Monday, January 23, 2006


Check out the new site here:

Bigger, Better and Uglier than ever!!!!!!!!!!


Tuesday, January 17, 2006

No Posts For The Next Few Days

I have some folks helping me work on some new stuff for the blog behind the scenes. It should be done in the next few days. So I will be unable to post for a little while.

I will let you know as soon as the work is done. Hopefully you will like it.....

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Terrorists Buying Untraceable Cell Phones In USA.


the FBI office in Midland Texas has now said:

"There is no known link or demonstrated link or any other kind of link at this point between the people here and any terror cell,"

This completely contradicts the previous reports from ABC.

Oh and to the Moonbats commenting on this thread. I am a Liberal Democrat.


This one hits close to home. Michelle Malkin has this story about terrorists buying large quantities of throw away cell phones. One of the towns mentioned Hemet California is about 15 minutes from my house. Here is an excerpt:

Federal agents have launched an investigation into a surge in the purchase of large quantities of disposable cell phones by individuals from the Middle East and Pakistan, ABC News has learned.

The phones -- which do not require purchasers to sign a contract or have a credit card -- have many legitimate uses, and are popular with people who have bad credit or for use as emergency phones tucked away in glove compartments or tackle boxes. But since they can be difficult or impossible to track, law enforcement officials say the phones are widely used by criminal gangs and terrorists.

...Law enforcement officials say the phones were used to detonate the bombs terrorists used in the Madrid train attacks in March 2004.

...The FBI is closely monitoring the potentially dangerous development, which came to light following recent large-quantity purchases in California and Texas, officials confirmed.

In one New Year's Eve transaction at a Target store in Hemet, Calif., 150 disposable tracfones were purchased. Suspicious store employees notified police, who called in the FBI, law enforcement sources said.

In an earlier incident, at a Wal-mart store in Midland, Texas, on December 18, six individuals attempted to buy about 60 of the phones until store clerks became suspicious and notified the police. A Wal-mart spokesperson confirmed the incident.

So you don't think the war on terror is real?

Believe it people. These guys are here maybe not in your neighborhood but somewhere close and they want you dead. Btw Hemet is a "small town". It is about 90 miles south east of Los Angeles, and 85 miles north east of San Diego. It is in the high desert at the base of the San Jacinto Mountain range. Until recently Hemet is pretty remote not near any major freeway and was just a place you would pass through if you were going camping in the mountains maybe stopping to gas up or get some fast food. It was a farming and ranching community. There have been a lot of new homes being built over the last few years as folks can no longer to buy houses in LA or San Diego.

The point is the terrorists are not only in the big cities. They are in the small towns either hoping to buy necessary supplies like these cell phones hoping the hay seeds won't notice what they are up to or they may even be planning to attack small town America.

The Sensible Mom is following up on the source of this story.

AJ Strata connects this story to the NSA leak story.

There you go Risen. If you ever needed evidence you are a Benedict Arnold this is it. And if we do get attacked because of these adjustments by terrorists - you and the NY Times will have the blood of innocents on your hands.

RELIAPUNDIT says he was the first one to connect the dots between this story and the NSA leak story and he is not very happy:

LL of these large sales came RIGHT AFTER the NYTIMES NSA leak (12/15/05). Though this is circumstantial, it is HIGHLY SUGGESTIVE that the leak alerted the sleeper cells HERE (and perhaps elsewhere), and that they are adapting their SOP's as a result; thus, they are making it tougher for us to prevent an attack.

The most amazing part of this story is the reaction from Glenn Greenwald.

If you’re interested in viewing the results of mixing sickly paranoia with abject stupidity -- or if you want to catch a glimpse of what our country will look like once the most rabid Bush followers have full reign over it -- I highly recommend this genuinely disturbing post from Michelle Malkin.

but his commentors go much much farther than that:

Malkin should be on her knees "thanking" Jim Risen (as only a horrid little slut can do) for his expose of this practice.
Malkin and her ilk deserve to be deported!
suspicious right-i suspect michelle is a double agent working for the chinese commies-

Michelle your cover is blown-i hope we're listening to all of her calls-it's for her own good
It's obvious somebody needs to ...

Or how about this reaction from Tbogg.

Since the Great Oklahoma Backpack Bomber Scare of 2005 went the way of Jack Abramoff's career, Michelle Malkin needed another threat to the homeland to get all nipply about and she found it in swarthy types buying cell phones. Quickly, Commisioner! Turn on the Crazy Ass Racist Bitch Signal!

Tbogg claims to be : "Faithful husband, soccer dad, basset owner, and former cowboy"

I wonder if he talks to his kids like that at soccer practice?

Thankfully none of these folks were working at Wall mart.

At least NewsHog has some common sense
even if he can't resist a few jabs at the Right and Michelle in particular.

I will give Malkin her due when she says that we all should be willing to report behaviour we thought was suspicious. I did, on one occasion right after 9/11. I have no idea if anything came of it but I am still glad I did. It may well be the case that, at least in the Texas incident ABC reports, there is some link between these bulk purchases and terrorism:

There will be more to this story I am sure.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Kyoto Be Damned!

Plants Produce "greenhouse gasses!" That’s right NPR’s morning edition reported this morning that scientists in Europe have made an astonishing discovering. All leafy plants (that includes trees) produce methane. In fact they produce as much as ONE THIRD of all methane gas in the world.

Other scientists who were at first skeptical are now accepting the research as valid. They are now questioning the effectiveness of Kyoto. You see one of the Kyoto provisions says that if countries exceed their allowed amount C02 production (C02 is a “greenhouse gas”) they could make up for it by planting trees which convert C02 into oxygen.

OOPS it appears by planting trees you are just substituting one greenhouse gas for another.

Oh and on another note India declared it will not comply with Kyoto C02 production goals.

If you believe Global Warming is happening or not (I am pretty convinced it is)

And/or if you believe it is man made or can be countered by man (I am far more skeptical of this) then maybe its time for plan B ehh?


This post is linked to these bloggers who are hosting Open Trackbacks: Wizbang,

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Alito Too Smart For Democrats and other news

At least that seems to be the general consensus.

Personally I think an attempt to block a nominee to the SCOTUS for ideological reasons is wrong. However this dance that is being performed is great for Democracy imo. Judge Alito is proving to the country just how much he knows about the law and demonstrating why he is qualified to serve on the court.

I think Captains Quarters has the best excert of the day:

Like the bad lawyer he has proven himself to be, Schumer asked one question too many:

SCHUMER: Does the Constitution protect the right to free speech?

ALITO: Certainly it does. That's in the First Amendment.

SCHUMER: So why can't you answer the question of: Does the Constitution protect the right to an abortion the same way without talking about stare decisis, without talking about cases, et cetera?

ALITO: Because answering the question of whether the Constitution provides a right to free speech is simply responding to whether there is language in the First Amendment that says that the freedom of speech and freedom of the press can't be abridged. Asking about the issue of abortion has to do with the interpretation of certain provisions of the Constitution.

The NYT says Judge Alito did very well on the first day of questioning:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10 - If Senate Democrats had set out to portray Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as extreme on issues ranging from abortion to government surveillance of citizens, they ran up against an elusive target on Tuesday: Samuel A. Alito Jr. For nearly eight hours, Judge Alito was placid, monochromatic and, it seemed, mostly untouchable.

The Washington Post takes the same angle:

It was beginning to look as if the Democrats had shown up to a knife fight without a knife yesterday.

It was beginning to look as if they'd just been woofing when it came to the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. That they'd written a check full of bluster that a lackluster series of questions couldn't cash.

Everyone of course is talking about this story. Here are some of the better blog takes from the left:: Bark Bark Woof Woof, firedoglake, Althouse, The Heretik,

From the Right: Decision08, Ankle Biting Pundits, As Usual Alexandra from All Things Beautiful is particularly insightful and thorough.

Ian from The Political Teen was allowed in the room for about 2o minutes. Congrats Ian on being able to witness history firsthand.

The Political Pitbul is Live Blogging
the hearings.

If the Republicans want to maintain their majorities in The House and Senate they should take Hugh Hewitt's advice when selecting new leadership. If whoever they choose for Majority Leader is eventually tied to the Abramoff scandal it will be very hard for them to recover in 2006.

The Volokh Conspiracy offers some poll results mentioned in this CNN story that claims the American Public is growing more skeptical of the secret NSA program recently exposed in a series of NYT stories and James Risen's new book. I checked the article myself. You can click on a link for some of the poll questions. Here are the results they allow you to see.

Question: Do you think the Bush administration has gone too far, has been about right, or has not gone far enough in restricting people's civil liberties in order to fight terrorism?

Answers: About Right 40%, 19% Not Far Enough (editors note: Thats 59% who feel the Bush admin has done enough or not gone far enough)

38% Gone Too Far, and 3% No Opinion.

Question: As you may know, the Bush administration has been wiretapping telephone conversations between U.S. citizens living in the United States and suspected terrorists living in other countries without getting a court order allowing it to do so. How closely have you been following the news about this?

46% Somewhat Closely, 29% Very Closely, 16% Not Too Closely, and 9% Not At All,

and the final question:

Question: Do you think the Bush administration was right or wrong in wiretapping these conversations without obtaining a court order?

50% Right, 46% Wrong, and 4% No Opinion.

What the article does not tell us is who was sampled, what were their political affiliations, were there any more questions and what was the wording of those questions?

This is once again an example of the press not being transparent. Why won't they give us access to everything in the poll?

I for one would like to know how the 25% of the people who answered they were either not following this story very closely or not at all to question two answered questions 1 and 3. Does anyone else think this is important?

Don't you want to know how people who have basically admitted to being ignorant of the details of this story answered?

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Internet Cowards....

I don't know about the wisdom of this new proposed amendment to the 1934 communications act, but I agree with La Shawn Barber completely on this one. This is one of my pet peeves about the intraweb. Before starting this blog, I posted frequently on a few internet message boards, and I have played online video games for several years. It always amazed and infuriated me when people would not just cross but leap over the bounds of socially acceptable behavior simply because they were anonymous. Saying things they would never say in person for fear of a well deserved beating, or in the case of video games, intentionally harming other players for pure amusement. Taking pleasure from the other player’s pain / inconvenience / loss etc.

I put up a recent example in my post "The Last Goodbye" where some anonymous coward insulted a Vietnam vet on a message board after he had posted this story and a heart wrenching personal account.

This worm had the gaul to call to make this comment:

They were stupid, Patriotism gets you nothing but a body bag.

Now if this guy had said this in a bar room, instead of the virtual room he was in (a message board) he would have been pummeled. Most likely he would have never said it fearing the beating he would get. So why does he say it on the web?

Because he is a coward. I have asked myself many times what could be done to make these people behave, or bring some type of justice to them. The only answer I can come up with is the sad pathetic lives they must lead is punishment enough.

I would love to see these cowards get what they deserve but I doubt a federal law is the right way to do it.

Sister Toldjah doesn't think this is such a good idea either.

Oprah and Her Fans Victims Of Fraud!

Whats worse than a career criminal drug addicted, drunken scumbag on crack?

How bout a pathetic little weasel of a frat boy who pretends to be one and defrauds over a million people with the help of an unwitting national television host?

The Smoking Gun has blown the lid off of this story.

After reading the TSG story I do have to wonder who was falling for this crap.

This post is linked to the following blogs who have Open Trackbacks today: Don Surber, Adam's Blog, Right Wing Nation,

Monday, January 09, 2006

Pork Busters Update

Being a Democrat I am supposed to hate Republicans. Well I don't in fact I find myself agreeing with the GOP far more than the Democratic leadership these days. However The GOP is in charge of both houses of congress right now and as John Fund tells us today they are spending far more of our money on pork barrel spending projects than ever before. The latest culprit being "earmarked" projects.

Earmarks are the latest way for congressmen put their votes up for sale. I.e. Ted Stevens notorious "bridge to nowhere". If the GOP doesn't clean up its act they are gonna find themselves out on their ears.

For the latest check the porkbusters website. Call your senator call your congressman tell them you want them to cut the pork barrel spending in your district and state.

Moonbats Support The Troops? : Smash Vs. Filner

So you know the tired mantra by now. "I support the troops I just don't support this war". Well Listen to the audio and read the transcript here from Smash who attended a town hall meeting this weekend with Congressman Filner in San Diego (my home town) and you tell me if Congressman Filner or his friendly audience was supporting Smash.

First a little background. Smash is a veteran of the Iraq war. Congressman Filner is a card carrying political opportunist and Bush hater. You will quickly notice how the crowd turns on Smash as soon as he asks a tough question. As Smash describes it, people were glaring at him, and asking him to give up the mike.

Now if these people truly supported they troops wouldn't they allow the man to speak and engage the Congressman in a substantive discussion?

Of course not because they are freakin liars. They don't support they troops. In fact they don't give a damn about the troops that is if they are troops who actually believe in what they are fighting for. Actions speak far louder than words and Congressman Filner's actions and his constituent’s actions speak volumes.

Michelle Malkin has more. The Moderate Voice has a pretty even handed article but the comments section reveals a not so moderate voice by the host or his guests.

I was especially impressed by this comment from Laura who questioned Smash's courage:

I wonder if the Indepundit would have the courage to confront the man who really
should be questioned about the Iraq war, that would be president Bush of course.

I bet Laura normally supports the troops but made an exception for Smash because of the evil things he dared say to Congressman Filner.

The Debate Link says this exchange demonstrates why he will never join the anti-war movement.

The Smoking Room addresses Filners rhetoric and exposes it for the utter nonsense that it is.

Troops Take On Murtha And Moran

Michelle Malkin has the video that you absolutely have to watch One is of recently discharged Sgt. Mark Seavey who just came back from his deployment to Afghanistan. The other is a retired General reading a letter from the mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq.

As you will see both of these men say the troops moral is high as is that of their families. They also state very clearly no matter who many times Murtha and Moran tell us they "support the troops", they troops don't see it that way.

Joe Klein Advises The Democrats On How to Stay Out of Power

In this article posted yesterday for Time's online edition. Mr. Klein explains why Dems still don't get it when it comes to National Security.

Klein tells us the NSA surveillance program was working and the NYT story has definitely tipped off the enemy:

But these concerns pale before the importance of the program. It would have been
a scandal if the NSA had not been using these tools to track down the bad guys.
There is evidence that the information harvested helped foil several plots and
disrupt al-Qaeda operations.

There is also evidence, according to U.S. intelligence officials, that since the New York Times broke the story, the terrorists have modified their behavior, hampering our efforts to keep track of them—but also, on the plus side, hampering their ability to communicate with one another.

Anyone else see the Risen interview with Tim Russert where the smug self important little twerp tells us his article was an important public service?

It seems he was right and the terrorists are very grateful.

Klein Concludes with:

The latest version of the absolutely necessary Patriot Act, which updates
the laws regulating the war on terrorism and contains civil-liberties
improvements over the first edition, was nearly killed by a stampede of Senate
Democrats. Most polls indicate that a strong majority of Americans favor the
act, and I suspect that a strong majority would favor the NSA program as well,
if its details were declassified and made known.

In fact, liberal Democrats are about as far from the American
mainstream on these issues as Republicans were when they invaded the privacy of
Terri Schiavo's family in the right-to-die case last year.

But there is a difference. National security is a far more important
issue, and until the Democrats make clear that they will err on the side of
aggressiveness in the war against al-Qaeda, they will probably not regain the
majority in Congress or the country.

Spot on. The Dems are completely out of touch with reality and the American People again. Nearly everyone understands the government spying on terrorists especially terrorists inside the country is a good thing and is no way similar to the Nixon era watergate scandal no matter how often the Dems try to tell us it is.

Mr. Klein also exposes a recent attempt by Nancy to score political points, and mislead the American People. Betsy’s page discusses that here. The Strata-Sphere has more:

Can it be any clearer? If any other President asked us to put national security
first, even the worse civil rights abusers in our history, the lunatic left
would align themselves with America first. But this is Bush - the object of
their undying hate.

Read the whole thing.

Sunday, January 08, 2006

My Comments To Professor Rosa Brooks

Professor Brooks appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio program last week to discuss a recent editorial she had written for the LA Times. In the Editorial Professor Brooks raises the possibility of GWB being impeached if the Dems somehow gain control of the congress in 2006. She also suggests there is some merit to the Dems claims. She specifically and repeatedly mentions the recent NSA story.

The funny thing is as soon as the questions turn from small talk to Brook's editorial she admits almost immediately that the NSA story is a minor issue and in her words:

the NSA wiretapping scandal, is in some ways, the least of it.It seems to me that that looks more like a technicality than for instance, possibly deliberately misleading people about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Then why did she make that the focus of virtually her entire article?

She also admits pretty quickly that she is not an expert on the subject and can't really say with any authority if what the Bush admin did was any violation of the law at all. Read this telling exchange:

HH: So they specifically reserved the question to one side, and the foreign intelligence surveillance court appeals board, in In Re Sealed Case number 2, also said no, the president has the authority to do this. So given that the federal authority...

RB: Well, you know, Hugh, I mean, you've got the case law at your fingertips, and I'm not going to challenge you on it, because I don't. And this is actually why, as I said a few minutes ago, this seems like the least of it to me. I mean, this seems to me to be an open question. You know, I'm not an expert on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or the case law behind it. I don't know.

Ok so she admits she really doesn't know what she is talking about fine. Now this brings me to the part of the interview that I took exceptional issue with. I have a serious problem with people who make outlandish claims that have already been demonstrably and repeatedly proven false. Call me crazy but it just makes me see red when people do this and even more so when they get away with it. I am just funny that way. Here is where Professor Brooks repeats the tired meme of "there are no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda".

possibly deliberately misleading people about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, potential violation of federal law on interrogations and detentions policy, and speaking specifically of the torture statute in the war crimes statute.

now anyone who wants to know and anyone who has read the 9/11 report, anyone who has read The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes or any of his 2 dozen or so articles on this topic know that there is no dispute. Saddam Hussein gave money, and training, held meetings, publicly praised (including the 9/11 attacks) and gave safe harbor to numerous terrorists. There are mountains of documentary evidence, including photos, documents, and witnesses supporting this.

Again call me crazy but I just expect a College professor to know what she is talking about before making an outlandish claim like this in one of the largest newspapers in the country or on a national radio show.

So I felt compelled to call Hugh that day and point it out. I also felt compelled to comment on Professor Brooks' blog and gave her some reference material so she can no longer claim ignorance of the facts. Here are my Comments on Professor Brooks blog:

I actually called in that day to gloat about the Texas win over USC but also to comment on your apparent complete ignorance of the numerous documented ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. as well as various other well known terrorist organizations.

Or are you one of the people who believe Abu Sayyaf leaders called Iraqi intelligence agents to discuss their night out bowling?

In case you have missed the over 2 dozen articles Stephen F. Hayes has written on the topic here are a few samples. Pay particular attention to the last one where he documents that Saddam trained THOUSANDS of terrorists in Iraq during the 4 years prior to the invasion. This particular claim has been confirmed by 11 government officials.

Mr. Hayes writes:

“The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come from a collection of some 2 million "exploitable items" captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives.”

Now you may have been ignorant before but that excuse is gone for you professor Brooks. I truly hope you are honest enough to leave this particular falsehood out of your repertoire in future articles or interviews on national radio programs.

Am I out of line?

Should't we expect serious people writing for major newspapers and appearing on national radio shows to know what they are talking about?

Hugh suggested he would have her back on the program. I hope he asks her specifically about the ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. She seems like a nice lady, and she did not come across as a partisan hack or ideologue. I hope she has the intellectual honesty to admit she was wrong.

Hugh talks a little bit about that interview in the context of the impending doom of the MSM here. I don't know if Michael Hiltzik will ever appear on Hugh's show again. I am leaning towards no.

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Ted Kennedy's Editorial On Alito: Your Kidding Me Right? / Open Track Back Weekend!

First of all for Ted Kennedy to question anyone’s credibility is a joke. Take a look at his editorial in today's Washington Post.

As you may notice Kennedy fails to address Alito's qualifications for the court at all. There is good reason for that. The man is one of the most qualified judges to be nominated to the court in the last 50 years. Alito just received the ABA's highest rating of "Well Qualified" for the job.

First Kennedy takes Issue with Alito's 1990 job application for a position in the AG's office under Ed Meese. In that application Alito stated his "deep disagreement with Warren Court decisions."

So What? Do you think Justice Ginsberg (who was an ACLU attorney before her appointment to the SCOTUS) had strong views on the Warren Court decisions or any other court for that matter?

Newsflash Judges are people too. People have political and philosophical views especially people who work in politics and government.

#2 Kennedy suggests Alito's membership in the Concerned Alumni of Princeton some how disqualifies him for the job. Is he serious?

#3 Kennedy cites Alito's failure to recuse himself in a 2002 case in which three Vanguard companies were named parties. Kennedy of course fails to mention any specifics about the case. Maybe this is damning maybe it isn't but I would bet dimes to donuts if it was Kennedy would have been far more specific.

#4 Kennedy says Alito pledged to be absolutely impartial in cases against the government despite his many years of service in the government. Sounds pretty reasonable and pretty typical. Lots of Judges served as prosecutors or government attorneys before their appointment to the bench. Kennedy again uses broad accusations and no specifics when he says
"But in case after case involving the actions of U.S. marshals, IRS agents and other government officials, he has sided with the government and against the citizens, even when his fellow judges have told him he was off-base."

He doesn't mention any particular case, or any specific incident that would indicate a pro government bias on Alito's part. If Kennedy knows something we don't he should put down his glass of scotch for a moment and share.

And finally #5 Kennedy says: His promise to leave his personal beliefs behind when he became a judge : That's what he told me in 1990 he would do.

and claims Alito's appearing and speaking at Federalist Society meetings somehow betrayed that promise.


Because if it is Alito is going to sail through confirmation just like Roberts did. Justifiably so.

This is an Open Trackback Post. If you have something you would like to share this weekend just leave a link to this post in the main body of your post and then leave a trackback here. I will put them up on the main page as I see them come in

Other folks with Open Trackbacks this Weekend: Stop The ACLU, Stuck On Stupid, Linkfest Haven, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Uncooperative Blogger, NIF, Point Five, Don Surber,

Read them, if you have a blog link to them.... I did.

Freedom Folks linked with: It's Your Ass Folks
The Young Conservatives linked with: Abramoff, DeLay, And Alito
The Florida Masochist linked with: All in the word of Allah
The Florida Masochist linked with: The Knucklehead of the Day award

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Mexico The West's Best Chance Of Survival? My Take On Mark Steyn's Article

If you haven't read Mark Steyn's piece yet do it right now.

For those who don't have 15 minutes. Here are the main points:

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries.

Yet while Islamism is the enemy, it's not what this thing's about. Radical Islam is an opportunistic infection, like AIDS: It's not the HIV that kills you, it's the pneumonia you get when your body's too weak to fight it off.

They know they can never win on the battlefield, but they figure there's an excellent chance they can drag things out until Western civilization collapses in on itself and Islam inherits by default.

That's what the war's about: our lack of civilizational confidence. As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder"--as can be seen throughout much of "the Western world" right now. The progressive agenda--lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism--is collectively the real suicide bomb.

Steyn hits it dead on. We are not losing, and can not lose the war against Islamofascism except by refusing to fight it, and refusing to reproduce and reinvest in and re-assert our own western culture. Not only are most Europeans and a good percentage of of Americans not willing to fight, they are unwilling to accept the fact that we are in a war for the very survival of our civilization.

He also offers these eye opening statistics:

"Replacement" fertility rate--i.e., the number you need for merely a stable population, not getting any bigger, not getting any smaller--is 2.1 babies per woman. Some countries are well above that: the global fertility leader, Somalia, is 6.91, Niger 6.83, Afghanistan 6.78, Yemen 6.75. Notice what those nations have in common?

Scroll way down to the bottom of the Hot One Hundred top breeders and you'll eventually find the United States, hovering just at replacement rate with 2.07 births per woman. Ireland is 1.87, New Zealand 1.79, Australia 1.76. But Canada's fertility rate is down to 1.5, well below replacement rate; Germany and Austria are at 1.3, the brink of the death spiral; Russia and Italy are at 1.2; Spain 1.1, about half replacement rate. That's to say, Spain's population is halving every generation. By 2050, Italy's population will have fallen by 22%, Bulgaria's by 36%, Estonia's by 52%.

By 2050, there will be 100 million fewer Europeans, 100 million more Americans--and mostly red-state Americans.

Just to recap those bald statistics: In 1970, the developed world had twice as big a share of the global population as the Muslim world: 30% to 15%. By 2000, they were the same: each had about 20%.

and follows with these poll results:

According to a poll taken in 2004, over 60% of British Muslims want to live under Shariah--in the United Kingdom.

and finally this conclusion:

If a population "at odds with the modern world" is the fastest-breeding group on the planet--if there are more Muslim nations, more fundamentalist Muslims within those nations, more and more Muslims within non-Muslim nations, and more and more Muslims represented in more and more transnational institutions--how safe a bet is the survival of the "modern world"?

Not good.

So as Steyn says this is a battle of attrition fought more in the bedroom than on the battlefield. I agree completely.

Which brings me to something I have been thinking about and contemplating posting on for quite some time. One of the strengths of the United States over the last 2 centuries has been its ability to take immigrants and incorporate them into society hence the nick name "the melting pot". Unlike European countries or any other country in the world for that matter, immigrants to the
United States have proudly considered themselves "Americans" no matter their country of origin. That certainly isn't the case in France, or Germany, or Italy. Ask any immigrant in those countries what nationality they consider themselves to be and they will tell you Turkish, or Armenian, or Kurdish, or Somali, etc. I have asked them myself. Never is the answer "I am German" or "French".

Now here is the unfortunate twist. Due to our fairly recent immigration policy we have created an entire generation of immigrants mostly from Mexico but to a lesser extent from all over Central and South America who still consider themselves "Mexican" or "Brazilian" or El Salvadoran". Only because we have forced them to.

I am completely against illegal immigration but our country thrives on immigrants. Like it or not these people are here to stay. They are not going home next week, or next year or six years from now as President Bush would like us to believe. So why don't we embrace them?

Why don't we encourage them to become Americans?

No matter how poorly considered the law to have been they have broken it and need to be penalized but that penalty needs to also be handed out with a path toward citizenship that can be earned.

Why am I bringing this up now and how in the heck does it relate to Mark's article?

Well The fact is
Mexico is our next door neighbor and Mexicans, have a whole lot more in common with Americans than Egyptians, or Nigerians. We share they same religion (Mexico and Brazil have the 2nd and 3rd highest Christian populations in the world next to the United States). Most of Central and South America is Catholic. They have a hard work ethic which is one of the major factors that led them to leave their families and lives behind in their home countries in the first place. They have high birth rates which if you didn't get the message above in Mark's piece WE DESPARATELY NEED.

We share a common history being discovered, and colonized by the Europeans. Hell the entire
Southwestern USA used to be part of Mexico as the names San Diego (my home town) Los Angeles, San Francisco, El Paso, and Las Cruces would suggest.

So my answer to Mark Steyn's dilemma begins with the "Americanization" of our existing 12 million or so Mexicans, Guatemalans, El Salvadorans, et al. Secondly I suggest we encourage more "LEGAL" immigration from these countries and give them p
referential status over European, Middle Eastern, and African immigrants. The next step is making a serious effort to end the kleptocracy governments of Mexico and the southern Americas. Again starting with Mexico, by simply putting an end to the corruption and replacing the oligarchies these countries could be very much Like the USA. Most of them are rich in resources. Mexico certainly is.

We should encourage the Mexican government to send us their citizens for the foreseeable future. We will welcome them with open arms but they will be our citizens, and as a condition of this new Mexican friendly immigration policy we should require and even subsidize Mexican schools to teach every Mexican child English. As that becomes established we should extend this policy farther south.

Sounds like a long term strategy doesn’t it?

As Mark pointed out the Islamists are thinking long term.

The fact is the people of
Mexico and eventually South America could be the West’s best hope of winning this war of attrition or reproduction however the case may be.

And again to draw from Mr. Steyn's article:

In July 2003, speaking to the U.S. Congress, Tony Blair remarked: "As Britain knows, all predominant power seems for a time invincible but, in fact, it is transient. The question is: What do you leave behind?"

If we can not encourage the people of
Mexico and the Southern America's to become us at least they will be much more like us by the time we have committed civilizational suicide. That is something we could be proud of leaving behind, and just may give modernity a fighting chance.

Other People talking about Mark Steyn's Article: Peak Talk,Bird of Paradise, Deep Keel, The Only Republican In San Francisco, UNCoRRELATED, Sun Comprehending Glass, All Things Beautiful, scottish-right, Pekin Prattles, OKIE on the LAM,

Hugh Hewitt has an even larger list of bloggers discussing this article.

In a related article check out this post titled The Other War at Freedom Folks. If you haven't figured it out already, my suggestion would partially address this problem as well. We will still need much better border enforcement but it should effectively stop the flood of hard working, legitimate immigrants and leave only the criminal elements to police.

instead of looking South Heliopause is looking north WAY NORTH. Something I am also very in favor of btw.

Open Trackbacks can be found today at these fine blogs: Third World County, Adams Blog, Bloggin' Outloud, Don Surber, TMH's Bacon Bits,

I have read and linked to them you should to!

The Must Read Piece Of 2006!

This article by Mark Steyn is the early must read of the year. Not only do you need to read it you need to show it to every left wing moonbat you know. It might, just might slap a few of them in the face hard enough to wake them up to the real imminent threat the western world is facing.

Here is an excerpt to give you an idea of the gravity:

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out
as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries. There'll probably still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy or the Netherlands--probably--just as in Istanbul there's still a building called St. Sophia's Cathedral. But it's not a cathedral; it's merely a designation for a piece of real estate. Likewise, Italy and the Netherlands will merely be designations for real estate. The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West.

That's what the war's about: our lack of civilizational confidence.
As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder"--as can be seen throughout much of "the Western world" right now. The progressive agenda--lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism--is collectively the real suicide bomb. Take multiculturalism. The great thing about multiculturalism is that it doesn't involve knowing anything about other cultures--the capital of Bhutan, the principal exports of Malawi, who cares? All it requires is feeling good about other cultures. It's fundamentally a fraud, and I would argue was subliminally accepted on that basis. Most adherents to the idea that all cultures are equal don't want to live in anything but an advanced Western society. Multiculturalism means your kid has to learn some wretched native dirge for the school holiday concert instead of getting to sing "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" or that your holistic masseuse uses techniques developed from Native American spirituality, but not that you or anyone you care about should have to live in an African or Native American society. It's a quintessential piece of progressive humbug.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Live Blogging The Rose Bowl!

This is my first Live Blogging deal so here goes

Texas just won the Toss.

And they elect to kick off.

The kick is 3 yards deep in the end zone and Reggie Bush is brought down at the 12 on the return.

First play from scrimage Bush ran out of bounds for a loss 2nd and 12.

Lienert was nearly sacked on the last two plays 3 and out BABY!

btw Kieth Jackson Rules! have you ever heard him say "ALL AHHH BAMMM AAHHHHH"

GAHHHHH. Texas fumbles the punt return. USC has the ball on the 46. Huge hit right in the face **Ouch***

Huge play #37 David Kirtman makes a great catch at the 7 and gets leveled. 1st and goal USC.

TOUCH DOWN LenDale White for USC. Texas better not make any more mistakes like this one or its gonna be all over early.

USC stops Texas on 4th and 1 at the 50! USC Ball.

Texas fails to convert on 3rd down and Texas freaking blows it with a stupid face mask penalty. 1st down USC. This could get ugly folks.

Whooo Hooo Texas Stops USC on 4th down. They take over on downs deep in their own territory.

another fumble by Texas luckily they recover it. Early on its apparent to me Texas can definitely play with USC they just need to calmn down. 4th down Texas punts it away. USC takes over at their own 17 yard line.

Ahhhh poooo little reggie bush just fumbled the ball. His 2nd of the ENTIRE YEAR! Texas Ball Baby. (some times its better to be lucky then good)

Texas puts together a nice drive but ends with another unforced fumble. Fortunately they recover and kick the field goal.

Score 7 - 3 USC.

WHOOOO amazing interception by Texas in the endzone. Texas ball on their own 20. I don't think USC has seen a secondary like this all year.


and they miss the PAT. 9 - 7 Texas.

It looked like they were trying to rush the extra point to avoid a review of the touchdown play. Vince Young may have been down before he lateralled.

USC has to punt on 4th and 17. Texas returns the punt to the 50 yard line. Could it be 16 to 7 going into half time?

Stay tuned.

Hey so whos checking the blog from Marylands Western Australia? I see you been there for the whole game eh mate?

Chime in and let us know who ya are.

TOUCH DOWN TEXAS Taylor with a 30 yard run!

and the PAT is good this time. 16 - 7 Texas.

Texas just misses another interception In fact it looks to me like they just got robbed. The DB had possesion the ball came out after he hit the ground. Oh well Its not the first time USC has benefitted from friendly refs.

Lienert has no where to thrown and is ran out of bounds at the 47.

Lienert just got rocked after a nice scramble for 10 + yards. Time out USC so matt can get rid of the stars in his eyes.

40 seconds left in the first half USC with the ball at the Texas 17 and BOOM Lienert goes down sacked by Frank Okham for a 4 yard loss!

Lienert has no where to throw and goes down again!

USC makes the 43 yard field goal. 16 - 10 Texas with 2 seconds left in the first half. That kick was nearly blocked btw.

16 - 10 at half time and pete carol looks a little worried.

2nd half getting ready to start 3 mins ETA. Texas will be receiving.

Texas brings it out to the 29 but there is a penalty on the play...... Holding on the Horns first down at the 19 to start the half.

3rd and 6 from the 23..... VY goes deep but the pass is incomplete. Looked like pass interference to me but of course no call. Here is the punt. Fair catch at the 48 and another flag. Block in the back on USC they start from their own 38

Nice completion at the Texas 22.... 1st and 10 USC. Then SC had to call a time out to avoid the delay of game penalty.

LenDale White with a bruising run down to the Texas 4. 1st and goal USC.

White with a 4 yard run for the TD the PAT is good 17 - 16 USC. That missed extra point could be big. This just in LenDale White is one big boy.

Texas starting from their own 20. Young keeps it for 7. Then hands off the Charles for another 20! Young runs another draw for 15 more! Texas first and 10 from the USC 45!

Another Texas first down pass complete from young at the USC 25!

Charles runs it up inside for another 10 to the USC 15. Then Young runs it in himself DIVING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

That was a damn impressive drive. and great answer to SC's score. Way to keep The big Mo HORNS.

The PAT is good. 23 - 17 Texas with 8:34 left in the 3rd quarter. Comercial time out.

If you havent heard Vince Young is a stud.

MONSTER HIT By aron Ross at the line of scrimage. No gain on the pass play. 2nd and 11 for SC. ... Pass complete to Smith for 6. 3rd and 5 to go. Fred Davis makes the catch at the 45 yard line of Texas. 1st and 10 USC

Nice 25 yard completion to #8 1st and 10 USC at the Texas 20. The run goes no where 2nd and 10. Little dump off pass for 9 yards and USC gets away with a holding call.
pass is incomplete. caught out of bounds. 4th and 1. White up the middle TOUCHDOWN.

extra point is good 24 - 23 USC.

Texas has a long way to go again fielding the kickoff in the 8 yards deep in the end zone. They start at their own 20.

SC player comes out shacking his arm. Young hits Thomas for a 1st down nice diving catch. 1st and 10 at the 35.

Young shakes off the rush like water and takes it all they way down to the USC 20 yard line GO GO GO. Just misses taking it to the house for the touchdown. ...

Ooo now thrown for a big loss. Sweet makes the catch at the 15 yard line 3rd and 5. pass complete but 4 yards short of the 1st down.

Nice D from SC.

here comes the field goal unit. Ok it looks like the 3rd quarter just ended. Well see the field goal after the commercial...... And he misses it GAH!

SC takes over after the missed field goal and completes and 8 yard pass to Dwane Jarret. He is having a good night. Moore tries the run it outside and gets STUFFED!

Kieth Jackson says LenDale "White is like an 18 wheeler runnin down hill tonight". I love this guy.

Texas has a defender down. Defensive end Robinson.

White with a huge hole inside takes it all the way down to the Texas 26. Bush finally breaks one outside and flys down the sideline for the TOUCHDOWN. diving into the endzone. At least thats the call but it looked like he was out of bounds to me...... after the review the TD stands.

the extra point is good. 31 - 23 USC.

Looks like SC was trying some kind of on sides kick. Texas starts at their own 30 with the short kick. VY has all day to throw the ball. ALMOST another Texas fumble ***whehh.**.... Wait a minute here comes the replay... .. after the review the play stands incomplete.

WIDE open Texas first down at the SC 35 yard line. Texas marching down the field now with another first down inside the SC 25 yard line.

On 2nd and 10 Young keeps it and runs for 5 yards. 3rd and 5. Texas needs a TD on this drive.

He runs for 3 it looks like short of the first. fubmles it again *damn it* but TX recovers. Texas is gonna kick a field goal....... and makes this one 31 - 26 USC.

If Texas looses this game its gonna be their own fault. The just seem more nervous than USC. No doubt Texas has the talent to win this game.

another dump off pass goes for 25 yards and tack on 15 after that for roughing the passer. all the way to the 31 yard line of Texas. White up the middle for 9.

Lienert to Jarret for the 20 yard TD pass. with 2 Texas defenders all over him. 2 Texas players down on the play they colided going after Jarret.

The PAT is good 36 - 24 USC

VY makes the USC Defense look silly and runs it in 17 yards for the TD. Texas just marches down the field easily. The extra point is good. 36 - 31 USC with 4:03 left to play.


Texas needs a defensive stop now.

Whats the over under on how many NFL players are gonna get drafted between these two teams? I say 22.

3rd and 7 at midfield. This is a big big play coming up. 2:22 left to play. White is stoped short of the first down! OHHH the ball comes out but right into the hands of the WR smith!


USC comes with a serious blits. VY dumps it off and avoids the sack. another man comes hard for young again no sack but he hurries the pass and incomplete. 3rd and 12.

Pass complete for 5 yards short of the first but a flag looks like a late hit or face mask on USC........ Yes Face Mask 5 yard penalty 1st down!

Another 9 yard completion from Young 2nd and 1. they are reviewing the play to see if it was fumbled but Carter was obviously down.

Young gets the 1st down and steps out of bounds for the 1st down.

Wide open pass to carter inside the USC 14 and out of bounds!

Texas goes for it all with a pass in the end zone tremendous catch after being Tipped but its..... Out of bounds.

Young keeps it and runs it down to the 8. Texas calls time out with 30 seconds left to play.


pass in the end zone batted away! Texas needs 5 for the first and 8 for the touchdown.


VINCE YOUNG RUNS IT IN FOR THE TOUCHDOWN BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

INVINCABLE says my boy Dan Fouts! (Charger Great) 39 - 38 Texas.


Poor little Pouty Petey Carol.

Texas is going for the 2 point conversion to make it a 3 point game.

And the 2 point conversion is good! USC needs a touchdown in 19 seconds. Its all over except the crying girls.

Lienert hits a shuffle pass to Bush for a nice gain with 8 seconds left. IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

5..4..3..2..1.... FINAL SCORE TEXAS 41 USC 38.

as Dandy Don used to say TURN OUT THE LIGHTS THE PARTY"S OVER.

Reggie Bush may have taken home the Heisman but Vince Young was obviously the best man on the field tonight. Over 200 yards rushing. 3 walk in touchdowns. AMAZING.

This cant be real they just said VY had 447 yards passing? 392 yards rushing? and 7 touchdowns in the last 2 rosebowls!


I gotta give it to Pete Carol he gave a classy post game interview.

WHAT AN AMAZING GAME! USC fans got nothing to be ashamed of.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Hearbreaking News 12 of 13 West Virginia Miners Are Dead


I awoke this morning to what seemed surreal news. The same news channels that were reporting 12 of the 13 miners were alive last night were not reporting in reality 12 of the 13 men trapped in a West Virginia coal mine explosion were dead. The lone survivor is in critical condition.

Please pray for these families. What they are going through is unimaginable.


MSNBC Rita Cosby is reporting right now that 12 of the 13 miners have just been found alive!
The 13th miner was found dead earlier today.

The towns church bells are ringing and family members are cheering in the streets.



CNN and Fox are now also reporting on 12 of the 13 miners being found alive. A press conference will be held soon.

USC Is Going Down In Flames Baby!


Welcome Hugh Hewitt Fans. I am Live Blogging the game Here:


Whooo Hooo The Rose Bowl is Tomorrow and the national championship is on the line!

Let’s take a break from politics for the moment and get pumped up for Texas' inevitable Crushing of USC Tomorrow!

Let's start with the Texas fight song!

here is the music and here are the lyrics:

The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the live long day.
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
You can not get away.
Do not think you can escape them
At night or early in the morn-
The Eyes of Texas are upon you
'Till Gabriel blows his horn.

now I want everyone to record this music and sing it loud every time Texas scores another touchdown tomorrow. I promise the fun you have will be exponentially increased with each additional USC fan in the room.

Here are the reasons why USC’s ignominious defeat is unavoidable!

TEXAS vs. usc (By GM Roper)

Courtesy of George of GM's Corner.

Not very long ago, I posted this graphic of the University of Texas Longhorn, with TEXAS superimposed above it:


Not willing to let things slide, some worthy, but ultimately losing USC fan posted on this very same blog this graphic:


Kind of puny as graphics go, only 150 pixels wide and a mere 200 tall. Nothing like my robust 250 pixel wide and 225 pixel tall graphic of the GREAT TEXAS LONGHORN

But I digress. The real reason my worthy (but ultimately gonna lose fellow conservative and otherwise brilliant) blogger bud posted such a small graphic is because if you enlarge the graphic to where you can see what is going on, you see this:

trojan chest with steer copy.png

You really can't blame him though, who wants to publicize that the TROJAN mascot is rooting for TEXAS?


USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 5

Well I missed a few days due to some other more important stuff than USC embarassing itself in the rosebowl. Thursday will be another huge news day(pray that it is all good) with the elections in Iraq. So I thought I should lighten up the blog a bit and give the geniuses at USC a little more to chew on.

  • USC tailback LenDale White "I don't know nothing about Texas,"

  • Vince Young is the better open field runner here's something Bush never will be: 6-5, 230 pounds. Those are the dimensions of Vince Young. Bush? He's 6-0, 200. Don't think size matters in the open field? Think again. All things being equal, I'll take the guy who's 6-5, 230 pounds over the 6-0, 200-pounder, any day.

  • Vince Young's legs beat Matt Leinart's arm: I've seen it many times. You have, too. And get this: Young can do it all himself. That's what makes his legs more deadly than Matt Leinart's arm.
  • Mack Brown's a better recruiter than Pete Carroll: Guess which school ranks No. 1 in's 2006 recruiting rankings? That's right, it's Texas.
  • Horns would hook USC at neutral site: I've got your "neutral site" right here: Pasadena, Texas. Yep, play this game in Pasadena, Texas. Then we'd have ourselves a real y'allgame, and Texas wins going away.
hat tip to The Sporting News for some great reasons why Texas is gonna lay the smack down on USC in the Rose Bowl!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 4

Ok I just learned that the Longhorns have a secret plan for their Rose Bowl Match up with the Trojans. Now this tactic was used famously once before but everyone knows academics are not a USC strong point so odds are they have never heard of it. Here is the concept. sshhhhhhh don’t tell any Trojan fans.

No Way the Trojans see this coming!


USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 3

More reasons why I dislike USC and why Texas will Crush Them in the Rose Bowl.

  • Hugh Hewitt hates USC
  • I could never afford to attend U$C
  • They play in a weak division with weak opponents
  • they cheated to beat Notre Dame!
  • They have their own Monopoly game!
  • Sam Donaldson went to USC!

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 2

So here is volume 2 of the reasons I dislike USC and Why Texas will Destroy them in the Rose Bowl. This feature will continue until they are crushed at the Rose Bowl or until I am selected in the MSM Blogger Draft being conducted over at which ever comes first. Who am I kidding, this will contine until their embarrassing Rose Bowl loss regardless of my MSM Blogger Draft status.

Here are some more reasons why I Dislike USC and why Texas Will Destroy them in the Rose Bowl.

Again reader suggestions on why USC sucks in general and specifically why Texas will kick the snot out of them are welcomed and encouraged.

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 1

Thats right I am adding a new feature today and will run it up to the Rose Bowl for two primary reasons:

1. I really don't like USC
2. Hugh Hewitt says it couldn't hurt my MSM Blogger Draft Status.

There will be no rhyme or reason or particular order just what ever comes off the top of my head. Reader suggestions are most definitely welcomed and encouraged.

1. USC is in Los Angeles and being from San Diego I hate everything about Los Angeles.
2. OJ went there and was qouted saying this last January by

“I’ll be in the stands cheering as loud as anybody for USC,” Simpson told The
Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday.

“I can’t wait. I always follow SC — always have, always will,” he said.

3. The LA Times loves USC.
4. The LA Times loves USC.
5. Brad Pitt was a Trojan in that lame movie and USC is named the Trojans.
6. Hook em Horns just sounds cool.

Now for your looser USC fans I asked my friend and bean counter Tiberious Graccus over at DSOTW to guest blog while I was spending some time with the wife in the mountains last week. Well he and his wife are both USC Alum's so he snuck in a few pro USC posts. If you want to see them here are the links: Here, and Here,

As you can see there is no comparison in creativity. The guy go to USC after all so give him a break ok?

Ghouls Attempt To Play Politics With WV Mining Tragedy

I found this shocking post at MYDD via Michelle Malkin.

Here is an excerpt:

Undoubtedly, some will criticize me for placing blame on President Bush here. The defense will be that Bush didn't cause the explosion that collapsed the mine. My response will be that he didn't do anything to prevent it. In fact, if anything, the actions of his administration made the situation worse.

Now if the comments of this ghoul don't make you angry the following comment posted by someone calling himself boilermaker surely will.

But they voted for him...West Virginia went for the guy by a nine point margin if I am not mistaken.

Cruel thing to say to the bereaved if it comes to that. But, if you vote based on race, southern strategy, Gay marriages and other so-called moral values at the expense of your future deserve your fate, whatever that fate might be.

Here was my comment in reply.

Your ghoulish attempt to make political points out of this tragedy shames you more than any words I could offer.

Boilermaker on the other hand who goes even farther and suggests these miners got what they deserved for voting for Bush deserves a punch in the mouth. I hope he has the courage to travel to WV right now and deliver this message in person to the miners families. Of course he won't because he is a coward on the internet.

I am sorry this had to be my first post of the New Year.

Ogre is also pissed about this

No, the utter and complete hatred of President Bush knows no end for those on the left. Even though as of the writing of this post the fate of the miners trapped in WV is unknown, that doesn't stop complete and utter lunatics from, yes, you guessed it, blaming Bush!!

I don't think he has read the comments section yet.


The Authoer of the post now has others agreeing with his vile position. Again the cowards say this from the safety of the internet:

posted by Teknofyl:

Did anything Bush do positivly impact that situation? Clearly the whole "two exits is one too many" approach was not helpful here, in hindight... how much money did the company save by no putting in the extra shafts? How much would they be worth now?

Bush makes horrible decisions (whaever criteria you think he uses, and no one really know except for him because they are so bad and schitzo), and people die.

The man SHOULD be impeached, convicted, and removed from office. Of course, Cheney as well... this tragedy is another clear example of how Bush's approach to public policy is toxic to anyone who isn't on the plus-side of his whims.

Overtkaen by Events read the comments section as was as disgusted as I was.

If you didn't know one of my favorite bloggers Don Surber lives in West Virginia. He has a great post up about mining in particular and the dangerous work that West Virginian's do in general. I would really like to know what Don thinks of these ghouls.

These bloggers are also covering the mining story. Scared Monkeys, Eu Rota, WizBang, Froth Slosh B'Gosh, and

Monday, January 02, 2006

Thank You To GM and Tiberius Gracchus!

Happy New Year Everyone! and a Huge Huge Thank You to both George from GM's Corner and Tiberius Gracchus from Dumb Shit Of The Week for filling in while I was gone.

Make both of their blogs regular reads. If you thought what they did here was good you will really enjoy their blogs.

I am glad to see they had some fun while I was out, too bad it will all be at Tib's expense when USC gets embarrassed in the Rose Bowl.

Posting will still be light as I caught the flu while on vacation but I will try and get some stuff up ASAP.

Sunday, January 01, 2006

GM's Last Post

Below, you will find my last post for my friend, The Real Ugly American. It is lengthy, but worth the read I think. I want to thank TRUA for the opportunity to help out on his blog, and I want to thank Tiberius Gracchus for all the fun with the back and forth on the TEXAS vs. USC upcoming fiasco (for USC that is).

I hope that all of you will add GM's Corner to your regular reads, as I have done for this fine blog. TRUA is a friend, a champion and a real true American (the ugly part is only reflected in his mirror - LOL)

Cheers, May the Good Lord Bless each and every one of you and may 2006 be such a wonderful year, it will ALWAYS be looked on as one of your best years.

GM Roper

Diagnosing The Left

Polipundit's DJ Drummond has maybe hit on a severe form of mental illness. As a Mental Health professional, I'm concerned about what the disorder is, how it begins - that is what is the genesis of the disorder and how can it be treated. Drummond calls this form of insanity Political Compulsive Disorder. Now, there will be many in the field, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers etc who will not agree that this is a mental disorder at all, but that would be because of their own political proclivities; one must believe that one who thinks he is Napoleon, doesn't think he has a problem!

Drummond notes that:
Democrats know full well that their tactics of slander and defeatism are not working to win elections, yet they just will not consider their position in any kind of mature light. Strange. Yet we have seen this before, and the problem seems to be based on raw emotion overriding better judgment."
This is a good beginning of the description. Surely they can read polls and know that the majority of the American electorate are supporting the use of wiretaps, believe that they are legal and even Bush's ratings have gone UP since these yahoos got on this particular meme, but that doesn't seem to stop them. Point in fact, since the 60's, the United States voter has generally shown that they distrust Democrats with national security issues. Yet in 2004 they nominate a man who served in Vietnam for only 3 months or so of a normally 12 month rotation, gets 3 wounds none of which required more than a bandaid, at least one of which was rejected for a Purple Heart by the treating physician (yet Kerry manuvered one anyway - by hook or crook we don't know) and opted out of Vietnam based on having three Purple Hearts. Then the man comes back and scathingly trounces his fellow troops, calls them war criminals, consults with the enemy in Paris and many years later, gets up on the podium at the DNC and gives the silliest, sloppiest most unprofessional salute I have ever seen (and since I grew up in the Army and served in the Army, I've seen plenty of them) and the Democrats think they have a winner. Infact, Markos M. of The Daily Kos goes so far out on that proverbial limb, he projects Kerry the Winner.

What is the left's response to The Daily Kos for that sloppy, unbelievable, insane prediction? They make DK the number one blog in the blogosphere. How's that for insanity?

But, I digress, and the opening topic today is DJ Drummond's diagnosis of the left. Lets take a look at some of the other mental health issues that the conservative blogosphere has put out:

John Moore, a good friend believes that the appropriate diagnosis is Cognition Disorder of Progressives and offers a number of symptoms for the same:
  • utopian thinking - A delusional belief that the patient knows simple, side effect free solutions to all social problems. In some cases this is associated with psychotic delusions of grandeur.

  • anthroplastic ideas - a delusion that behavioral conditioning, performed by the government, will cure all behavioral and social problems, i.e., will change all non-CDP people into CDP . Implicit in this delusional system is the idea that people can be "programmed" to be "perfect."

    This symptom leads to a reflexive, vehement resistance by the patient to even the idea that people may have immalleable characteristics. The worst known example is that of Pol Pot, who attempted to remove all undesirable influences in the belief that the perfect socialist man would then emerge.

  • anti-theistic rebellion - an emotional antagonism against Christianity... probably caused by an abnormal persistence of adolescent rebellion... may also be related to the need to avoid counter-arguments to desired policies (see utopiate thinking, above). This ranges from a mere antagonism to Christianity to a hatred of religions of all forms. Generally the more "western" a religion is, the more it is hated. Thus these patients may accept primitive and animalist belief systems.

  • naturist delusion - a sincere belief that mankind is evil and nature is benign. The incidence of this symptom is inversely related to the practical experience that the patient has with nature. Self hatred is a feature in this area. Typical thinking includes a belief that mankind is a cancer on earth, and that earth (viewed as a feeling being) will retaliate with a deadly virus.

    The utopian view of nature is remarkable in that most patients are also believers in evolution, which has resulted in vast amounts of suffering and cruelty in the natural arena.

  • environmental spasm - the patient experiences episodes of manic activity on behalf of "the environment." The delusional nature of this is evidenced by the misanthropic attacks on all works of man, and also by the focus on visible or totemic objects... for example, the Mount Graham Red Squirrel or the Spotted Owl.

    An example of the paradoxical nature of these delusions is given by the Red Squirrel and the Santa Barbara Sand Fly. The Squirrel, a subspecies of the very common Red Squirrel, is fought for aggressively, while the Sand Fly, equally at risk and a truly distinct species, inspires little passion.

    The patient usually is obsessed only with cute or cuddly animals, which is probably a displacement of the nurturing urge, itself unfulfilled due to abortion.

  • control obsession - this is the tendency of the patient to strive for excessive control over others, through government action. This is probably a projection of an unconscious fear of losing control over ones' self, even though the conscious manifestation is viewed as "compassion."

  • racist/feminist hypocrisy - the patient passionately advocates discrimination based on sex or race, while loudly proclaiming opposition to policies which are "racist" or "sexist."

  • overemotional perceptions - the patient is far more concerned with how a social action "looks" or "feels," and resists or denies objective evidence to the contrary, This also leads to very superficial cognition about matters of significant impact, as the patient merely gets the "feel" of the issue rather than truly understanding it.

  • sexual dysfunction - the patient is highly anxious about sexual matters, and this is manifested as:
    Obsession with sexual and gender roles.
    Passionate embrace of most non-traditional sexual preferences.
    A need to define individuals by their gender or sexual preference, and make social policy as if everyone were equally obsessed.
    A need to constantly push the envelope of indecent art.

  • John is probably on to something, but there is also something missing. For example, John calls this a cognition disorder which indicates faulty wiring in the brain, and while this may be true, it doesn't encompass the irrational part of the disorder that is exhibited by the Democrats/leftists. The Assistant Village Idiot believes that the tendency to want to "rule" is the direct result of being highly intelligent. He may be on to something. Didn't the left taut Kerry's obvious (to them at least) superior intelligence based on nothing more than the ability to speak in public with a solid Kennedyesque cadence? In fact, they kept that one going until it turned out that Bush made slightly better grades than Kerry did in college. As the AVI noted:
    All you folks who think that the world would be better if the smart people were in charge – drop that idea. I have never interacted with a group that had screwier ideas, listened less, or postured more. Everyone arrived with the idea at long last, people I can reason with, but the discussions were as petty and unreasonable as everywhere else. Higher vocabulary and more formulas, same arguments

    OK, we've included in the run-up to making a good diagnosis at least one factor, the intellectual/cognitive dysfunction exhibited by the oh-so-highly-intelligent members of the left and the Democratic party, we'll keep that in mind."

    But, as Drummond noted that this disorder is also based in emotion, raw unreasoning emotion. Rush Limbaugh has noted in the past that the right thinks, the left feels. And I think there is something to this and we may be able to add another factor to our workup for a functioning diagnosis. One of my very favorite people in the Blogosphere is Dr. Sanity. She, as a practicing Psychiatrist has looked at the seeming mental illness of the left. Too, she recently did a post called PsychbloggerTouch And Go survey of mental health professionals who blog and does a regular "Carnival Of The Insanities," a not to be missed weekly carnival. Perhaps her most important work in her blog is describing Narcissism and Society in three parts. You absolutely must read the whole thing, but here is a teaser:
    In some ways, the rise of human civilization from the cave to the present day has resulted because of attempts through the Rule of Law and social controls to set limits on the unrestrained Grandiose Self. This is primarily due to the destructiveness of the Narcissistic Rage generally associated with that part of the Self.

    Because of this, the Grandiose Self has received a bad reputation philosophically, morally, and politically. The natural development of Governments and Religions (which ultimately are an expression of the Idealized Parent Image/Omnipotent Other side of the Self)have all too often attempted to ruthlessly suppress the Grandiose Self--much to the detriment of the individual AND the success of the particular society or religion.

    In fact, despite the obvious truth that governments, nations, and religions are in a much better position to wreak far more systemized misery and death on human populations, it is almost always the Grandiose Self that gets the blame. As Wretchard at The Belmont Club pointed out in a recent post, a review of the 20th century, for example, shows that all the "people's revolutions" supported by the Left and purportedly for the purpose of "freeing" large populations of people; resulted instead in enslaving them and increasing authoritarian rule.

    Without a political or economic framework that is able to incorporate what we refer to as "human nature" into its calculations, all so-called "perfect" societies and ideologies will at best simply fail in the real world; and at worse cause untold human suffering. With the best of intentions (this is perhaps debatable), the social engineers of philosophy, political science, and economics have caused so much more slavery, misery and death on a grand scale--that the grandiose CEO's of the largest corporations can be considered mere pikers by comparison.

    Another Psychblogger who attempts to look at one issue of diagnosis is Shrinkwrapped who looks at the left's inability to face reality in the war against Islamic Fascism in this post The Left's Inadvertant (?) Anti-Americanism. A note, if one sees a reality that no one else can fathom, either the "see'er" is a dreamer with a view of the future, improbable as it seems, or the "see'er" is psychotic, that is out of touch with reality. The focus of Shrinkwrapped's post then is that the left is either covertly or overtly helping the other side and is, as George Orwell noted:
    Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other."

    So far, we have looked at diagnosing the left as Political Compulsive Disorder, Cognitive Disorder of Progressives (bolstered with the Assistant Village Idiot's "Intelligence isn't everything"), an excellent case for Narcissim, the refusal of the left to "see" what the war really is.

    My own contribution to the fray is Acquired/Induced Bush Derangement Syndrome. BDS is a term coined by another psychiatrist, Dr. Charles Krauthammer. Krauthammer's premise is that the left is so traumatized by the election of George Bush in the 2000 election, that they have lost all ability to reason. That they are indeed Deranged. Vintage Krauthammer:
    Moreover, Dean is very smart. Until now, Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) had generally struck people with previously compromised intellectual immune systems. Hence its prevalence in Hollywood. Barbra Streisand, for example, wrote her famous September 2002 memo to Dick Gephardt warning that the president was dragging us toward war to satisfy, among the usual corporate malefactors who ``clearly have much to gain if we go to war against Iraq,'' the logging industry -- timber being a major industry in a country that is two-thirds desert.

    It is true that BDS has struck some pretty smart guys -- Bill Moyers ranting about a ``right-wing wrecking crew'' engaged in ``a deliberate, intentional destruction of the United States way of governing'' and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, whose recent book attacks the president so virulently that Krugman's British publisher saw fit to adorn the cover with images of Dick Cheney in a Hitler-like mustache and Bush stitched-up like Frankenstein. Nonetheless, some observers took that to be satire; others wrote off Moyers and Krugman as simple aberrations, the victims of too many years of neurologically hazardous punditry.
    My poor contribution to this is the effect that this has had on to be pitied Cyndy Sheehan. The degree of insanity of which is indicated in that post's comment section by one "Fred" (not to be confused with our dearly beloved TEXASFRED). Fred's comment:
    A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." Even so, there will be real consequences for Bush and his misanthropic henchman. It is just unfortunate that we will all have to suffer until this veil of righteousness is lifted. In the meantime, PEACE. I hope you make a lot of money, as that seems to be the real religion followed by Bush and his fellow traitors. Worship away, and perhaps you will build a sufficient fortress to keep the masses at bay for a few days when they get tired of being told to "eat cake".

    In an update on the post I made regarding BDS "Pandemic" I noted that EJ Dionne had succumbed:
    EJ Dionne (long infected with BDS - Bush Derangement Syndrome) has had a hissy fit. He recently decided that he didn't like the way that Bush put the onus on the dems for the way they are touting the "Bush Lied" meme, in fact, I doubt if anyone else likes "... to be told their arguments make the troops' job harder. Who would want to hear they're undermining the war effort?" as Jonah Goldberg put it in National Review Online's "The Corner" Dionne writes:

    Bush was not subtle. He said that anyone accusing his administration of having "manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people" was giving aid and comfort to the enemy. "These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will," Bush declared last week. "As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them."

    Bush was not subtle? OMG... EJ, where have you been for the last 2 and a half years. The Dems, including the vast majority of Dems in the Senate who signed onto the war, have been anything BUT subtle in their condemnation of Bush and the War. And, whether you like it or not, when they turn around and accuse Bush of everything but shorting the sheets of new recruits, they ARE undermining the morale of the troops, the vast majority of whom know EXACTLY why they are in Iraq and who re-up (reinlist) in record numbers. They ARE giving aid and comfort to the islamofascists who believe that if they hang on long enough, the US will belly up.

    So, to the mix we add an inability of the left to see where they fit into the political dialectic. This obviously needs much more study, so a second part (following the example of the good Dr. Sanity) will follow in the near future. Until then, look kindly on your lefty friends, they just can't help themselves.

    Xposted at GM's Corner