be checking out what y'all have been up to. Again, I'm back and GLAD!!!!!
Seane-Anna
PS
Yesterday was my birthday. YEEHAW!!!!!
Seane-Anna
PS
Yesterday was my birthday. YEEHAW!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)