My Sister has Shingles
Whenever I hear that someone has shingles I always get this image of asphalt roofing around the person's middle. I assume that's not actually the case. But then why the name?
Shingles [Latin cingulus, a girdle] The colloquial name of the dermatomal rash caused by herpes zoster. (from Taber's)
Well, we all know what herpes is. But before you assume that my sister's deportment has fallen to unspeakable depths... shingles is when the chicken pox (herpes zoster) you had as a child returns and attacks your nerve endings.
So my sister is still a saint... albeit a suffering one.
Get well, Sis.
(I wonder if she wanted this information published?)
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Global Warming: It's Now Official
It's now official. Global Warming is here and it's for real. I heard an announcer for ESPN radio tell his audience this yesterday.
So at least now we know for sure.
In the past heat waves were just a pain, but now they take on an ominous aura with the Left's stories of man-produced climate change.
It's all the same story, really. Global warming. Gas prices. The war on terror. The story is that the world is going to hell in a Republican hand-basket.
When you don't have any ideas, you go with what you got.
It's now official. Global Warming is here and it's for real. I heard an announcer for ESPN radio tell his audience this yesterday.
So at least now we know for sure.
In the past heat waves were just a pain, but now they take on an ominous aura with the Left's stories of man-produced climate change.
It's all the same story, really. Global warming. Gas prices. The war on terror. The story is that the world is going to hell in a Republican hand-basket.
When you don't have any ideas, you go with what you got.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Not Your Grandfather's War, Israel
Bill Kristol writes for Front Page Mag:
Why is this Arab-Israeli war different from all other Arab-Israeli wars? Because it's not an Arab-Israeli war. Most of Israel's traditional Arab enemies have checked out of the current conflict. The governments of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia are, to say the least, indifferent to the fate of Hamas and Hezbollah. The Palestine Liberation Organization (Fatah) isn't a player.
The prime mover behind the terrorist groups who have started this war is a non-Arab state, Iran, which wasn't involved in any of Israel's previous wars. What's happening in the Middle East, then, isn't just another chapter in the Arab-Israeli conflict. What's happening is an Islamist-Israeli war. You might even say this is part of the Islamist war on the West--but is India part of the West? Better to say that what's under attack is liberal democratic civilization, whose leading representative right now happens to be the United States.
So the Iranians are Persian and the people of Syria are Arab. Mix in the Shiite and Sunni differences and you have this very different kind of threat to Israel as Iran seeks to become the leader of the World of Islam.
For while Syria and Iran are enemies of Israel, they are also enemies of the United States. We have done a poor job of standing up to them and weakening them. They are now testing us more boldly than one would have thought possible a few years ago. Weakness is provocative. We have been too weak, and have allowed ourselves to be perceived as weak.
The right response is renewed strength--in supporting the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, in standing with Israel, and in pursuing regime change in Syria and Iran. For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions--and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement.
As Israel fights this current battle in the war for the survival of Western Civilization... alone, the Left in this country and the Jew-haters of Europe line up against her. Weakness and appeasement rule Europe and will be running for office this fall in the United States. We should pray that the American people have the wisdom to defeat it... lest we be ultimately defeated.
Bill Kristol writes for Front Page Mag:
Why is this Arab-Israeli war different from all other Arab-Israeli wars? Because it's not an Arab-Israeli war. Most of Israel's traditional Arab enemies have checked out of the current conflict. The governments of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia are, to say the least, indifferent to the fate of Hamas and Hezbollah. The Palestine Liberation Organization (Fatah) isn't a player.
The prime mover behind the terrorist groups who have started this war is a non-Arab state, Iran, which wasn't involved in any of Israel's previous wars. What's happening in the Middle East, then, isn't just another chapter in the Arab-Israeli conflict. What's happening is an Islamist-Israeli war. You might even say this is part of the Islamist war on the West--but is India part of the West? Better to say that what's under attack is liberal democratic civilization, whose leading representative right now happens to be the United States.
So the Iranians are Persian and the people of Syria are Arab. Mix in the Shiite and Sunni differences and you have this very different kind of threat to Israel as Iran seeks to become the leader of the World of Islam.
For while Syria and Iran are enemies of Israel, they are also enemies of the United States. We have done a poor job of standing up to them and weakening them. They are now testing us more boldly than one would have thought possible a few years ago. Weakness is provocative. We have been too weak, and have allowed ourselves to be perceived as weak.
The right response is renewed strength--in supporting the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, in standing with Israel, and in pursuing regime change in Syria and Iran. For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions--and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement.
As Israel fights this current battle in the war for the survival of Western Civilization... alone, the Left in this country and the Jew-haters of Europe line up against her. Weakness and appeasement rule Europe and will be running for office this fall in the United States. We should pray that the American people have the wisdom to defeat it... lest we be ultimately defeated.
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Jumping the Shark: and Points in Time
I love "All I Can Stands" and his Logic Lifeline which taught me a new figure of speech today. AICS links to an American Spectator piece that explains it in terms of the Wilson-Plame lawsuit against Rove, Libby, and Cheney:
In TV-land the moment is infamous.
One of the stars of the longtime hit TV series Happy Days, Arthur "The Fonz" Fonzerelli, played by Henry Winkler, is made to do something by the show's writers that was clearly designed to save the fading series from sinking ratings.
The something? The Fonz, on water skis, was forced to literally jump a shark. The episode not only failed to save the once popular series that also starred future director Ron Howard, "jumping the shark" became a Hollywood metaphor for the point at which a once believable premise became a caricature.
With the filing of a lawsuit against Vice President Cheney, White House political aide Karl Rove and ex-Vice Presidential aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame have finally jumped the shark. With the revelation by columnist Robert Novak that it was neither Rove nor Libby, much less Cheney, who was his primary source for his column mentioning -- in passing no less -- that Wilson's now-famous assignment to Niger was arranged by his CIA-wife, Wilson's entire claim to fame takes a torpedo amidships. The New York Post now reports that Novak's main source was the anti-Iraq War Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a charge that Armitage has thus far not refuted.
http://www.theamericanspectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10091
I love it. However it leaves me with a burden that I will carry for awhile. I've been pacing and thinking of examples of just when certain individuals and groups went off the deep end and became a caricature.
When did Jesse Jackson jump the shark?
And the civil rights movement?
Was there one sentinel event when Howard Dean moved from the realm of politics to cartoon?
When did the ACLU jump the shark?
The American Spectator, Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, all those wonderful conservative bloggers out there (like AICS), and others in this new "age of information" shine a cold and revealing light on fashionable lunacy, defining it as such. Just a few years ago the celebrated elites could tread on the truth with impunity and spew the most outrageous bilge without being called on it. But the once sacrosanct is now fair game for inspection... And if you jump the shark (I love it) you are going to be called on it. And that, my friends, must drive the formerly protected classes to distraction.
I love "All I Can Stands" and his Logic Lifeline which taught me a new figure of speech today. AICS links to an American Spectator piece that explains it in terms of the Wilson-Plame lawsuit against Rove, Libby, and Cheney:
In TV-land the moment is infamous.
One of the stars of the longtime hit TV series Happy Days, Arthur "The Fonz" Fonzerelli, played by Henry Winkler, is made to do something by the show's writers that was clearly designed to save the fading series from sinking ratings.
The something? The Fonz, on water skis, was forced to literally jump a shark. The episode not only failed to save the once popular series that also starred future director Ron Howard, "jumping the shark" became a Hollywood metaphor for the point at which a once believable premise became a caricature.
With the filing of a lawsuit against Vice President Cheney, White House political aide Karl Rove and ex-Vice Presidential aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame have finally jumped the shark. With the revelation by columnist Robert Novak that it was neither Rove nor Libby, much less Cheney, who was his primary source for his column mentioning -- in passing no less -- that Wilson's now-famous assignment to Niger was arranged by his CIA-wife, Wilson's entire claim to fame takes a torpedo amidships. The New York Post now reports that Novak's main source was the anti-Iraq War Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a charge that Armitage has thus far not refuted.
http://www.theamericanspectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10091
I love it. However it leaves me with a burden that I will carry for awhile. I've been pacing and thinking of examples of just when certain individuals and groups went off the deep end and became a caricature.
When did Jesse Jackson jump the shark?
And the civil rights movement?
Was there one sentinel event when Howard Dean moved from the realm of politics to cartoon?
When did the ACLU jump the shark?
The American Spectator, Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, all those wonderful conservative bloggers out there (like AICS), and others in this new "age of information" shine a cold and revealing light on fashionable lunacy, defining it as such. Just a few years ago the celebrated elites could tread on the truth with impunity and spew the most outrageous bilge without being called on it. But the once sacrosanct is now fair game for inspection... And if you jump the shark (I love it) you are going to be called on it. And that, my friends, must drive the formerly protected classes to distraction.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Skyepuppy on Iraqis and the Israelis
Skyepuppy has a great post that deals with changing attitudes in Iraq concerning Israel and the terrorists they face. She writes:
They (Iraqis) have been the victims of Islamist extremists in Iraq for two to three years now, so they know what it's like. The average Iraqi citizen has more in common these days with the average Israeli than they do with the average Palestinian.
Read the entire post here: http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/iraq-model-on-reactions-to-gaza.html
Skyepuppy has a great post that deals with changing attitudes in Iraq concerning Israel and the terrorists they face. She writes:
They (Iraqis) have been the victims of Islamist extremists in Iraq for two to three years now, so they know what it's like. The average Iraqi citizen has more in common these days with the average Israeli than they do with the average Palestinian.
Read the entire post here: http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/iraq-model-on-reactions-to-gaza.html
Friday, July 14, 2006
Jacques Chirac on Middle East "Fairness"
Chirac says:
"One may well ask if there isn't today a kind of wish to destroy Lebanon -- its infrastructure, its roads, its communications, its energy, its airport. And for what?
"I find honestly -- as all Europeans do -- that the current reactions are totally disproportionate," he said in a live television interview on France's national Bastille Day.
I suppose the "disproportionate" response is due to the fact that Israel has better weapons and better trained soldiers. Chirac thinks that Israel should only respond to the bombing that originates in Lebanon with force no greater than that which the terrorists are able to muster. Anything else just wouldn't be fair to the terrorists.
I'm not sure that the French leader is being hypocritical, because it is quite possible that if the French were being bombed by a lesser power, Jacques Chirac might very well respond only in like manner. That is why France is in the shape it's in.
But to the Israelis it just doesn't make sense to sacrifice its citizens to "fairness" when they have the power to bomb the living crap out of those who mean them harm. Go figure.
The recommendation that the Israelis should act proportionately condemns Israel to a perpetual state of siege by its neighbors. And while that may be good for France, the world economy, and the status quo, it is ridiculous to expect the Israelis to live that way... Because that is no way to live.
Chirac says:
"One may well ask if there isn't today a kind of wish to destroy Lebanon -- its infrastructure, its roads, its communications, its energy, its airport. And for what?
"I find honestly -- as all Europeans do -- that the current reactions are totally disproportionate," he said in a live television interview on France's national Bastille Day.
I suppose the "disproportionate" response is due to the fact that Israel has better weapons and better trained soldiers. Chirac thinks that Israel should only respond to the bombing that originates in Lebanon with force no greater than that which the terrorists are able to muster. Anything else just wouldn't be fair to the terrorists.
I'm not sure that the French leader is being hypocritical, because it is quite possible that if the French were being bombed by a lesser power, Jacques Chirac might very well respond only in like manner. That is why France is in the shape it's in.
But to the Israelis it just doesn't make sense to sacrifice its citizens to "fairness" when they have the power to bomb the living crap out of those who mean them harm. Go figure.
The recommendation that the Israelis should act proportionately condemns Israel to a perpetual state of siege by its neighbors. And while that may be good for France, the world economy, and the status quo, it is ridiculous to expect the Israelis to live that way... Because that is no way to live.
Pennsylvania Town Legislates Against Illegals
HAZLETON, Pa. (July 14) - The City Council approved a law Thursday night designed to make this small city in northeastern Pennsylvania among the most hostile places in the U.S. for illegal immigrants to live or work.
The 4-to-1 vote came after nearly two hours of passionate debate. Opponents argued it was divisive and possibly illegal, but supporters said illegal immigrants' growing numbers have damaged the quality of life here.
"We must draw the line, and we are doing it tonight," Mayor Lou Barletta told a packed council chambers.
Barletta proposed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act last month as a response to what he said were Hazleton's problems with violent crime, crowded schools, hospital costs and the demand for services.
The ordinance would deny licenses to businesses that employ illegal immigrants, fine landlords $1,000 for each illegal immigrant discovered renting their properties, and require city documents to be in English only.
"The illegal citizens, I would recommend they leave," Barletta said after the meeting.
Council Vice President Jack Mundie voted for the ordinance.
"We're against illegal immigrants that are coming here and that are draining the resources of our city," he said.
The number of Hispanic residents in Hazleton, a former coal-mining town about 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia, has increased dramatically in the past six years.
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/city-passes-harsh-law-against-illegal/20060713215209990003?ncid=NWS00010000000001
I predict that Mayor Barletta will have his job for about as long as he wants it.
The AOL poll that accompanied the story revealed that only 15% of readers were against the town's new law.
HAZLETON, Pa. (July 14) - The City Council approved a law Thursday night designed to make this small city in northeastern Pennsylvania among the most hostile places in the U.S. for illegal immigrants to live or work.
The 4-to-1 vote came after nearly two hours of passionate debate. Opponents argued it was divisive and possibly illegal, but supporters said illegal immigrants' growing numbers have damaged the quality of life here.
"We must draw the line, and we are doing it tonight," Mayor Lou Barletta told a packed council chambers.
Barletta proposed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act last month as a response to what he said were Hazleton's problems with violent crime, crowded schools, hospital costs and the demand for services.
The ordinance would deny licenses to businesses that employ illegal immigrants, fine landlords $1,000 for each illegal immigrant discovered renting their properties, and require city documents to be in English only.
"The illegal citizens, I would recommend they leave," Barletta said after the meeting.
Council Vice President Jack Mundie voted for the ordinance.
"We're against illegal immigrants that are coming here and that are draining the resources of our city," he said.
The number of Hispanic residents in Hazleton, a former coal-mining town about 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia, has increased dramatically in the past six years.
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/city-passes-harsh-law-against-illegal/20060713215209990003?ncid=NWS00010000000001
I predict that Mayor Barletta will have his job for about as long as he wants it.
The AOL poll that accompanied the story revealed that only 15% of readers were against the town's new law.
I'm Ready to Pay
Let me first say that I see no equivalence between western civilization and the moral wilderness of radical Islam. I see no equivalence between people who raise and nurture families, and those who strap bombs to teenagers. The former are human beings and the latter are animals.
They are not animals because of their race or religion. They have become animals because of their hate and murderous activity.
Israel has been at war for many years now... a war that is the elephant in Israel's living room that they so deftly ignore. But elephants make a mess. They're noisy, they're dangerous, they break things, and they poop all over everything. I, for one, wonder why Israel has put up with it for as long as they have.
Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria are the main provocateurs in Israel's war and are behind the murder of American soldiers in Iraq. They want war. They insist on war. I think we should give it to them and I'm ready to pay.
There is no hope for reasoning and talks of peace. There are no breakthroughs or epiphanies on the horizon that will suddenly change the evil hearts and minds of these animals. I believe all we can do is make an example of these groups and countries, and we should do it with economy in terms of monetary cost and American lives.
I don't like it. In fact I dread it. Innocent people will suffer. But this is a war that we didn't start, and this is an evil that will keep coming at us until we kill it, so I'm ready to be done with it and I'm ready to pay.
If gas costs 10 dollars per gallon but my family lives its future in security then I'm ready to pay. If the economy suffers and I lose my job, but my great nephew and great nieces can raise their children in a free America, then I'm ready to pay.
Like Israel, our choices are limited by the dictates of those who want war. Either we continue to treat the symptoms or we kill the disease. I choose to kill the disease and I'm ready to pay.
Let me first say that I see no equivalence between western civilization and the moral wilderness of radical Islam. I see no equivalence between people who raise and nurture families, and those who strap bombs to teenagers. The former are human beings and the latter are animals.
They are not animals because of their race or religion. They have become animals because of their hate and murderous activity.
Israel has been at war for many years now... a war that is the elephant in Israel's living room that they so deftly ignore. But elephants make a mess. They're noisy, they're dangerous, they break things, and they poop all over everything. I, for one, wonder why Israel has put up with it for as long as they have.
Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria are the main provocateurs in Israel's war and are behind the murder of American soldiers in Iraq. They want war. They insist on war. I think we should give it to them and I'm ready to pay.
There is no hope for reasoning and talks of peace. There are no breakthroughs or epiphanies on the horizon that will suddenly change the evil hearts and minds of these animals. I believe all we can do is make an example of these groups and countries, and we should do it with economy in terms of monetary cost and American lives.
I don't like it. In fact I dread it. Innocent people will suffer. But this is a war that we didn't start, and this is an evil that will keep coming at us until we kill it, so I'm ready to be done with it and I'm ready to pay.
If gas costs 10 dollars per gallon but my family lives its future in security then I'm ready to pay. If the economy suffers and I lose my job, but my great nephew and great nieces can raise their children in a free America, then I'm ready to pay.
Like Israel, our choices are limited by the dictates of those who want war. Either we continue to treat the symptoms or we kill the disease. I choose to kill the disease and I'm ready to pay.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Heck's Campaign Advice for Rudy
Yesterday on the Peter Heck Show, Mr Heck addressed the problem Rudy Giuliani will have with conservative and Evangelical voters as he runs for the presidential nomination in 2008. Mayor Giuliani is on record as being pro-choice, pro gun-control, pro gay-rights... all of which is a very tough sell to those who hold the opposite opinions on these issues. Heck suggested that Giuliani must pledge to nominate strict constructionists, lately called conservatives, to the Supreme Court.
Heck feels that with the former mayor's gravitas on security issues and crime, this social liberal might garner conservative votes if he can reassure concerning judicial nominations.
I agree with Mr Heck, but I would advise Giuliani to take a step further that might insure him the nomination. I believe Giuliani can be openly liberal on social issues and secure the conservative and Evangelical vote if he becomes an evangelist for judicial restraint. Instead of skirting these divisive social issues, he should be aggressively pro-active in explaining and embracing the concept that the people should decide for themselves what laws should govern the land.
Rudy should say:
"Its my belief that the current Supreme Court has made it its policy to usurp the constitutional authority of the state and federal legislatures. If elected I promise I will nominate to the Court judges like Rehnquist, Scalia, and Roberts who interpret the constitution, not establish their personal preferences as law. I will nominate strict constructionists to the Supreme Court because the people, through their elected representatives, should decide the laws of the land... not unelected judges."
He should be up-front and honest about his personal views, but should add that it's not the place of the President or the Judicial Branch to legislate social issues. And, he should name at least 10 lower court judges from which he will choose his nominations for the high court.
If Giuliani can effectively educate the public on the issue of judicial restraint, he will appeal to pro-choice women, independents, and Evangelicals... and he will do much to mute the hysterics that will no doubt come from the Left.
I've often said that you don't need to be pro-life to know that Roe was a power grab by the Supreme Court. You don't have to be a conservative to see the advantage of nominating a strict constructionist to the court. Giuliani knows that striking down Roe wouldn't outlaw abortion and if he can make the public understand this much-under-reported truth, he will broaden his appeal among many groups.
Now... if he adds to this a very tough stance on illegal immigration... that is in line with the wishes of most Americans... I believe this guy could march straight into the White House.
Yesterday on the Peter Heck Show, Mr Heck addressed the problem Rudy Giuliani will have with conservative and Evangelical voters as he runs for the presidential nomination in 2008. Mayor Giuliani is on record as being pro-choice, pro gun-control, pro gay-rights... all of which is a very tough sell to those who hold the opposite opinions on these issues. Heck suggested that Giuliani must pledge to nominate strict constructionists, lately called conservatives, to the Supreme Court.
Heck feels that with the former mayor's gravitas on security issues and crime, this social liberal might garner conservative votes if he can reassure concerning judicial nominations.
I agree with Mr Heck, but I would advise Giuliani to take a step further that might insure him the nomination. I believe Giuliani can be openly liberal on social issues and secure the conservative and Evangelical vote if he becomes an evangelist for judicial restraint. Instead of skirting these divisive social issues, he should be aggressively pro-active in explaining and embracing the concept that the people should decide for themselves what laws should govern the land.
Rudy should say:
"Its my belief that the current Supreme Court has made it its policy to usurp the constitutional authority of the state and federal legislatures. If elected I promise I will nominate to the Court judges like Rehnquist, Scalia, and Roberts who interpret the constitution, not establish their personal preferences as law. I will nominate strict constructionists to the Supreme Court because the people, through their elected representatives, should decide the laws of the land... not unelected judges."
He should be up-front and honest about his personal views, but should add that it's not the place of the President or the Judicial Branch to legislate social issues. And, he should name at least 10 lower court judges from which he will choose his nominations for the high court.
If Giuliani can effectively educate the public on the issue of judicial restraint, he will appeal to pro-choice women, independents, and Evangelicals... and he will do much to mute the hysterics that will no doubt come from the Left.
I've often said that you don't need to be pro-life to know that Roe was a power grab by the Supreme Court. You don't have to be a conservative to see the advantage of nominating a strict constructionist to the court. Giuliani knows that striking down Roe wouldn't outlaw abortion and if he can make the public understand this much-under-reported truth, he will broaden his appeal among many groups.
Now... if he adds to this a very tough stance on illegal immigration... that is in line with the wishes of most Americans... I believe this guy could march straight into the White House.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
One Jewish Girl's Opinion
As things heat up in and around Israel, lindasog heats up a little herself:
Enough already with putting IDF (Israeli Defense Force) soldiers at risk to reduce enemy casualties. Israel can solve this problem without putting her soldiers at risk, just bomb the sh__ out of one city after the other, destroying them completely, until they surrender once and for all.
Arabs do not understand restraint, they do not understand compassion, they do not understand peace. They do not value life, they value death, destruction and chaos. The only thing they understand is merciless, relentless and continuous war until the enemy is so decimated that they cannot stand up long enough to fight.
http://www.lindasog.com/archives/2006/07/lebanon_declares_war.html
Sounds about right.
As things heat up in and around Israel, lindasog heats up a little herself:
Enough already with putting IDF (Israeli Defense Force) soldiers at risk to reduce enemy casualties. Israel can solve this problem without putting her soldiers at risk, just bomb the sh__ out of one city after the other, destroying them completely, until they surrender once and for all.
Arabs do not understand restraint, they do not understand compassion, they do not understand peace. They do not value life, they value death, destruction and chaos. The only thing they understand is merciless, relentless and continuous war until the enemy is so decimated that they cannot stand up long enough to fight.
http://www.lindasog.com/archives/2006/07/lebanon_declares_war.html
Sounds about right.
The Big Rivalry
OK... so yesterday I saw this story on the AOL Welcome Page that reported on the bad blood between Bill O'Reilly of Fox News Channel and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC. It must be true because I just heard Olbermann say on his show, "Mental health is not O'Reilly's strong suit."
I'm not that familiar with Olbermann, but from what I've been able to gather, he is sort of like Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "Daily Show"... a non-news newsperson who makes a show of the news... who is in no way married to the truth... more interested in entertainment than issues... very much a mouthpiece for the Democrats and the Left.
You get the picture... At least you get my impression...
I'm sure Lefties, stupid people, and the ignorant (a homogenous grouping) think this guy is great.
And the numbers, please....
CABLE NEWS RACE
MON., JULY 10, 2006VIEWERS
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,264,000
FNC HANNITY/COLMES 1,801,000
CNN LARRY KING 1,382,000
FNC GRETA 1,340,000FNC
SHEP SMITH 1,252,000
FNC HUME 1,197,000
CNN COOPER 1,132,000
CNN DOBBS 823,000
CNN PAULA ZAHN 679,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 360,000
CNNHN GRACE 354,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 349,000
Well call me slow, but it dosn't look like there is much of a rivalry. Olberman's audience is a mere 15% of O'Reilly's... a poor showing when you consider that many cable and satellite packages offer MSNBC but not FOX. This is like the "rivalry" between Rush Limbaugh and Air America... Non-existent.
But the people that produce the AOL Welcome Page are mouthpieces for the Left, and I'm sure in their dreams Olbermann has kicked open wide the door of broadcast liberalism.
(OK, it's not much of a post, but I do love charts.)
OK... so yesterday I saw this story on the AOL Welcome Page that reported on the bad blood between Bill O'Reilly of Fox News Channel and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC. It must be true because I just heard Olbermann say on his show, "Mental health is not O'Reilly's strong suit."
I'm not that familiar with Olbermann, but from what I've been able to gather, he is sort of like Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "Daily Show"... a non-news newsperson who makes a show of the news... who is in no way married to the truth... more interested in entertainment than issues... very much a mouthpiece for the Democrats and the Left.
You get the picture... At least you get my impression...
I'm sure Lefties, stupid people, and the ignorant (a homogenous grouping) think this guy is great.
And the numbers, please....
CABLE NEWS RACE
MON., JULY 10, 2006VIEWERS
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,264,000
FNC HANNITY/COLMES 1,801,000
CNN LARRY KING 1,382,000
FNC GRETA 1,340,000FNC
SHEP SMITH 1,252,000
FNC HUME 1,197,000
CNN COOPER 1,132,000
CNN DOBBS 823,000
CNN PAULA ZAHN 679,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 360,000
CNNHN GRACE 354,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 349,000
Well call me slow, but it dosn't look like there is much of a rivalry. Olberman's audience is a mere 15% of O'Reilly's... a poor showing when you consider that many cable and satellite packages offer MSNBC but not FOX. This is like the "rivalry" between Rush Limbaugh and Air America... Non-existent.
But the people that produce the AOL Welcome Page are mouthpieces for the Left, and I'm sure in their dreams Olbermann has kicked open wide the door of broadcast liberalism.
(OK, it's not much of a post, but I do love charts.)
Peter Heck all over
Madeline Albright
While my title most assuredly conjures up some disgusting imagery, I've been wanting to link to Mr Heck's post from last Friday ever since I first read it... because, it's superb. It actually feels good to read it. It's also infuriating. Don't miss it!
You'll find it here:
http://peterheck.com/betasite/fullBlog.php?entry=224
Madeline Albright
While my title most assuredly conjures up some disgusting imagery, I've been wanting to link to Mr Heck's post from last Friday ever since I first read it... because, it's superb. It actually feels good to read it. It's also infuriating. Don't miss it!
You'll find it here:
http://peterheck.com/betasite/fullBlog.php?entry=224
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Quran Murdered in Tennessee
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. The F-B-I will look into an online video that shows two men shooting a Quran with a military rifle and then leaving the bullet-riddled holy book at a Chattanooga mosque. F-B-I agent Tim Burke said the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations asked the Justice Department to investigate the incident. He said no one from the Chattanooga Muslim community had complained.
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. The F-B-I will look into an online video that shows two men shooting a Quran with a military rifle and then leaving the bullet-riddled holy book at a Chattanooga mosque. F-B-I agent Tim Burke said the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations asked the Justice Department to investigate the incident. He said no one from the Chattanooga Muslim community had complained.
You've got to be kidding. Maybe CAIR hasn't heard about free speech, but I would have thought that the FBI would have.
Justice Department spokesman Eric Holland said the request would be reviewed carefully.
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Islamic group, said the video may have been recorded in Chattanooga a year ago.
That's the same Ibrahim Hooper that once said, "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.
The video shows the man purchasing a Quran at a bookstore, going to a wooded area and shooting the book, then throwing it on the ground outside the door of the Chattanooga Islamic center. http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=5133866&nav=3HvE
It's so hard to keep these things straight. So you can burn the American Flag, but if you fill a Quran full of lead you're going to be investigated by the FBI? What exactly would be the charge? One count of being rude and offensive?
I think that the FBI should have explained to the CAIR people that they're in America now and in this country we have the God-given freedom to buy books and shoot them. Instead the Bureau panders to CAIR's outrage, empowers them, and sets a very bad precedent. What a bunch of pathetic PC idiots.
Malott for United States Senator
We at Malott's Blog have grown tired of Senator Richard Lugar's wussie attitude towards illegal immigration. Senator Lugar (Old Lugie, as we say in Greentown) went so far as to vote for an amendment that requires our government to consult with the Mexican government before building a wall along our southern border. In other words, Dick doesn't care that 80% of Americans want a wall, but he does care what Mexico thinks about it. That's nice, Dick.
He voted for a Ted Kennedy amendment that would have raised the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25, and voted with "his brother RINOs" against the Santorum amendment that would have provided assistance for pro-democracy programs and activities inside and outside Iran, to make clear that the United States supported the ability of the people of Iran to exercise self-determination.
He has sometimes voted for pro-family legislation, but he is never out front leading the way.
This fall the Indiana U.S. Senate race will have only Lugar and a Libertarian on the ballot, since no Democrat filed for the May, 2006 primary. Malott's Blog was considering backing the Libertarian... until we learned that he had all the appeal of a beached carp.
Malott? Why Not!
We at Malott's Blog have grown tired of Senator Richard Lugar's wussie attitude towards illegal immigration. Senator Lugar (Old Lugie, as we say in Greentown) went so far as to vote for an amendment that requires our government to consult with the Mexican government before building a wall along our southern border. In other words, Dick doesn't care that 80% of Americans want a wall, but he does care what Mexico thinks about it. That's nice, Dick.
He voted for a Ted Kennedy amendment that would have raised the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25, and voted with "his brother RINOs" against the Santorum amendment that would have provided assistance for pro-democracy programs and activities inside and outside Iran, to make clear that the United States supported the ability of the people of Iran to exercise self-determination.
He has sometimes voted for pro-family legislation, but he is never out front leading the way.
This fall the Indiana U.S. Senate race will have only Lugar and a Libertarian on the ballot, since no Democrat filed for the May, 2006 primary. Malott's Blog was considering backing the Libertarian... until we learned that he had all the appeal of a beached carp.
Therefore, the entire staff at Malott's Blog has convinced Mr Malott (shown above) to run for the United States Senate as a "write-in" candidate.
Malott, who is known for his "Bachelor Tips", "Gardening Tips", posting almost anything on his blog page, and vulgar self-promotion in general, promises to show up for work every day at 7 A.M. and vote as a strict conservative. He promises not to be influenced by the people at those Washington D.C. parties... because he doesn't like parties, preferring to be in bed by 9 P.M.
Malott promises to spit on the floor whenever he passes Ted Kennedy. Malott promises to spit on the floor whenever he passes Charles Schumer. Malott promises to spit on John Kerry.
Does Malott have Presidential ambitions? Well, for now he's staying tight-lipped (shown above) about that.
The entire staff at Malott's Blog encourages the Indiana electorate to send a real Hoosier to Washington by writing in "Malott" (use black ink or a No.2 pencil) this November. You might want to go early and use a laundry marker to write our voting instructions on the wall of the voting booth. We're pretty sure that's legal.
As Mr Malott's official campaign site, Malott's Blog will keep you up-to-date as our candidate charges into the fray!
Shown below is our first campaign picture and slogan. We at Malott's Blog like it because it rhymes.
Malott? Why Not!
Have You Got Change for an Amero?
Skyepuppy asks if a story she found on WorldNetDaily is fact or a conspiracy theory.
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/conspiracy-theory.html
Are secret meetings being held between the corporate and political elites of the U.S., Mexico and Canada to push North America into a European Union-style merger?
Does the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America include a common currency that would scrap the dollar in favor of what some are calling the "amero"?
The Supreme Court is already bleeding our autonomy by allowing international influence into its rulings. Big business along with their employees in Congress have re-defined the word border to mean nothing because, in the short-term, it fills their coffers with cash. If this story turns to reality is anyone going to be surprised?
Skyepuppy asks if a story she found on WorldNetDaily is fact or a conspiracy theory.
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/conspiracy-theory.html
Are secret meetings being held between the corporate and political elites of the U.S., Mexico and Canada to push North America into a European Union-style merger?
Does the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America include a common currency that would scrap the dollar in favor of what some are calling the "amero"?
The Supreme Court is already bleeding our autonomy by allowing international influence into its rulings. Big business along with their employees in Congress have re-defined the word border to mean nothing because, in the short-term, it fills their coffers with cash. If this story turns to reality is anyone going to be surprised?
Sunday, July 09, 2006
Killing Baby Girls
Skyepuppy has an interesting post that addresses the infanticide that is taking place in countries where baby boys are valued more than baby girls... more valued to the point that female babies are being aborted at an alarming rate. You'll find it here:
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/india-is-aborting-its-girls.html
The sin of killing unborn (or born) baby girls will lead to a multitude of societal problems, because a deficit of female adults is yet another stake in the heart of marriage and the family.
And adding to what the Pupster has already said... Perhaps in a culture where women are devalued there is already an inclination for women to enter, or be sold into, prostitution. Women, young and old, will more easily become cynical about something as arduous as marriage and turn to a mercenary expression of what God meant to be a union and a blessing.
Liberals, who champion abortion, fancy themselves rather than God to be the caretakers of this world and love to tinker with His creation... believing they know better. But nothing is more predictable or constant than the calamity which ensues every time we turn from His ways.
Skyepuppy has an interesting post that addresses the infanticide that is taking place in countries where baby boys are valued more than baby girls... more valued to the point that female babies are being aborted at an alarming rate. You'll find it here:
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/india-is-aborting-its-girls.html
The sin of killing unborn (or born) baby girls will lead to a multitude of societal problems, because a deficit of female adults is yet another stake in the heart of marriage and the family.
And adding to what the Pupster has already said... Perhaps in a culture where women are devalued there is already an inclination for women to enter, or be sold into, prostitution. Women, young and old, will more easily become cynical about something as arduous as marriage and turn to a mercenary expression of what God meant to be a union and a blessing.
Liberals, who champion abortion, fancy themselves rather than God to be the caretakers of this world and love to tinker with His creation... believing they know better. But nothing is more predictable or constant than the calamity which ensues every time we turn from His ways.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Kenneth Lay... Rest in Peace
I was visiting www.democraticunderground.com to witness the latest hysteria of the suffering Dems (they always seem to be suffering from one thing or another), which included the latest hate directed at Joe Lieberman... and a discussion of Ken Lay's death which included this:
Will George Bush be giving the eulogy?
After all, Enron financed his theft of the White House.
It's really good news for conservatives that the Democrats refuse to move on with their lives. I suppose they will be talking about the stolen election of 2000 for the rest of my life. The independent recounts that showed President Bush to be the winner in Florida just never really registered with these people for some reason.
Anyway, I don't know if Kenneth Lay was evil, but celebrating his death certainly is... at the very least it's tasteless. Let's hope that the sins of those at Democratic Underground are also forgiven and forgotten... just as those of the rest of us lesser souls are.
I was visiting www.democraticunderground.com to witness the latest hysteria of the suffering Dems (they always seem to be suffering from one thing or another), which included the latest hate directed at Joe Lieberman... and a discussion of Ken Lay's death which included this:
Will George Bush be giving the eulogy?
After all, Enron financed his theft of the White House.
It's really good news for conservatives that the Democrats refuse to move on with their lives. I suppose they will be talking about the stolen election of 2000 for the rest of my life. The independent recounts that showed President Bush to be the winner in Florida just never really registered with these people for some reason.
Anyway, I don't know if Kenneth Lay was evil, but celebrating his death certainly is... at the very least it's tasteless. Let's hope that the sins of those at Democratic Underground are also forgiven and forgotten... just as those of the rest of us lesser souls are.
Remembering Terri
SkyePuppy rules, as always. I was there reading a story about the man who recovered consciousness after being in a vegetative state (no, not Arkansas) for twenty years.
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/man-recovers-from-permanent-vegetative.html
In a new medical study sure to remind the world of the debate surrounding the forced dehydration death of Terri Schiavo, researchers found the injured brain of a man in a "vegetative state" for 19 years rewired itself, permitting him to renew communication with his loved ones.
I saw this story on TV some time last week, and the most striking part of the experience was the assured enthusiasm with which the reporter explained to her audience that this was a completely different situation than the Terri Schiavo case. Completely different. Completely. Different. Different in a very complete sort of way. A most complete difference, and completely, amen.
The man's doctor probably told the reporter this, or possibly the reporter looked until she found a doctor who would tell her this.
I would wager my left leg that this man's doctor told his family that he would never recover, and that the only difference between the man and Schiavo was that he didn't have an estranged spouse that wanted him dead.
When I started working with doctors, what impressed me most was how smart they were, and how utterly clueless they were about the human body and its healing. It's 2006, and the medical community has much more to learn about healing than it has learned thus far. They work hard and try sincerely, but they are still operating in the Bronze Age of medicine. This man's story is an illustration of modern medicine's ignorance.
The right to die is an interesting concept. But Terri's inconvenient life was not slipping away. She was not dying. She was dehydrated and starved to death. And all the assuring in the world will not convince me that what doctor's learned from this man's recovery will not lead to better methods of treatment... methods that might have one day brought Terri a clearer relationship with her world.
SkyePuppy rules, as always. I was there reading a story about the man who recovered consciousness after being in a vegetative state (no, not Arkansas) for twenty years.
http://skyepuppy.blogspot.com/2006/07/man-recovers-from-permanent-vegetative.html
In a new medical study sure to remind the world of the debate surrounding the forced dehydration death of Terri Schiavo, researchers found the injured brain of a man in a "vegetative state" for 19 years rewired itself, permitting him to renew communication with his loved ones.
I saw this story on TV some time last week, and the most striking part of the experience was the assured enthusiasm with which the reporter explained to her audience that this was a completely different situation than the Terri Schiavo case. Completely different. Completely. Different. Different in a very complete sort of way. A most complete difference, and completely, amen.
The man's doctor probably told the reporter this, or possibly the reporter looked until she found a doctor who would tell her this.
I would wager my left leg that this man's doctor told his family that he would never recover, and that the only difference between the man and Schiavo was that he didn't have an estranged spouse that wanted him dead.
When I started working with doctors, what impressed me most was how smart they were, and how utterly clueless they were about the human body and its healing. It's 2006, and the medical community has much more to learn about healing than it has learned thus far. They work hard and try sincerely, but they are still operating in the Bronze Age of medicine. This man's story is an illustration of modern medicine's ignorance.
The right to die is an interesting concept. But Terri's inconvenient life was not slipping away. She was not dying. She was dehydrated and starved to death. And all the assuring in the world will not convince me that what doctor's learned from this man's recovery will not lead to better methods of treatment... methods that might have one day brought Terri a clearer relationship with her world.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Cohabitation with Islam
Robert Spencer reports in Front Page Mag about the writings of the wives of the terrorists recently arrested in Cananda. Here are some of the wives' unedited posts on the internet:
"Know what you will face one day. Let them call you a terrorist, let them make you look like a savage, but know that THIS [the American military] is the filth of the earth, the uncivilised destroyer of humanity."
"[And] if [my husband] ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce."
"All muslim politicians are corrupt. There's no one out there willing to rule the country by the laws of Allah, rather they fight to rule the country by the laws of democracy."
"Are you accepting a system that separates religion and state? Are you gonna give your pledge of allegiance to a party that puts secular laws above the laws of Allah? Are you gonna worship that which they worship? Are you going to throw away the most important thing that makes you a muslim?"
Spencer then writes:
One primary lesson that authorities should draw from these Internet postings is that Islamic terror is not a problem that can be solved by social engineering. It cannot be assuaged by gestures of good will, negotiations or concessions. There is in Western countries today a large and growing population of Muslims, among whom are many who have no intention of assimilating or adopting Western values and perspectives, and who regard the West with as much or more disdain and contempt as these women show in their Internet postings. The jihad ideology as such must be confronted and combated, or it will continue to spread, and breed terrorists and subversives.
But for authorities to understand this and take positive steps to deal with it, they would first have to admit that Islam has anything to do with terrorism at all - something they have taken great pride in denying. And that denial only ensures that there will be many more jihad cells in Canada and Western countries, with the wives of the plotters cheering from the sidelines.
Most Western leaders would seemingly rather allow Western Culture to dissolve into history than utter the politically-incorrect thought that Islam and the West might be an incompatible marriage. Idealistically clinging to multi-culturalism and liberal immigration principles is becoming a very expensive and myopic policy. But we are so adept in this country at ignoring problems, regardless of their size, that I wonder what (if any) number of negative experiences would cause us to remove our blinders and see that we cannot live peacefully alongside a colony of jihadists and their supporters.
Liberals exhibit such a healthy fear of global warming... saying that the dangerous possibilities are just too horrible and serious not to address. I wish they would take notice that things are heating up very rapidly on another front, constituting a much more palpable threat than the shrinking of glaciers.
Robert Spencer reports in Front Page Mag about the writings of the wives of the terrorists recently arrested in Cananda. Here are some of the wives' unedited posts on the internet:
"Know what you will face one day. Let them call you a terrorist, let them make you look like a savage, but know that THIS [the American military] is the filth of the earth, the uncivilised destroyer of humanity."
"[And] if [my husband] ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce."
"All muslim politicians are corrupt. There's no one out there willing to rule the country by the laws of Allah, rather they fight to rule the country by the laws of democracy."
"Are you accepting a system that separates religion and state? Are you gonna give your pledge of allegiance to a party that puts secular laws above the laws of Allah? Are you gonna worship that which they worship? Are you going to throw away the most important thing that makes you a muslim?"
Spencer then writes:
One primary lesson that authorities should draw from these Internet postings is that Islamic terror is not a problem that can be solved by social engineering. It cannot be assuaged by gestures of good will, negotiations or concessions. There is in Western countries today a large and growing population of Muslims, among whom are many who have no intention of assimilating or adopting Western values and perspectives, and who regard the West with as much or more disdain and contempt as these women show in their Internet postings. The jihad ideology as such must be confronted and combated, or it will continue to spread, and breed terrorists and subversives.
But for authorities to understand this and take positive steps to deal with it, they would first have to admit that Islam has anything to do with terrorism at all - something they have taken great pride in denying. And that denial only ensures that there will be many more jihad cells in Canada and Western countries, with the wives of the plotters cheering from the sidelines.
Most Western leaders would seemingly rather allow Western Culture to dissolve into history than utter the politically-incorrect thought that Islam and the West might be an incompatible marriage. Idealistically clinging to multi-culturalism and liberal immigration principles is becoming a very expensive and myopic policy. But we are so adept in this country at ignoring problems, regardless of their size, that I wonder what (if any) number of negative experiences would cause us to remove our blinders and see that we cannot live peacefully alongside a colony of jihadists and their supporters.
Liberals exhibit such a healthy fear of global warming... saying that the dangerous possibilities are just too horrible and serious not to address. I wish they would take notice that things are heating up very rapidly on another front, constituting a much more palpable threat than the shrinking of glaciers.
Monday, July 03, 2006
Court Makes the Constitution a Suicide Pact
Joseph Klein writes in Front Page Mag:
Wittingly or unwittingly, the Supreme Court has started our nation down the slippery slope of treating our own Constitution as a suicide pact. It is providing a global enemy determined to destroy our freedoms the very tools such freedoms create to use against us and to prevent us from defeating their evil designs.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23204
What is the source of this inherent mind-set of the Left that consistently labors against innocence, and supports and encourages all that threatens our country? Is it some academic miasma, some masochistic intellectual pretension that maniacally endeavors to treat American interests with enmity?
Whatever its source, it is the duty of all of us on the Right to explain that black is sometimes simply... black. And, that this enemy-from-within, which embraces seemingly any cultural pathology and obsessively searches for some fashionable nuance in the simplest matters of national security, must never be allowed to lead.
Joseph Klein writes in Front Page Mag:
Wittingly or unwittingly, the Supreme Court has started our nation down the slippery slope of treating our own Constitution as a suicide pact. It is providing a global enemy determined to destroy our freedoms the very tools such freedoms create to use against us and to prevent us from defeating their evil designs.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23204
What is the source of this inherent mind-set of the Left that consistently labors against innocence, and supports and encourages all that threatens our country? Is it some academic miasma, some masochistic intellectual pretension that maniacally endeavors to treat American interests with enmity?
Whatever its source, it is the duty of all of us on the Right to explain that black is sometimes simply... black. And, that this enemy-from-within, which embraces seemingly any cultural pathology and obsessively searches for some fashionable nuance in the simplest matters of national security, must never be allowed to lead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
