Sarge's Spot

Could Somebody Please Pass Me a Bucket?

2008-09-05T06:59:00.002-04:00

Because if I hear this nonsense about "John McCain voted with George Bush 90% of the time" again, I think I'm going to hurl. Nearly 50% of votes in the Senate are unanimous, which means that Barack Obama "voted with George Bush" nearly 50% of the time. Oh, and by the way, for those of you who slept through your 9 weeks worth of U.S. Government class in high school, the president of the United States does not have a vote in the U.S. Senate. I'm guessing this is the type of thing you learn during your first semester of college if you're a pre-law major, but then, that's about the time Barack Obama was hyped up on weed and cocaine, so perhaps this explains why he's missing the point.

You have got to be kidding me

2008-08-30T08:09:00.003-04:00

Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin? Why didn't John McCain just nominate my daughter's daycare teacher? With all the highly qualified people--men and women--out there, McCain adds this woman whose experience is, amazingly, even less than that of Barack Obama, and all of a sudden conservatives are supposed to be energized.

Let's call this move what it is: a blatant attempt to "buy" the votes of white women who are angry Hillary wasn't their nominee by putting a token woman on the ticket. McCain's move is painfully transparent, and if I were a woman, I would be insulted. In fact, I'm insulted as a man.

For the last several months, McCain has been harping on the inexperience of Barack Obama and how little we know about him as his primary argument against him. Has he realized, in his old age, that the vice president must also be "ready to be president"? Could it have escaped his mind that at 72 years old and with a history of skin cancer, he needs a vice president who could actually take over? I mean, you think Dan Qualye had a deer-in-the-headlights look during some of his debates with Lloyd Bentsen? I'm betting this Palin woman makes Dan Quayle look like a seasoned political veteran.

Oh well, it's not like McCain had my vote anyway. In the past few years, I've begun to lean much more Libertarian than Republican. But it's surprising to me how quickly Republicans are falling in lockstep with this vice presidential selection. With Barack Obama's colorful past being brought more into the light every day (e.g., his associations with people who have nothing more in common than their disdain for all things American,--Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, et al--his shady real estate deals with Tony Rezko, his wife's apparent belief that America is a "downright mean country" that she has never been proud of, etc.), it shocks me that Republicans would now be willing to vote for a ticket that includes a vice presidential candidate who is an even bigger mystery than Obama.

But it's okay. Go ahead and vote for McCain. As someone said regarding the whole Dan Quayle/Lloyd Bentsen situation, "Wouldn't you rather vote for a president and hope he lives than vote for one and hope he doesn't?" As for me, I'll be voting for Bob Barr, the libertarian candidate. This will be the first time I have given my vote for president to a third party candidate, and no, I don't feel I'm wasting my vote. In fact, my vote will carry much more meaning than the millions of votes that are cast, noses held, by Republicans and Democrats for nothing more than party loyalty because let's face it, both parties have nominated some stinkers.

This is exactly what I hoped for

2006-12-12T00:02:00.000-05:00

When I went to the poll in November and didn't vote for a single contested Republican, this is exactly what I had hoped for. I wanted to see two things happen: first, I wanted to see Republicans lose power for two years. I wanted to see their faces when they realized that their base isn't a bunch of mindless idiots who will vote Republican no matter what. And second, I wanted to see the Democrats make absolute asses out of themselves for those same two years.

I couldn't have written it any better myself. First Nancy Pelosi goes off the deep end endorsing Murtha for majority leader, and now the incoming Intel chairman--whom Pelosi picked over Jane Harman as retribution for her tepid support of President Bush's Iraq policy--can't even identify our enemies. He has no idea what the driving force behind al Qaeda and/or Hezbollah violence is, because he doesn't even know what sect of Muslim they come from. It's enough to make you cry, but you can't cry because you're laughing too hard!

Yep, I'm really starting to look forward to 2008. Republicans see what happens when they stray from their principles, and the American people see what happens when these idiotic Democrats take control. Hell, we couldn't spy on terrorists during Clinton's reign, but he had no problem spying on real enemies of the United States, like Princess Diana. Oh yeah, it's going to be very interesting in 2008. Thanks, people, for giving me exactly what I wanted.

Required Reading

2006-11-17T14:39:00.000-05:00

If you read one article in its entirety today--or for that matter, this year--make it this one. If you spend 5-10 minutes of your time doing anything, let it be to read this article. Love him, hate him, wish he would just roll over and die.....doesn't matter. Donald Rumsfeld was brilliant in these comments. Don't miss it.

Warning! Don't take a swig of your drink before you watch this

2006-11-10T21:08:00.000-05:00

I nearly split my side watching this one. Enjoy! Rummy, hamming it up.

Ahhh, another great election day passes

2006-11-07T23:56:00.000-05:00

Note: I don't know what's up with blogger, but if you want to view the picture below, you may have to click on it.

I've gotta tell you: today was the first time I've ever voted for a majority of candidates that weren't Republican, and it felt great!! I cast my ballot for about a half-dozen Libertarian candidates, and even though none of them will win, I still got to have my say. Give it a shot next time. It wasn't as hard as I expected.

A few random notes from today:

1. In various places, there were flash floods today. This is obviously an attempt by the Republicans to suppress the vote of poor...ahem...I mean, underprivileged, or less fortunate voters. Everybody knows that only rich people can afford the boats that they needed to get to polls. Those damned evil rich people and their boats! It's a vast right-wing conspiracy!

2. Can you feel the completely not disguised glee of the people of CNN as they report Democratic gains in the House and Senate? They've got their "Balance of Power" headline over at the website, and it's as if they're counting down to the 218th Democratic Representative so that they can hold some kind of New Year's Eve-esque celebration. Hell, they've probably got a big shimmering ball to drop somewhere.

3. Is it just me, or is the art of proofreading dead? (If you find errors here, they are due to computer glitches in the publishing process, and they are most certainly not caused by an error on my part.) I took this screenshot from the local news website. Read the caption carefully. It's pretty fun.

4. CNN has been running a computer-generated graphic at the close of election coverage segments that is supposed to be a cartoon-ish elephant colliding with a similarly cartoon-ish donkey. Thing is, the elephant has huge tusks, and its trunk is a bit.....oh, please forgive me.....truncated. In fact, the elephant looks strikingly like a rhinoceros when you just catch that fleeting glance of it. Could they be trying to send a subliminal message that our Republicans in Congress are actually just RINOs? (Republicans in name only). Hey, there are a lot of people out there who feel that the Republicans have betrayed their base. Just some food for thought.

That's all, folks. Have a great night, and remember: the Democrats most likely control the House of Representatives now, and their motto? "Mo' new taxes." Enjoy those non-truncated paychecks while you can.

Ignore the ads and decide for yourself

2006-11-03T10:18:00.000-05:00

If you're like me, you are sick and tired of all the political ads on television. This candidate says that, and that candidate says this. Who do you believe? For example, in my area there is a big race shaping up between Mac Collins and Jim Marshall. Collins, the Republican candidate, has been running ads saying that Jim Marshall pretends to be a conservative in Georgia, but votes like liberal Nancy Pelosi in Washington. Marshall's ads have accused Collins of ignoring the needs of rural hospitals and supporting amnesty for illegal aliens. Man, oh man, what is the truth? Well, now I've found a place where you can get the truth for yourself--even if you're as lazy as I. Check it out here.

On this site, you can find any member of Congress and review his voting record. The list of votes offers links for each that provides you with an overview of the bill, including all of its major provisions and a summary of the debate surrounding it.

The only drawback is that it applies only to current members of Congress, and not to those who are challenging, even if they are former Congressmen. (Like Mac Collins). Enjoy, do your homework, and may the least weasley candidate win your vote.

Election Cycle History Lesson

2006-10-29T23:46:00.000-05:00

I've been studying the "Great War", or World War I, as we know it. I must admit, I have realized just how ignorant I was of this conflict until I took this class. For instance, I never knew that the Russian Revolution grew out of the first world war. Oh, Russia was pretty much done fighting before it happened anyway, but still, it's interesting to note that it came in part because of anger over the war.

So for today, I thought I'd give those of you who are like I was--that is to say, ignorant--a little lesson in history that seems to have particular significance right now.

In a little over a week, Americans will go to the polls and vote. In fact, the date is November 7th. Today's lesson centers around that date. For 10 bonus points, can anyone tell me the significance of November 7th in world events?

Nah, didn't think so.

It was 89 years ago, on November 7th, that the Bolsheviks seized control of the Russian government. The Bolsheviks, in case you were wondering, were headed up by a guy named Lenin. They were the 1917 version of today's Democratic Party. Their platform consisted of two items, just as the platform of modern Democrats does:

1. Get rid of the current government.
2. Get us out of the war.

That was their big plan. That was their platform. It's the exact same platform Democrats are running on today.

1. Get rid of Republicans.
2. Get us out of Iraq.

What the masses didn't know on November 7, 1917, was that the Russian army had dealt the Central powers a devastating blow in the Brusilov offensive, and had the Russians just.....gasp!.....stayed the course a little while longer, the German army would have been completely broken because it would have had to continue its defensive maneuvers on the western front and it would have had to hold the entire eastern front line by itself. Russia, you see, had all but knocked Austria out of the war. In fact, Franz Josef--the Austrian leader--was already putting out peace feelers. The Russians were on the verge of sealing an Allied victory, and defeatist, pacifist 1917-version Democrats caused them to surrender.

In fact, it wasn't just a withdrawal from the war that these early-day Democrats achieved. (I guess they probably called it a "redeployment" or something like that.) No, they achieved even more. Guess what they did? They did what Democrats want to do today: negotiated with the enemy. They sent a guy named Trotsky to Brest-Litovsk to negotiate a peace deal with the Germans. What was the result? The Germans ignored the deal and marched on Petrigrad. The Bolsheviks retreated to Moscow (wonder why the capital is there now?) and wound up signing a humiliating treaty that surrendered Russian territory all the way to the Black Sea, including the Ukraine, one of Russia's most vital centers of natural resources, to the Germans.

A wise man once said, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Will we be condemned to repeat the past? Or will we learn from the mistakes others have made? Who will we put in power? The pacifist, Marxist Democrats? The big-government, borrow-and-spend Republicans? How about some strong Libertarians?

Oh well, the choice is yours. At least now you're a little more educated. Or perhaps "sedated" is the word?

Sarge out.

El presidente de México debe guardar su nariz gorda fuera de nuestro negocio.

2006-10-27T07:12:00.000-04:00

Hey, Mexico. Here are some tips to keep your relationship with the United States from becoming a hostile one:

1. Work on getting rid of your hypercorrupt government. Try installing one that doesn't use its position to glean millions of dollars in bribery from the hands of criminals.

2. Clean up. Your country--at least in the one time I visited--is nasty.

3. Stop providing information, comfort, and aid to those of your citizens who are trying to cross into our country illegally.

4. Think for a second about why so many people want to leave your country and come here, and then sit down and try to reason out some ways to entice your people to stay home.

5. Finally. Keep your fat nose out of our business, el presidente. It's none of your concern whether or not we put up a fence along the border. If you would take the advice of (1) through (4) above, a fence wouldn't be necessary. The only problem with this fence is that it is 700 miles long, not 2200, and it doesn't come stocked with National Guard soldiers and gun turrets.

Hello? McFly?

2006-10-26T22:15:00.000-04:00

Click here to have a good laugh today.

And for a laugh of a different type, check here. Oh, you might want to get yourself a vomit bag handy. Don't say you weren't warned.

More Bottled Up Anger Released

2006-10-20T00:27:00.000-04:00

While I'm really winning friends and influencing people, let me hit a couple other topics.

1. Mark Foley. Bury this preying-on-subordinate-children fag under a maximum security prison somewhere. In fact, put him in an all-women prison so he can't get his jollies when Big Bubba meets him in the shower. I don't care if he had sex with the boys or not--the fact is, he preyed on them and used his position of power to pressure them into these vile conversations, and to me, that deserves a....ahem....stiff punishment. And while you're at it, send Denny Hastert to the same place. Don't even try to tell me he didn't know about Foley's behavior. We're learning that EVERYbody knew about Foley's behavior, and nothing was done. Nothing. It makes them nothing short of accomplices. Send them packing.

2. Nancy Pelosi. Sorry to say, this bed-wetter will most likely soon be the speaker of the house. God save us all. This woman is about as kook fringe liberal moonbat as you can get, and pretty soon she'll have the gavel. But you know what? Republicans have earned the privelege of listening to her BS for 2 years. Americans are not afraid of sacrifice, and if we have to tolerate two years of poor leadership in the war on terror to teach these RINO republican congressmen a lesson, then I say that is a sacrifice that needs to be made.

3. The game "tag". In case you haven't heard, a school in Santa Monica (shocking, I know, that it's in that wacko state) has banned the playing of the children's game tag, citing troubled students. Dear God. These students are having their feelings hurt that they are losing at tag. Well you know what? Put down the computer mouse and the Sony Play Station controller and get out and run a little more, and maybe you'll be fast enough to win. And adults: you should be ashamed of yourselves. You are certifiable moonbats now.

4. The New York Times. Never in the history of our republic has a single institution been so overtly guilty of anti-American activity. This so-called "news" paper has published, three times now, details on classified anti-terror and terror assessment programs and results, to the detriment of our armed servicemen and our first responders. This rag of a paper has, without a doubt, given aid and comfort to our enemies by providing them with details regarding the measures we are taking to defeat them. It's no less a crime than if the NYT had published America's secret communication code in WWI and WWII for the Germans and Japanese to see. In fact, I'm surprised the NYT didn't tell Japan in 1945 that we only had one more nuclear weapon available, and not the stockpile of them that Japan thought we had. The owners and editors should be tried for treason, and nothing less.

5. The Sarge. Am I in a bad mood? No, absolutely not. I'm sure it might seem that way if you're still reading. The truth is, I'm having a great fall. School is going well, Amy and I are getting along great, and Alli is just beautiful. I am just so tired of the full-scale lack of common sense in the world today. I'm tired of defeatism here at home, and I'm tired of our so-called allies constantly kicking our feet out from under us. Yes, people, the world has changed since 9/11 and a lot of it doesn't particularly care for the U.S. But here's a tip: they felt that way BEFORE March of 2003, and they have been complicit in our struggles there. Had the world presented a united front, committed to removing Saddam Hussein and building an autonomous government in Iraq, this conflict would have long since been over. Our enemies have a nose for weakness, and they have found ours, just as the Viet-Cong did in the 60s and 70s. They cannot defeat us militarily, so they aim to defeat our will, and sadly, Democrats here in America have followed the plan of our enemies to a T. It's pathetic.

Wow...4 months can really fly by

2006-10-19T00:05:00.000-04:00

I guess I'm probably back to square one now. Square one, of course, being the existence of zero readers here at Sarge's Spot. I don't blame you. Hasn't been anything to read in over four months. I'll dispense with the excuses and get to it. There are a few topics I've got on my mind, so here goes.

1. Minimum wage. There has been a lot of talk in Congressional debates about the minimum wage. This person voted against it, this person voted for it, etc. Let's get something straight. The minimum wage is unconstitutional. Simple. The constitution of the United States prohibits the government from exercising powers not explicitly granted to it in the constitution. Nowhere in that sacred document will you find an article that grants government the right to interfere in the terms of private employment contracts. Don't like it? Think I'm heartless? Think I hate poor people? Well I don't give a crap. I'm sick of this "living document" theory. The constitution is not a living document. It is the foundation of our republic (that's REPUBLIC, not DEMOCRACY, for those of you who fell asleep in 8th grade civics) and it is not open to the wild interpretations to which liberals and so-called progressives love to subject it. The minimum wage is just as unconstitutional now as it was when it was first written into law. Get the government out of private employment contracts. If you're trying to raise a family on a minimum wage job, you're a loser and you need to go back to school. Plenty of government assistance is available in that arena. The fact is, "minimum wage jobs" (read: unskilled labor) are not intended to be the types of jobs you support a family on.

2. Mid-term elections. I just can't even listen to talk radio anymore. Well, except for Boortz, but even he is starting to get on my nerves. On the one hand, you've got Limbaugh and Hannity spending three hours a day telling us why we should get out and vote for Republicans, in spite of the pathetic record they've put up in the last 6 years. Then on the other hand, you've got Boortz telling us we shouldn't vote for Republicans, but only because if we do, then voters will elect all Democrats in 2008 and talk radio will be finished off by the fairness doctrine. So let's see....according to these people, my options are A) vote for Republicans no matter how pathetically they perform, or B) vote for Democrats just to save talk radio. I don't really care for either of those options. If you're like me, you're fed up with two types of politician: the defeatist, surrender monkey, Euro-weenies of the Democratic party, and the fake, phony, hypocritical, "I'm-more-moral-than-you" teenage-page-seducing homos of the Republican party. So here's my answer: Libertarian. If you find a Libertarian candidate who will be strong on national defense, put him in office. Period. Abandon the miserably failed "war on drugs" and legalize, reduce taxes, eliminate government entitlement programs that are unconstitutional, decriminalize behavior that takes place in the privacy of your bedroom, and get us back to our roots. The Libertarian party is the closest we have to true constitutionalists out there. Now if you're a hard-core conservative, you can pick your jaw up off the floor. Yes, I said legalize drugs and get rid of so-called sodomy laws. It's not the government's place to regulate any behavior that isn't harmful to others. It isn't the government's place to decide what your moral and religious values will be. It's your place. If the behavior doesn't attempt to deprive another person of life, liberty, or property through force or fraud, it shouldn't be a crime. I'm sick of the Terri Schiavo pimps in the Republican party using their so-called moral values a campaign issue when they're just as perverse and corrupt as the Democrats. And by the way, this doesn't mean my stance on homosexual marriage has changed. I think it's wrong, and I think it's a perversion of the institution of marriage. "But Sarge, so are these people who get married and immediately divorced!" You're right. I also support making it very hard to get a divorce except in cases of abuse or infidelity. Marriage is a legally binding contract, and it should be enforced as such. Sadly, it's not. "But Sarge, what about our Judeo-Christian values?" Well entertain this scenario, if you will: 50 years from now, the Muslim population of America has outgrown all other religions and has become the majority. Muslims look back to today and say, "Back in the early 2000s, you subjected us to laws based on Christian values. Now, we are going to use our majority to subject you to Sharia law."

How do you like that? Now WE are the minority and those Muslims--those evil Muslims--have subjected us to Islamic law. They don't have the right to do that! Well neither do we. "Dammit, Sarge, I hate when you're right."

3. North Korea. There is quite a simple solution to this problem. It's called a 50 megaton nuclear warhead in the middle of Pyongyang. And if anyone has a problem with that, we've got more where that one came from. Why is the Asian Pimpsta so bold these days? Because he knows the Defeatocrats here in America and the Axis of Weasels in Europe won't do a damned thing. It's the same reason that terrorist dictator in Iran is so emboldened right now. Defeatocrats and the Axis of Weasels.

4. Madonna and her adoption. I just don't give two flying craps about Madonna or her third-world baby. This should be a non-story in today's global landscape. Why we've got credible news agencies wasting ink, paper, and bandwidth on this washed-up has-been 80's queen eludes me.

I guess that's enough for now. Enjoy, pass along to your friends, and make sure some of you whackos out there write hateful comments. I love it. See you soon.

--The Sarge

Sweet Justice

2006-06-12T23:21:00.000-04:00

THEY CELEBRATED HIS LIFE

AND THEY CELEBRATED HIS WORK

NOW LET THEM MOURN HIS DEATH

Excuses, excuses

2006-05-23T11:37:00.000-04:00

Yes, I know I've been gone a while. I've got excuses aplenty. And yes, I know I've strayed from the hard-hitting political commentary you've gotten used to. For that, I say this: I'm just a little tired of it all. I've come to realize that after following national politics for a while, you start to be able to predict everything that's going to happen. Hillary Clinton is in favor of immigration reform. Please, tell me something I don't know. (If 80% of Americans want it, then it's a lock Hillary is for it, at least on the outside.) A politician is caught taking hundreds of thousands in bribes. Well, duh. Can anyone say "term limits?" Thirty years of being in Congress makes you two things: arrogant and powerful, and that is a deadly combination. Just look at Ted Kennedy. John Kerry is both for and against a wall along the Mexican border. Shocking.

So anyway, I've not stopped following politics altogether, but I've backed away from it for a short break. Hopefully my 4 readers will hang around anyway.

It was a long week last week. I went down to Lake Park and spent four days and three nights with my buddy and his family for two purposes: to learn the produce business and to have a little fun. Both missions accomplished, although I sure was hoping to play that golf course down there. Turns out my buddy really does work for a living. We went in at 8 in the morning, and every night it was past 6:30 before we left. I learned a lot. For instance, I learned that there are about 97 varieties of squash and about 74 varieties of peppers, and every variety has a different price that you have to have memorized. A challenge, but interesting nonetheless. I also learned a little of the produce business lingo. There are the "pin hookers," who are guys that buy a field from a farmer for a fixed price and pick the vegetables, hoping to sell them for a profit. Then there are the "birddogs" who scout out all the packing sheds to see which ones have the best product, and then report back to their employers, who then purchase said product. I learned that those in the business use cute little abbreviations for common vegetables. It's too much work to say "cucumbers," so they say "cukes" instead. Same for "zucchini." Those are "zukes." Also, it turns out that the squash we eat down here in the south isn't common all over. Our squash has a curved neck, so they call that a "crookneck." Apparently those up north eat "straightneck" squash. Who knew? There is all kinds of cool stuff to learn.

Still, the most enlightening thing of the week was about my buddy himself. Well, about the both of us, I guess. We don't see each other that much these days. He took off to the south down to Lake Park, and I took off to the north up to Warner Robins, but it's amazing how close you can stay when you've got a history together. As Forrest Gump would say, "we was like peas and carrots."

Or maybe I should use the illustration my dad prefers these days: we were like two peas in a pod, and neither of us has been fertilized.

Yeah, that's about right.

Life Does Indeed Come Full Circle

2006-05-10T19:12:00.000-04:00

Over the past week, the Sarge has been hard at work doing some repairs on the ole homestead. It turns out the people who put the original roof on the house were just clueless, and they apparently did the valleys wrong, so as I pulled back the fascia boards to replace them, I found a lot of water-damaged wood behind them. So I did what any good Marine would do when faced with a difficult task: I called my daddy.

Dad came up last Friday morning to help, and we had a great, productive day. He stayed over Friday night, and Saturday morning, we got up to go at it again. It was about 2 hours into our venture when the unthinkable happened. Dad went to move an 8-foot ladder, forgetting that a hammer was sitting on top of it. You can guess the rest. The hammer succumbed to the forces of gravity, and Dad's head succumbed to the large force of the hammer striking it.

As I raced inside to grab some paper towels for Dad to use to put pressure on the wound to stop the bleeding, I began to replay in my mind the dozen-or-so times Dad had taken me to emergency rooms all over the southeast as a child. There was the first time I need stitches--which I was too young to remember--because I didn't like our coffee table and decided to attack it with my left eyebrow. Then there was the time I took a running jump and drove my right shin into the corner of some brick stairs. I can't leave out the time I was running in church and decided to use my forehead to hammer in a loose nail on one of the pews. And who can forget that summer at camp, when my right knee had a serious disagreement with a jagged rock on the ground. All of these times, my poor young body required stitching, and all of these times, my dad was there.

He loves to tell the story about one of my many forays into the emergency room. The doctor asked me if I was going to be okay as he stitched my wound. My response? "Just give me the needle and thread; I can do it myself." That's a sign of a boy who has had too many accidents. Come to think of it, were I a child in this day and age, my parents would probably be under investigation by DFACS.

Anyway, all of these thoughts are racing through my mind as I drive Dad to the local hospital. This time, it's me taking him to get sewn up. Instead, he had to settle for a couple of staples. I guess times have changed. But one thing that hasn't changed is that the circle of life keeps on spinnin' round, and I guess that's okay with me.

I'm not so sure it's okay with Dad's head.

Well at least no one died this time

2006-05-08T00:14:00.000-04:00

"And the big bad wolf huffed, and puffed.....but he didn't inhale--I swear!"

And there are those who still believe history doesn't repeat itself. Well for those, I submit one Mr. Patrick Kennedy, son of Edward "6-pack" Kennedy of Chappaquiddick fame. As the title suggests, however, we didn't lose any teenage girls this time. Nope, no young women were left to drown in a crashed vehicle while a scheming politician "walked the streets, confused" and tried his best to figure out how he was going to save his career. Not this time. This time, we just had capitol hill police officers waiving the sobriety test on a man who was apparently intoxicated. I can't imagine why! Can you? I mean, had this been George Bush who crashed his car into a police barricade and staggered away, the headlines would have read, "Capitol Hill Police Claim They Were Gentle With the Rubber Gloves," and people like Michael Moore and Howard Dean would have been calling for impeachment.....again.

Well, at least Kennedy didn't punch a Capitol Hill police officer. I mean, can you imagine a white guy claiming racism?

I've got a solution for ya, Bill

2006-05-04T16:49:00.000-04:00

Bill Gates has announced how sad he is that he is the richest man in the world. Said the Microsoft founder, currently worth about $50 billion, "I wish I wasn't. There is nothing good that comes out of that," referring to being the world's richest.

Well, Bill, let me help you out. I can relieve you of $215,000 right now. That's how much it would take to pay off my house, purchase my wife and me new vehicles, (mine is over 150,000 miles; hers, 125,000), pay for me to finish my Master's degree at Mercer University, and pay off my wife's student loans from UGA. Then, you poor, poor, pitiful soul, you would be worth a mere $49,999,785,000.

Furthermore, after careful calculations, I have come to the following conclusions:

If Bill Gates would like to cut his net worth in half, he could accomplish any one of the following:

--Send 500,000 students to a public university for four years, room and board included.

--Buy 400,641 people a brand new Toyota Camry and cover the oil changes, tires, gas, and repairs on that vehicle for 10 years

--Build nice new homes for 142,857 people

--Cover the average prescription drug bill for 1,388,888 retirees for 15 years

--Provide health insurance for 320,512 people for 10 years

--Pay 600,961 people an $800/week salary for one year. Call them his "personal assistants"

--Provide a year's worth of groceries for 3,205,128 people

--Keep the gas tanks of 925,925 cars full for 15 years

--Purchase about 1,000,000 votes from members of Congress

--Cover the wage gap between illegal farm workers and legal ones for 300,480 workers for 5 years (can you say, "immigration problem solved"?)

See, even guys with as much money as Bill Gates have plenty of places to spend it. For now though, Bill, you can start by cutting my wife and me a check in the amount of $215,000. We pledge to you that we will use the money for honorable purposes. We won't gamble, drink, or "drug" away the money. We will use it to cover the debts--present and future--that I outlined at the beginning of this piece, and one day when I'm a successful electrical and software engineer, I'll come work for you and make you more and more billions. All for the discount price of $215,000.

Thank you.

Today's Funny

2006-04-25T16:14:00.000-04:00

Looks like the folks over at Despair.com get it. Notice that looming figure in the background? This is a photo of Paris, and it's about not working hard.

Did you know that in France, any hours over 35 worked in a week are considered overtime? Hey, it's only 5 higher here, so some people think a 40-hour workweek is standard. No, it's a starting point if you plan to be financially sound. Take a look at the CEOs of major corporations. Do you think they got there by working 40 hours a week? The answer is no.

This laziness that is spreading among Americans is the same reason GM is trying to pay its employees a $140,000 ransom for them to quit. That's right. GM is offering some of its employees up to $140,000 to quit and sever all ties with GM, giving up their benefits. Why would this company do such a drastic thing just to get rid of employees? Because it will save them money. Believe it. The labor unions in this country have been holding our large corporations hostage for years, and it's gotten so bad that GM has to offer six figures to these labor rats just to get rid of them. Pathetic.

The evolution of man

2006-04-19T10:29:00.000-04:00

Yesterday I found out there was going to be a golf day for my company, Northrop Grumman, on the 27th--next Thursday. I had never heard about it before, presumably because I'm such a lousy golfer that no one wanted me asking to be on his team. This year, however, somebody let the cat out of the bag. Of course I wanted to play. I always want to play. For men who like golf, asking them if they want to play golf is like asking a man if he wants to have sex. The answer is always yes, even if you don't feel good or if you're angry at the person you're supposed to be playing with.

So I found myself headed home to present the proposition to my lovely bride. I told her, "A bunch of people from work are having a golf day at Southern Hills in Hawkinsville next week. Sounds like fun."

Her response? "Are you asking me if you can go?"

It was in that moment that I realized that yes, I was asking her. But it wasn't like a child asks a parent. It wasn't for her permission. I was asking her because I wanted to include her feelings in my decision-making. Oh yes, had she objected (she didn't!!!), I probably would have been mad about it for a while, but I wouldn't have gone, and the disappointment would have eventually gone away. And then I would have shown her that her feelings meant something to me in a way that no card or vase full of flowers can ever do. See, the way you show that something is important to you is that you will sacrifice for it.

Just as she sacrifices for me, I have learned that I must sometimes sacrifice for her. And with that, I have proved that men do evolve. Oh maybe our bodies will never "evolve" something truly useful, like eyes in the back of our heads or the ability to breathe underwater, but we can evolve mentally and emotionally. I'm living proof.

Have Republicans earned another term?

2006-04-12T22:25:00.000-04:00

There has been a lot of talk this year about a Democratic victory in the House. Surprisingly, I'm starting to hope it happens. No, I don't think they'll do any better of a job than Republicans have done. But it's time the "Republican base" sent a message to our representatives. They have failed us on two major issues that people like me hold dear.

1. They haven't controlled spending. I'm not talking about DHS or military spending. There wasn't much we could do about that. But the Bush administration has overseen the largest increase in discretionary spending in history. Thanks in part to the socialist-leaning Medicare prescription drug program and the vast array of new entitlement programs President Bush has fought for and implemented, this so-called conservative Congress has begun to spend money like drunken Democrats. Further, it has been Republicans in the Senate that have led the way in earmark spending (read: pork barrel), with knuckleheads like Alaska senator Ted Stevens notching out over $200 million for a bridge to an island with 50 inhabitants. And in spite of all of this lunacy, President Bush has yet to use the power of veto. It's ridiculous.

2. They have buckled on immigration reform. People like me--that is to say, those who traditionally vote Republican--strongly support border control and strict enforcement of our immigration laws. We believe that people who want to come to our country should do it legally and should wait their turn. This Republican congress has given in to the demands of illegal aliens who turned out in vast numbers to protest such enforcement. In the 4 1/2 years since 9/11, they have refused to increase security at our borders and our ports, and they have refused to start enforcing existing immigration laws regarding visas and work-studies for foreigners. For all the tough talk on homeland security and national defense, our Republicans in congress have refused to take even the most elementary steps of defending our borders from unwelcome outsiders.

I, for one, will be voting Libertarian or Democratic this Fall. No, they won't do any better of a job than the Republicans, but perhaps being ejected from their comfortable little seats on Capitol Hill will remind these men and women of why we sent them to Washington in the first place. It wasn't to become Democrats. It was to adhere to our conservative principles and to vote likewise. I've been waiting for five years now--with Republicans in control in the Senate, House, and White House--and I haven't seen the conservative agenda enacted. Time to send a message.

The U.S. economy just keeps on getting worse...

2006-04-12T10:54:00.000-04:00

for Democrats.

Surrender Monkeys at it again

2006-04-11T09:33:00.000-04:00

If you don't know who I'm talking about, it's those lovable French. Through years and years of surrendering when it was time to fight, they have earned this nickname, and yesterday they proved once again why the title is well deserved. Remember all those protesters (read: rioters) that took to the streets over the new law that would give employers more flexibility to fire young workers? Well, it seems the French government has caved. The message? "If you riot and loot and cause general mayhem in numbers large enough, you'll get your way." Oh yeah, and let's not forget this message: "The government of France has the right to interfere with private employment contracts by preventing employers from firing young workers, and job security for the 78% of those under 26 who are working is more important than jobs for the 22% not working."

Don't laugh, folks. We here in America are facing a similar situation with respect to the immigration debate. Hundreds of thousands of protesters took to the streets yesterday to protest proposed legislation that would enforce our existing immigration laws. It's only a matter of time until our Congress buckles under the pressure. Oh wait...they already have.

Did I mention that you should do something about it?

America the Conquered

2006-04-10T10:43:00.000-04:00

Yeah, those Mexicans really want to be Americans, don't they?

The headline is coming to a newspaper near you. You can bet on it. Today, 500,000 "immigrants' rights" protestors gathered in Dallas to demonstrate against proposed legislation that would--gasp!!--enforce existing immigration laws.

That's right, folks. These "undocumented migrants"--and you can be sure that probably 1/2 or more of the people marching are illegals who probably couldn't pick the English words "House of Representatives" out of a lineup--are angry because America is considering enforcing her own immigration laws.

What these people want is to be able to come to America, take advantage of her good fortune, and return all or most of the profits to the motherland, Mexico. They want to come here and set up "Little Mexico" neighborhoods all over our beautiful nation until finally, America is a sovereign nation no more. They want to be the "reconquistadors." And if our people and our politicians don't grow a spine, and quickly, they will succeed. Our children will be grow up in a suburb of Mexico, and our grandchildren will be full-blown Mexican citizens, born right here in the United States of Mexamerica.

Do something. Click on this site, find the contact information for your Representatives and Senators, and call them/write them/email them to express your sincere desire to see America's borders protected and secured. The only way to defeat the Mexican mobs that have infiltrated our streets is to make our voices louder than theirs.

Heck, the Congressmen won't even have to get translators to read our comments.

Have a little fun today

2006-04-07T10:44:00.000-04:00

I think I know exactly where this sign is located.

Have a little fun yourself over at the church sign generator website.

Tidbits for Today

2006-04-07T09:36:00.000-04:00

Yes, I know it's been ages since my last post, and for the three readers I still have, thanks for sticking around. It's been a combination of laziness and a busy schedule at school that has kept me from dutifully fulfilling my obligations as your primary source of news and information. So here are a few things to whet your appetite. Hopefully, I can get back in the swing of things.

More terrible news was released today about our economy. Those Democrats were right--George Bush is the worst president since Herbert Hoover. Oh wait....maybe I misread the numbers. Yep, it's 4.7% unemployment and rising consumer confidence coupled with a stronger job market. My bad. Now with Tom Delay out of the House and Randy Cunningham sitting in prison, the Democrats can't use the "worst president since Herbert Hoover" line OR the "culture of corruption" line in the fall elections. What are they going to do now?

Cynthia McKinney.....where do you start? She has surpassed Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to officially take the title of Prime Minister of Race Pimping. This woman is clearly suffering from a serious mental disorder. After assaulting a Capitol Hill police officer, her idea of damage control is to cry racism, racial profiling, etc. It's something I've railed against here at Sarge's Spot on several occasions. Blacks in this country who choose to live a life of victimhood are ruining the image of the honest, hard-working blacks who have realized that it's not 1964 anymore. The fact is, racism will never end until we stop having black racists and bigots, because that is exactly what Cynthia McKinney is. She is a bigot. She doesn't like white people. She is a racist because she believes herself to be superior to white people. She is also now the laughing stock and embarrassment of the House of Representatives, the Democratic Party, and Georgia.

Immigration reform. This should be so simple. The American people have responded time and time again to polls, and the response has been that we strongly favor strict enforcement of immigration laws that are currently on the books, we strongly favor deporting those who have come here illegally, and we strongly favor legal immigration. We're not anti-Mexican. We're anti-criminal, and people who sneak across our borders are criminals, period. In fact, can you think of anything you have to sneak around to do that isn't wrong? They're being sneaky because they know it's wrong. The trouble is, our representatives won't do anything because they're so afraid of losing the "Hispanic" (read: Mexican) vote. So the invasion continues unabated.

Speaking of Mexicans, if they're so hot on becoming Americans, why do they keep on waving Mexican flags? I say if a Mexican is caught waving a Mexican flag, he should be put on the back of a truck and deported right then and there. No trial, no jury, just "On the truck, Senior."

Speaking of flags, the next principal who, in his attempt to get his 15 minutes of fame, bans American flags or patriotic clothing from his school should be put on the back of the truck with the Mexican-flag-waving Mexican and sent across the border. There was a time in this country when people loved America. Let's bring it back.

Paula Abdul has been assaulted. She was pushed up against a wall. Does anybody really care? Just curious.

That's all for today, folks. Have a great weekend, and check back soon for more enlightening, witty commentary. Then, when you get done at boortz.com, maybe you'll stop by here again.

2006-03-20T16:53:00.000-05:00

MORE BAD NEWS FOR DOOM-AND-GLOOM DEMOCRATS! CLICK HERE!

Where America is Headed

2006-03-18T06:55:00.000-05:00

Several days ago, an uproar began in France. "Over what?", you might ask. Well, it wasn't over tax increases, and it wasn't over the Iraq war, and it wasn't over discrimination, and it wasn't over political corruption. No, let me tell you what this uproar was all about:

A new law is in the works in France. Here's what this new law would do: it would remove the government's power to prevent private businesses from hiring and firing as they choose. As it stands now, businesses cannot fire people unless the government approves of the reason. This law would give businesses the power to fire anyone under 26 years old without having to justify it during their first two years of employment. Why does France need this law? They need it because most of the people out there who are under 26 years old are completely worthless and incompetent employees(which, by the way, is a product of socialism). Employers know that if they hire one of these worthless workers, they won't be able to fire them. Therefore, they just aren't hiring young workers. That's why the unemployment rate for people under 26 is absolutely sky-high, over double the national rate and rising to 50% in some areas.

Do you understand how serious this is? In France, the government has to pass a law to prevent itself from interfering in private employment contracts because it maintains complete power in those situations now. If you're wondering why we should care what's happening in France, well, let me tell you. The left in this country basically wants to model our government after the socialists in Europe. They were successful in implementing a national minimum wage, they were successful in establishing all-powerful unions, and they will be successful in destroying the ability of businesses to thrive in this country if they get their way.

See, mine isn't just an ideological difference with leftists. The fact is, their way of doing things just does not work. History has shown time and time again that socialized anything leaves much to be desires. Just take a look at socialized medicine in Canada, where you have to wait over a month for an MRI, and now just take a look at socialized employment in France, where employers are scared to hire people because they know their new employees are likely to become blood-sucking leeches of their company.

Socialism doesn't work to bring people out of poverty. It keeps them there just as well as any dictator.

New Words for 2006

2006-03-09T23:25:00.000-05:00

I received this in the email today as part of the "Boortz Blast." It's pretty good, so I thought I'd put it out there for all of you. I think my personal favorite is the "404." Or maybe it's the "Salmon Day." I have my share of those. Sooo many of them walking around out there. Enjoy.

1. BLAMESTORMING: Sitting around in a group, discussing why a deadline was missed or a project failed, and who was responsible.

2. SEAGULL MANAGER: A manager, who flies in, makes a lot of noise, craps on everything, and then leaves.

3. ASSMOSIS: The process by which some people seem to absorb success and advancement by kissing up to the boss rather than working hard.

4. SALMON DAY: The experience of spending an entire day swimming upstream only to get screwed and die in the end.

5. CUBE FARM: An office filled with cubicles

6. PRAIRIE DOGGING: When someone yells or drops something loudly in a cube farm, and people's heads pop over the walls to see what's going on.

7. MOUSE POTATO: The on-line, wired generation's answer to the couch potato.

8. SITCOMs: Single Income, Two Children, Oppressive Mortgage. What Yuppies turn into when they have children and one of them stops working to stay home with the kids.

9. STRESS PUPPY: A person who seems to thrive on being stressed out and whiny.

10. SWIPEOUT: An ATM or credit card that has been rendered useless because the magnetic strip is worn away from extensive use.

11. XEROX SUBSIDY: Euphemism for swiping free photocopies from one's workplace.

12. IRRITAINMENT: Entertainment and media spectacles that are annoying but you find yourself unable to stop watching them. The J-Lo and Ben wedding (or not) was a prime example - Michael Jackson, another...

13. PERCUSSIVE MAINTENANCE: The fine art of whacking the crap out of an electronic device to get it to work again.

14. ADMINISPHERE : The rarefied organizational layers beginning just above the rank and file. Decisions that fall from the
adminisphere are often profoundly inappropriate or irrelevant to the problems they were designed to solve.

15. 404: Someone who's clueless. From the World Wide Web error Message "404 Not Found," meaning that the requested site could not be located.

16. GENERICA: Features of the American landscape that are exactly the same no matter where one is, such as fast food joints, strip malls, and subdivisions.

17. OHNOSECOND: That minuscule fraction of time in which you realize that you've just made a BIG mistake. (Like after hitting send on an email by mistake)

18. WOOFS: Well-Off Older Folks.

19. CROP DUSTING: Surreptitiously passing gas while passing through a Cube Farm.

More Idiocy From the Prime Idiots

2006-03-06T10:06:00.000-05:00

In case you're wondering, I'm talking about the New York Times. For all the grief Fox News receives for its right-leaning slant (and yes, it does have some) the New York Times sure does seem to get a pass for its left-leaning slant. The latest incarnation is today's powerful story about how parental notification laws don't reduce abortion rates.

The purpose of this story isn't to pass along information, by the way. The purpose of this story is to serve as "proof" that parental notification laws are unnecessary and unjust. The New York Times wants you to believe that parents shouldn't have the right to know when their daughters are having abortions.

What they've done is set up a classic straw man argument: "You only wanted parental notification laws for the purpose of reducing abortion rates, and look! Abortions rates aren't down! Parental notification laws don't work!"

The fact is, most of us proponents of parental notification laws support them for one reason: we believe that parents of minors need to know when their children are undergoing serious medical procedures. Considering the possible emotional ramifications of a procedure such as an abortion, the parents need to know about it so that they can be prepared to offer support in any form necessary. It's that simple. Of course we don't like seeing 15-year-old girls having abortions, but the law says they can. What we believe is that parents have the right to know.

We wouldn't send minors under the knife for any other procedure without parental notification, and in most cases, parental consent. We're not asking for consent here; we just want the parents to be notified. If you oppose that, then you aren't "pro-choice", you're pro-abortion.

An Example of the Kind of Mindset We're Up Against

2006-03-04T20:49:00.000-05:00

I just finished publishing a comment I received on this post from someone named "Brittney."

I felt I had to post some part of her comments because it's such a stark reminder of what is at stake in the political war surrounding Iraq. By the way, instead of having to type [sic] about 38 times, I'm just going to tell you that I've left all of Brittney's grammatical and spelling errors intact.

"Our president took 'inside' information from an Iraqi (known as 'curveball'), who planned to 'help-out' our country by telling his tall-tale stories of Saddam having WMD in Iraq, and his plans for the destruction of our country. This information (along with the uranium from Africa, also from 'curveball')came to be known as un-true."

Brittney's argument is that all of the intelligence we gathered on Saddam's WMD program came from a single dubious source. That is factually inaccurate. It's not even close to accurate. In fact, it's a complete lie used in an attempt to gain points in a debate. I challenge Brittney right now to produce a single news article to that effect.

Further, the information about Saddam's interest in African "yellow cake" did not come from "Curveball"; it was British intelligence that made that suggestion, and oh, by the way, the British still stand by that assessment.

"The war with Iraq is all about the oil."

Yeah, that's why the price of oil has been dropping so rapidly since we invaded.

"The war against terrorism, which was intended to ward terrorists away,only overthrew one dictator (who, weirdly enough kept peace in his chaotic country), and the fact that we did not do anything to the terrorists who actually bombed our country, is one reason that this war is a hoax."

Did you catch that? Brittney just argued that Saddam Hussein was able to keep peace in his own country. Yes, Brittney, he was. He did it by murdering hundreds of thousands of people who disagreed with him. He used chemical warfare against his own country on at least three separate occasions. He oversaw the torture, rape, and murder of enough people to fill all of the mass graves that our troops have uncovered in Iraq.

Yes, Brittney's idea of keeping the peace means brutally murdering anyone who opposes you. Interestingly enough, that's precisely the method that was used by Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and every other fascist dictator ever to roam this earth.

So congratulation, Brittney: you've just aligned yourself with that treasure trove of great leadership I've just listed. You're off to a great start in life.

"We are just as much terrorists in Iraq as the Arabs who bombed 9-11."

Do I really need to say anything about this one? Yes, Brittney, we have hijacked civilian aircraft and crashed them into civilian buildings because we have an intense desire to accomplish two goals: to murder as many innocent Iraqi civilians as possible, and to go to paradise so we can engage in sexual intercourse with 72 virgins at any time we choose. Yes, that's America. That's her Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. We're just a bunch of terrorists.

Here's a tip, Brittney: read this post, and then go get the book and read it. Then come back to the Sarge and talk to me about how WE are the terrorists. In fact, just read anything. Read a newspaper, read a magazine, read any kind of book about something other than Paris Hilton, and then come back and try to put together some coherent thoughts.

"It is time for our country to retreat, and just leave Iraq be. We have 'helped' them enough by overthrowing their corrupt dictator who kept his own country from fighting with itself..."

And now we know exactly how most of those on the left feel. America should retreat. To hell with pride. To hell with seeing a job through to the end. To hell with the code of conduct our military swears by. To hell with standing up for something good and just and right in this world. To hell with the Iraqi people who need our help in their emerging democracy. To hell with bravery and valor and commitment and honor and courage. To hell with everything America stands for, Brittney. In fact, Brittney, to hell with America. Right?

Al Qaeda Plotting "Big Bang" in Iraq

2006-03-02T21:47:00.000-05:00

Here is the link. The headline reads:

U.S. Intel: Qaeda Plotting 'Big Bang'

Know what my first thought was when I read this? It was that I hope al Qaeda succeeds in creating a big bang.

That way, maybe a solar system with one planet that's perfect for human life will be created. After all, didn't you know that billions of years ago, there was another "big bang", and that from this massive explosion, all the perfect order of the universe as we know it came into being? Well here's a small snippet from the article:

This occurance was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other. The Big Bang actually consisted of an explosion of space within itself unlike an explosion of a bomb were fragments are thrown outward. The galaxies were not all clumped together, but rather the Big Bang lay the foundations for the universe.

What? You didn't know that explosions could cause order?

Well they can.

Just ask the scientists. If you ask me, however, I'm going to tell you this: the "Big Bang Theory", as described at the link above, sounds an awful lot like....gasp!!!.....creation. It sounds like the universe simply **came into being** out of nowhere. Now tell me, how do you suppose that would have happened?

C'mon, al Qaeda. Give us another big bang. Please. We need a do-over anyway.

The Case for War in Iraq

2006-02-28T23:47:00.000-05:00

I've been in a rather long-winded debate with Mister Hand over at The Wicked Truth on this post. It started out as a "Fox News Lies" post and quickly morphed into a "Bush Lied About Iraq WMD" conversation. Well, I just got done posting what I feel is a pretty strong argument in favor of the war, so I decided to post that comment here at Sarge's Spot. I mean, why waste such good stuff? Here it is: (Be forewarned: this is VERY long, but if you aren't sure about the Iraq War--or even if you think you are--you need to read every word)

A quote from the CIA's George Tenet:

""We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qa'ida going back a decade. Credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qa'ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression. Since Operation Enduring Freedom [in Afghanistan], we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad. We have credible reporting that al Qa'ida leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al Qa'ida members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs."

Let me guess: Bush "pressured" Tenet into saying that, right?

More info on Iraq - al Qaeda ties here and here. The 2nd link is from the 911 commission report. It states that there was never an operational commitment between Iraq and al Qaeda; however, it goes on to state this:

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported to have received a significant response. According to one report, Saddam Hussein's efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.74

In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air attacks in December.75

Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of the United States.

So let's see: the 911 Commission finds that at one point, Hussein's regime actually offered bin Laden safe haven in Iraq (although it was refused), yet somehow we're to believe that, had bin Laden requested aid in developing WMD to use against the United States, Hussein would have denied him.

Is it possible that they would never have collaborated? Of course.

Did we want to find out the hard way? Probably not.

With regard to the discovery of WMD in Iraq post-invasion, from David Kay's October 2003 report(a few tidbits for you):

"We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002."

"Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:

Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS)."

I read about half of this report. Bear in mind that "no stockpiles at present" doesn't mean "no capability of producing mass amounts once the pressure is off."

It is well documented that Hussein was going to reinstate his WMD programs as soon as inspections / sanctions had ceased. The evidence of Iraq - al Qaeda ties is, of course, under dispute, but many very credible people still believe the ties existed, and the 911 Commission even acknowledged those ties, although they didn't acknowledge a working relationship.

There comes a time when you have to measure the cost of inaction against the possibilities of acting and failing. After 12 years of sanctions and resolution after resolution after resolution--only to have Hussein STILL hiding his WMD program material and STILL doing his best to deceive the inspectors--I think I can go along with "enough is enough."

Update: 21st Century Freedom of Speech

2006-02-27T21:51:00.000-05:00

I received this email from Mister Hand of The Wicked Truth. It's a forward from one of his regular readers that concerns this post. In the comments there, I asserted that Fox News wasn't the only organization that carries a bias, but rather than all news agencies report with a certain amount of bias, including CNN, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC. I also linked to stories from three of those sites that I found to be biased. Here's the email:

Smell the Glove wanted me to forward this to you. I would post it but don't really have any way of doing it (no hosty, just linky).

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Geo----------@regions.com
Date: Feb 27, 2006 1:27 PM
Subject: Partisanship and News
To: m--------------@gmail.com

I know I've sent this to you before, but it may help to shut up Daniel.

So there you have it, folks. I know that Mister Hand doesn't want to "shut up Daniel," (he does, however, love proving me wrong!), but his reader, "Smell the Glove" does. That's his idea of winning an argument: just cause the other person to shut up.

It's that type of "political discourse" that has brought our country to this divide we have now. It's that type of "shout louder than the other guy" mentality that has reduced our politicians to a bunch of snivelling babies.

Yep, there are some people who love free speech, as long as what you say agrees with their preconceived notions.

Olympics

2006-02-27T09:40:00.000-05:00

OLYMPIC ATHELETE 50 YEARS AGO

OLYMPIC ATHELETE TODAY

And they wonder why nobody cares about the Olympics.

(That link won't always contain the information I want you to see, so let me copy and paste):

FLASH: OLYMPIC FADE FOR NBC... CLOSING PULLS 9.5 RATING/14 SHARE SUNDAY NITE [DOWN FROM 23.3./33 IN 2002 AND 12.8/19 BACK IN 1988]... ABC 'DANCING W/STARS' DOMINATES 17.3 RATING/24 SHARE... EASILY WINS NIGHT... MORE...

21st Century Freedom of Speech

2006-02-26T22:53:00.000-05:00

We love freedom in this country. We love freedom of the press, we love freedom of religion, and we love freedom of speech. Unless somebody's saying something with which we disagree.

First things first: these Neo-Nazis are a bunch of putrid scumbags. That said, they have every right to organize peacefully and hold a protest in any neighborhood of their choosing without being assaulted. They have the right to hold signs protesting crime, they have the right to wear swastikas, and they have the right to be putrid scumbags! And here's a tip, people. We don't have the right to try to silence them.

This is twice now in the past year that Nazis have tried to hold a peaceful demonstration and have been attacked. It's just further proof that we love freedom of speech only as long as people are saying something with which we agree. It's funny.....that's exactly how the hated Nazis operated.

And now those "peaceful" Christians...

2006-02-22T09:52:00.000-05:00

What, did you think the Sarge would ignore mindless violence perpetrated by Christians? Well, I won't. When Christians screw up, they need to be called on it just as when Muslims screw up. So if you read the story, you'll find that Christians mobs murdered at least 6 Muslims in counterprotests in Nigeria. That's right--those peace-loving Christians are murdering people and burning buildings. How long will it take for Christian leadership in this country to condemn the violence? I'd bet it'll take about as long as it took a Muslim--any Muslim--to condemn their violent followers.

Here's the problem, though. Is it possible that this violence, this mob mentality is not a solely religious problem? You don't see Christians in America murdering people because they disagree with them. You also don't see Muslims in America murdering. You don't see violent protests here in America unless it comes from south central Los Angeles--and that's another post altogether. So what is it? It must not be just the religion causing the violence. Could it be that it's simply a cultural difference? Could it be that these countries across the sea simply have not culturally evolved enough to recognize that life is precious? Be careful how you answer! You just might start believing that American culture is actually superior to others. You just might start getting on board with the Sarge when he says that cultures such as those in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, and yes, even Iraq, are just morally inferior when cast in the light of America. And if you're not careful, you just might start to question this whole concept of multiculturalism on a moral level. Frankly, I don't want these repressive, violent cultures infiltrating America. You want to bring peaceful, respectful Islamic culture to America? Go ahead. If you can live in peace with your neighbor and not want to smite him because he is an infidel, then you are always welcome on our shores.

Here's another problem. I can count 6 deaths perpetrated by violent Christians now. How many can we count perpetrated by violent Muslims? Violence is a problem that must be dealt with no matter whom the offenders are, but let's face it: most--that is, a huge majority--of the people in this world who murder in the name of religion are Muslims. As with any 12-step program, one of the first steps to solving the problem is admitting you have a problem. And that's the "problem." We are so afraid of offending that we refuse to identify these murderous savages for who they are--Muslims. We use words like "terrorist" and "insurgent" and "protester." What do they all have in common? Islam.

It's just not possible that this is a coincidence.

It's the economy, stupid

2006-02-14T09:32:00.000-05:00

Wasn't that the rallying cry of Democrats in 1992? What about 2004? Didn't they use the economy as a measure of the effectiveness of George Bush?

How come they're not talking about the economy now? Oh, I think I can guess. Doesn't fit the template.

You did know about the budget surplus, didn't you?

2006-02-10T16:08:00.000-05:00

Do something for me:

Go to CNN.com, MSNBC.com, ABC News.com, and CBS news.com and do a search for "budget surplus."

After you don't find any stories about the $21 billion federal government surplus for the month of January, (which is due to record corporate tax receipts--in spite of those "massive tax cuts for the rich" and "massive tax cuts for big business") then go to this site and read all about it.

Why won't CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS report the budget surplus? Could it be that a budget surplus--even if it's only for one month, and even if the total fiscal year budget is still in the red--doesn't fit the mainstream media template of "George Bush is evil and is the worst president ever"? Could it be because the MSM doesn't want you to know that the tax cuts really aren't benefiting only the wealthy and the corporations? Could it be because if you were to find out the truth, which is that tax cuts actually lead to an increase in tax revenues because of how they spur the economy, that their gig might be up?

I don't know. I mean, I'm just speculating here. You draw your own conclusions.

...And here's why Kanye West should take a long walk off a short pier

2006-02-10T06:58:00.000-05:00

"I know all they is to know about the shrimpin' business."

If you know the name Kanye West, it's probably because of his idiotic remarks during a telethon for Katrina victims. Today he's in the news again, and it's like deja vu all over again. Again, today, I would love to see Kanye West take a long walk off a short pier. This time he's saying that he should be in a new revised version of the Bible because he is a "griot", or West African storyteller who is an "inspirational speaker." So in honor of this "griot", I'd like to post one of his "inspirational stories" right here on Sarge's Spot. This gem is called "Golddigger." [Warning: if you are the type of person who gasps at the sight or sound of the F-bomb, then you might want to avoid reading this "inspirational" story]
[Warning #2: reading this "inspirational" story has been known to cause the loss of as many as 28 IQ points]

[Jamie Foxx]
She take my money, well I'm in need
Yeah she's a triflin friend indeed
Oh she's a gold digger way over town
That digs on me

[Chorus:]
(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (Well I'm in Need)
But she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (When I'm in Need)
but she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(i gotta WEED)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head

[Verse 1:]
Cutie the bomb
Met her at a beauty salon
With a baby louis vuitton
Under her underarm
She said I can tell you rock
I can tell by ya charm
Far as girls you got a flock
I can tell by ya charm and ya arm
but I'm lookin for the one
have you seen her
My psychic told me she'll have a ass like Serena
Trina, Jennifer Lopez, four kids
An I gotta take all they bad ass to show-biz
Ok get ya kids but then they got their friends
I Pulled up in the Benz, they all got up in
We all went to din and then I had to pay
If you fuckin with this girl then you betta be paid
You know why
It take too much to touch her
From what I heard she got a baby by Busta
My best friend say she use to fuck wit Usher
I dont care what none of ya'll say I still love her

[Chorus:]
(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (Well I'm in Need)
But she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (When I'm in Need)
but she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(on yo knees)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head

[Verse 2:]
18 years, 18 years
She got one of yo kids got you for 18 years
I know somebody payin child support for one of his kids
His baby momma's car's crib is bigger than his
You will see him on TV Any Given Sunday
Win the Superbowl and drive off in a Hyundai
She was spose to buy ya shorty TYCO with ya money
She went to the doctor got lipo with ya money
She walkin around lookin like Michael with ya money
Should of got that insured, GEICO for ya moneeey( your money)
If you aint no punk holla We Want Prenupt
WE WANT PRENUPT!, Yeaah
It's something that you need to have
Cause when she leave yo ass she gone leave with half
18 years, 18 years
And on the 18th birthday he found out it wasn't his

[Chorus:]
(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (Well I'm in Need)
But she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(can you feel me ma)
Now I aint sayin she a gold digger (When I'm in Need)
but she aint messin wit no broke niggaz(i gotta leave)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head get down (all yall need)
get down girl go head

[Verse 3:]
Now I aint sayin you a gold digger you got needs
Y'all wanna do the smoke but he can't buy weed
You go out to eat and he cant pay yall cant leave
There's dishes in the back, he gotta roll up his sleeves
But while yall washin watch him
He gone make it into a Benz out of that Datsun
He got that ambition baby look in his eyes
This week he moppin floorz next week it's the friers
So, stick by his side
I know his dude's ballin but yea thats nice
And they gone keep callin and tryin
But you stay right girl
But when you get on he leave yo ass for a white girl

Get down girl go head get down
Get down girl go head get down
get down girl go head get down
[she take my money]
Let me here that back

Grammy Awards.....Who Cares?

2006-02-09T13:48:00.000-05:00

If you watched the Grammy Awards last night, then.....well, then you're lame. I'm sorry, but I just couldn't care less about which wannabe thug, coked-out rocker, or whorish hottie was voted the best. I mean, let's face it: being the best out of that group is about the same as being voted "Most Likely to Die of a Drug Overdose or Sexually Transmitted Disease" in high school--it ain't something to be all that proud of.

So that's why I wasn't too surprised to see that the Grammy Awards show was a less-than-stellar performer in the ratings department. Here's the quote from Drudge:

SHOCK: 'IDOL' AMATEURS BEAT 'GRAMMY' PROS IN RATINGS
Thu Feb 09 2006 09:01:52 ET

How 100+ wannabes Outrated Madonna, U2, Kanye

The music business suffered another embarrassment Wednesday night -- when AMERICAN IDOL's Hollywood cattle call drew a larger audience than THE GRAMMY AWARDS!

The amateur pop contest was easily the top-rated show of the night, NIELSEN claimed, with a 17.4 rating/26 share to GRAMMY's 12.3 rating/19 share.

In direct competition at 8 pm ET, IDOL hit 27 share to GRAMMY's 16 share.

[The industry's top music awards slipped from 2005 levels [12.3/19 vs. 13.2/20] early numbers show.]

With IDOL, FOX won the night over CBS: 12.7 rating/18 share to 12.5/18.

Developing...

For one, I am SO glad that people are actually watching real talent on television. The singers on American Idol actually have some, as opposed to the likes of Kanye West and P.Diddy, who have no talent other than that of exploiting the idiocy of the typical adolescent consumer to make a buck.

Thanks, American Idol. At least you're not a 100% freak show YET.

Pigs Are Flying and There Are Snowballs in Hell

2006-02-08T10:51:00.000-05:00

I can't believe my eyes. Could it be that there is a Muslim somewhere in this crazy world that hasn't lost his Allah-given mind? Well, maybe so.

Look for the true face of Islam to condemn the condemnation as the rioters (read: idiot Muslim thugs) continue their sieges of foreign embassies and common decency.

Marines Lead the Way

2006-02-06T00:08:00.000-05:00

I came across this picture while scanning the new entries at Snopes.com. Here's the story:

This guy is an 18-year veteran of the Marine Corps named Gunny Burghardt (that's Gunnery Sergeant to you non-Marine-types out there). He has been with Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) for about 15 of those years. That means that he disarms bombs. In Iraq, it specifically means that he disarms IEDs. Insurgents there use a tactic known as "secondary devices." That is, they explode an IED, then wait for the EOD team to come in and then explode another device they've hidden close by. This means that they are typically hiding very close by and watching what goes on so that they can detonate the secondary device at the most opportune time.

Gunny B. got hit by a secondary device that was buried right beneath where he was standing. He survived the bomb without any major injuries, and realizing that his attackers were most likely watching, chose not to be carried away on a stretcher, but rather to walk away. As he left the scene, (and after having his trousers cut away to inspect the injuries to his legs) he gave the insurgents the ole "One-Finger Salute."

Be proud of your Marines, America. They are some tough dudes, and they fight for you. Said Gunny B. after the attack:

"I don't want a ticket out. I want to stay here so we can take as many people home as possible. I'll do 30 years, as long as I'm having fun. Unless I die."

And as I've heard it said before, "If that don't light your fire, your wood's wet."

More News From the Peaceful World of Islam! Click Here!

2006-02-05T13:22:00.000-05:00

Peaceful Muslims

Just a few of the tidbits hitting the wire:

--Thousands of Syrians enraged by caricatures of Islam's revered prophet torched the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus on Saturday

--In Gaza, Palestinians marched through the streets, storming European buildings and burning German and Danish flags. Protesters smashed the windows of the German cultural center and threw stones at the European Commission building

--the leader of the Palestinian group Hamas called the cartoons "an unforgivable insult" that merited punishment by death.

--In Santiago, the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the Chilean Embassy in Damascus was also torched

--Demonstrators moved onto the Norwegian Embassy about 4 miles away, also setting fire to it before being dispersed by police using tear gas and water cannons

--Young Muslims clashed briefly with police in Copenhagen, the Danish capital

Yep, those peaceful Muslims are at it again. You did know, didn't you, that hating them makes me a Nazi. To be honest, I almost wear this comparison as a badge of honor. When someone compares you to a Nazi, that is a sure sign he is completely devoid of a real argument, and you can bet you've won the debate.

MORE NEWS FROM THE PEACEFUL WORLD OF ISLAM!

2006-02-04T15:53:00.000-05:00

Another Defeat for Defeatists

2006-02-03T09:40:00.000-05:00

Looks like the economy is still rolling, in spite of what the defeatists in the Democratic party want you to believe.

Prejudice Justified?

2006-02-03T06:46:00.000-05:00

In recent years, there has been a movement, the followers of which insist that no one culture is superior to any other. They have gotten laws passed banning "hate speech" and "hate crimes", which presumably means that a crime against one person is worse than the exact same crime against another person, and the degree of the crime is based solely upon which group the victim is a member of.

Well in the past two days, we've seen, I believe beyond the shadow of a doubt, that multiculturalism and the principle that every culture is equally valuable and good have been way wrong.

In fact, some might argue that if everything is good, then why do we fight? Why do Democrats and Republicans wage war every day in the Senate and House? Why do we have election campaigns? Why do we fight wars? Isn't it because we believe our ideas to be superior to those of others?

For two days now, Muslims across the globe have proved to us that they are, in fact, inferior. Islam is not a peaceful religion. For the record, there was a time that Christianity wasn't peaceful, either, but thankfully times have changed. But for now, Islam is a religion that supports, defends, initiates, perpetuates, and glorifies violence, and it's time for people to start saying so instead of hiding behind the cloak of political correctness.

In case you haven't seen the stories (which probably means you've been under a rock for the past 48 hours), here is the original story. A Danish newspaper printed editorial cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammed. Here at Sarge's Spot, we don't give a damn if the Muslims are offended, so here are a couple of the cartoons, and you can find the rest here.

Also, you can find the follow-up stories about Muslims attacking people and buildings because of the cartoons here and here.

I don't know about you, but I've never been happier to say we're fighting these people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Screw your politics, screw your criticisms of our government policy, and screw your personal feelings about George Bush. The fact is, our culture is superior to the culture of these animals, and it's time somebody said it.

And They Say Fox is Biased

2006-02-01T23:35:00.000-05:00

I was scanning the headlines at CNN.com tonight, and I saw one that caught my eye, right up at the top of the page:

"House Passes Cuts in Health Care for Poor"

How horrible! Those evil Republicans have cut health care benefits to the poor people!

Do you know the bill to which the headline refers? It's H.R. 4241, an appropriations bill passed by the Senate late last year. Here is a link to the entire text of the bill. It's a .pdf file. It's 830 pages long.

That's right. It's 830 pages long. And from 830 pages, the headline CNN comes up with is "House Passes Cuts in Health Care for Poor."

The "most trusted name in news" indeed.

What is the Democrats' Plan for Iraq?

2006-02-01T06:55:00.000-05:00

I mean, other than to pull out immediately. Nancy Pelosi was interviewed by Anderson Cooper just after the SOTU, and he asked her about four times what the Democrats' plan for Iraq was. The only substantive answer she gave was to make sure the Iraqi security forces we're training don't turn out to be corrupt.

There was no mention of a timetable for withdrawal, although that has been one of the primary cries of the Democratic Party for a year now.

There was no mention of how to change the way we're conducting our training operations to make them more efficient, although Democrats have complained relentlessly that we aren't training Iraqis fast enough.

There was no word from Rep. Pelosi on how we can improve security, although Democrats have been blasting the president on the number of casualties for two years now.

There was no mention of how to improve our efforts in rebuilding infrastructure, in spite of Democrats' complaining that the Iraqi people are worse off now than under Saddam Hussein with respect to basic governmental services.

There was no plan put forth to help bring other world powers to the fight to join us, although Democrats have decried the president's "go-it-alone" policy.

No, none of these issues were addressed by Rep. Pelosi. There she was, presented with the perfect national forum, most likely being watched by people who watched the SOTU address--many of whom were Bush supporters--and with perhaps the best opportunity the Democrats will get to put forth their plan for victory in Iraq to the public, and she balked.

If you want to know why Democrats have always lost on the issue of defense and why they will always lose on that issue, now you've got it. Their plan for defense, their plan for warfighting, their plan for Iraq is this: criticize the president and hope our poll numbers go up.

It's Official

2006-01-31T14:06:00.000-05:00

Our entire government--that is, all three separate and coequal branches of our government--are ruled by one party. If you're a student of history, you'll know that this is a bad thing.

Don't get me wrong. The Supreme Court has made some heinous decisions during the era of Stephen Breyer and Sandra Day O'Connor, but I can't help but be afraid of a one-party government. It's a recipe for disaster. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I firmly believe in the old adage that "absolute power corrupts absolutely." As frightened as I am of Hillary Clinton being in office, I'm more frightened of a Republican-controlled House, Senate, Oval Office, and Supreme Court. And don't let the talking heads fool you: Sam Alito is a conservative in ideology. Their arguments about "strict constructionists" have nothing to do with how true Alito is to the original intent of the framers. It has everything to do with how much he tends to agree with them. "Them," of course, includes me. Whenever the highest court--or any court, for that matter--comes to a decision that contradicts a conservative viewpoint, that judge is branded an "activist" and is said to be "legislating from the bench." Take, for example, the Lawrence v. Texas decision. Republicans use this case as a prime example of "activist judges" who are acting as "unelected legislators." Well, try as I might, and in spite of my distaste for all things homosexual, I can't find anywhere in my Constitution a law that prohibits consensual sex between any two adults. Therefore, the decision was the right one. The government has no business telling two adults what they can or can't do in the privacy of their own bedroom. By the way, that goes for assisted suicide, too. (Oh, and for those of you who will use these words against me regarding the homosexual marriage issue, let me preempt you. Allowing consenting adults to have sex is a lot different from encouraging, promoting, and rewarding homosexuality by offering the government benefits that have traditionally been reserved for married couples.)

Regardless of your opinion on the Alito affirmation, you'd better get it in your head that one-party rule is bound to become corrupt one-party rule. This country needs a few Democrats in power, if for no other reason than to keep the Republicans honest.

Hell is Over

2006-01-19T16:58:00.000-05:00

I just finished reading a book by Mike Tucker called "Hell is Over: Voices of the Kurds After Saddam." This book should be required reading for anyone who thinks America has done nothing but evil in Iraq since our invasion. In it, you'll find firsthand accounts of actual torture endured by the Kurds at the hands of Saddam Hussein and his Mukhabarat, or secret police. You'll read about how the Kurdish peshmerga(underground army/resistance) battled Saddam Hussein for his entire reign, from 1968 to 2003. You'll find out how life has changed since Baghdad was taken by coalition forces on April 9, 2003.

Further, you'll see that some of the claims on the left that Bush has mismanaged the war may well be true. See, I find this author to be credible because the vast majority of the book contains nothing but praise for the invasion of Iraq and the freeing of the Kurds from Saddam's oppressive grip. But the epilogue goes on to demonstrate how the Kurds, who have been fighting Saddam and his feydayeen for over 30 years, were basically ignored by U.S. military commanders when they tried to offer advice. It's a failure that needs to be examined with an objective eye.

No one who has read this blog regularly can accuse me of being an anti-Bush partisan hack. On the contrary, most would accuse me of being a Bush Kool-Aid drinker. Well, when I read things written by people I consider to be credible, I believe them and seek to learn more.

This book is a good place to start that learning process, for me and for anyone else interested in discerning the truth. Give it a shot.

Let me also say that I don't believe mistakes made by the Bush administration mean it is a complete failure. Mistakes are made in combat; that's historical fact. What defines us isn't the mistakes we make, but how we react to them. Will we learn from them and avoid making the same mistakes in the future, or will we revel in our own superiority, refusing to acknowledge errors and face them? Time will tell.

Memory Lane: Sarge's First Real Post

2006-01-16T18:24:00.000-05:00

It was a year ago tomorrow that the Sarge made his first real post on this blog. It was technically my second post ever, but the first one was just a welcome/intro post. So in honor of Sarge's impending 1-year anniversary, I thought I'd reprint that MLK-day post. So here it is, in its entirety:

Greetings all. Today is the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial holiday. We celebrate the life of perhaps the greatest civil rights figure ever. As I ponder the life and work of Rev. King, I am struck by a few points of interest in his famous speech of 1963.

1. Rev. King referred to black Americans as "black" and "Negro." Negro, by the way, is derived from a foreign word that means "black." Imagine that. If you'll notice, Rev. King never once referred to his people as "African Americans." Know why? Because he wasn't African. He was an American, and he was proud of it. I'm reminded of the words of another great man in American history: Theodore Roosevelt. He said this:

"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all."

2. One of the most famous lines of Rev. King's speech was this:

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Yet here we are, 42 years later, and our civil rights "leaders" of today are still promoting using skin color as a factor in college admissions, job application processes, etc. How far we have come!

3. Rev. King mentioned God 5 times in his speech. Today, he would have been blasted as a "Jesus freak" or a religious fanatic. He would have been called a right-winger, for crying out loud! Imagine that!

I know, enough ranting for one day. I'm just disappointed that Rev. King's legacy is being marred by the likes of the "Reverends" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. They have made a mockery of King's legacy. In a speech today. Jesse Jackson turned a day of honoring a fallen hero (MLK) into a Bush-bashing speech. He talked about everything from the Iraq war to jobs. A short quote:

"You got the birthday. But do you have the legacy? The legacy is to fight for jobs, justice, health care, education and end to war."

No, Mr. Jackson. The legacy was about racial equality and nothing more. Get it straight. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s legacy had nothing to do with attacking a sitting president. It had everything to do with eliminating systemic, government-supported racial bigotry. And by the way, he succeeded. Congratulations to him.

Today, I'll remember Rev. King. And hopefully tomorrow I can forget Mr. Jackson.

Yep, even from day one, the Sarge was full of hard-hitting truth.

Stay tuned for more. And by the way, happy MLK day. I honor this brave man and the legacy he left behind. May we never forget him.

Time to Destroy Yellowstone National Park

2006-01-14T20:26:00.000-05:00

It looks like our evil country has been caught red-handed this time. We are obviously the most evil country in the world because of our high usage of fossil fuels, which in turn produces greenhouse gases and causes the earth to get hotter. (Of course, never mind that China's use of oil is growing at an alarming pace that dwarfs how fast our use is growing)

Now, however, we've been busted on another front. It seems that we have lots of plants, and plants produce greenhouse gases.

Now I'm just waiting to see how long it is before these KPPs (that's Kyoto Protocol Pimps) start badgering us to destroy some of our vegetation. I mean, obviously America's plants are worse than those of any other country. We must be stopped!

American Military Personnel Routinely Torture People

2006-01-13T16:18:00.000-05:00

Torture has been a buzz word for a while now, especially since the revelations of the happenings at Abu Ghraib.

Well, Sarge has uncovered the definitive truth on the issue, and sadly, our American military personnel are, in fact, guilty of torture. I have received, from a very reliable source, a first-hand account of some of the tactics employed by our Marines, to include:

--Forcing captives to maintain stress positions for extended periods of time.
--Exposing naked captives to water sources that alternate between freezing cold and scalding hot
--Forcing captives to stand, completely nude, in the presence of other captives for extended periods of time for the purpose of humiliation
--Using violent intimidation tactics of up to four Marines against one captive for the purpose of terrorizing the captive into submission
--Forcing captives to perform exhausting physical activities relentlessly for up to an hour at a time
--Psychological warfare tactics to include informing captives that their wives back home have left them and they will never see their families again
--Giving captives less than one proper meal per day for many days at a time
--Forcing captives to sleep in freezing cold conditions in holes dug into the ground for no more than 4 hours at a time for weeks at a time
--Threatening to kill captives
--Training fire truck water hoses on the faces of captives
--Leading captives on forced marches of over 40 miles in less than three days, resulting in mass dehydration, shin splints, stress fractures, and blisters the size of oranges

Yes, these brutal tactics have been employed by the few, the proud, Sarge can now confirm.

The obvious question is this: how can the Sarge confirm that U.S. Marines are using these tactics?

I can confirm it because I was one of the "captives" while stationed at Parris Island, South Carolina for Marine Corps recruit training. All of the tactics I have listed here are conditions that Marine recruits regularly endure during training exercises, yet the left would have you believe that these tactics are "torture."

Now pick up your jaw and stop calling my brothers "torturers." It's a lie.

Sarge's Idiot Wannabe Victim of the Day

2006-01-13T09:34:00.000-05:00

No, there won't be daily additions to this. I tried a weekly "Idiots" column and quickly got bored with it. So this will just come up as I come across stories like this one.

This guy's family is claiming that after he ducked a shrimp thrown at him by a chef in a Japanese restaurant, he required neck surgery. After the neck surgery, this unfortunate man died of complications, possibly infection. By the way, infection is a risk of every surgery, from cutting out ingrown toenails to heart transplants.

Regardless of how the man died, for this family to say that the hibachi chef caused his death by throwing a shrimp at him is, well, just retarded. I think this lawsuit is even more retarded than that idiot woman who spilled coffee in her lap and sued McDonald's, and she was a freakin' retard, man.

It just goes to show how far our society has evolved. We are a society of victims. Everybody wants to be a victim. Heck, I even catch myself getting caught up in it sometimes, although not at the level of idiocy these people are setting. No matter what happens to us, we want to find somebody to blame, and we want to become independently wealthy because of it. Somebody rear-ends you? Get yourself a neck brace and a good lawyer, and you'll be in that $250,000 home before the year ends. Choked on a bloomin' onion? Outback has loads of money, dude. Sue them because you are too stupid to chew your food, and you'll likely get a huge settlement. Dropped your hair dryer in the tub with you and got electrocuted? Your family is about to be rich because you are an idiot.

And finally, hurt your neck ducking a flying shrimp at a restaurant where flying shrimp is the norm? Die of a secondary infection caused by a surgery? It must be the restaurant's fault! Sue! Sue! Sue!!!!!!

Idiot.

Update: Mary J. Blige

2006-01-12T23:26:00.000-05:00

Not long after posting this, I came across a recent column by Larry Elder in which he also addressed Blige's comments. It's an interesting read, and you Texas football fans might enjoy it as well.

I can't believe I let this slip off my radar screen

2006-01-12T19:32:00.000-05:00

It has been nearly a month since I read this story concerning Mary J. Blige, and from the moment I read it, I knew I wanted to post about it. But somehow with the excitement of the Christmas season (or holiday season, for you "I hate Christians" people out there), I let it slip off my radar screen.

If you don't know who Mary J. Blige is, she is a huge recording artist with hit after hit after hit. Some of her biggest hits include "Family Affair", "Not gon cry", "No more drama", and "Love no limit."

Just as a further tidbit for you, in case you're not familiar with Mary and her work, Mary is a black woman. If you're one of these politically correct goons, that would make her an "African American," even though she, as is the case with most "African Americans" probably has never set foot on the continent of Africa and most likely can't even name 10 countries on the continent either.

I'm digressing. In the story I read back in December, Mary was being interviewed, and during the course of the interview, she made the following comment:

"The blacker you are, the worse it is for you. If you're mixed, you've got a shot. If you cater to what white America wants you to do and how they want you to look, you can survive. But if you want to be yourself, and try to do things that fit you, and your skin, nobody cares about that. At the end of the day, white America dominates and rules. And it's racist."

So Mary thinks the only way to have a chance in this country if you're black is to "cater to what white America wants," huh? Well let's just explore that a bit.

First, this black woman is an amazingly successful recording artist. In fact, if I can speculate a bit, I'd be willing to bet that when the interviewer asked, her bodyguard, personal servant, pool boy, gardener, and personal traveling chef declined comment on the "blacker you are, worse America is" issue. This woman has got it all.

But if she wants to say that she had it rough in the beginning, that's understandable. All I'm saying is this: let's be honest about why she had it rough. She dropped out of high school, she was a recreational drug user, and she went through a period of alcoholism in her life, too. This is what bothers me the most about those who claim racism is still in full effect today; the opportunity is there for every American, rich or poor, black or white, to get a free education and make something of himself. I know the schools in the inner city aren't as good as the richer suburban schools, but I refuse to believe that a student with the drive and motivation necessary just cannot get a good enough education to go on to college and make something of himself!

This world has always been unfair to the poor. It's just the way of nature. But in this country, more than any other, the poor are at least given a stepping stool to help them climb out of poverty and into a decent livelihood, but the stepping stool is only useful if people choose to use it. If they choose to devalue their education and drop out of high school, then yes, life is going to be hard. In fact, in this day and age, if you choose to ignore college, life isn't going to be exactly roses. Getting an education, getting a decent job, getting a bit of financial independence....these are difficult things that require enormous amounts of dedication and hard work. Did you get that? Hard work. Without it, you just can't expect to make it.

And that's my problem with Mary's statement. If I could, I'd like to offer a revision of her statement:

"The lazier you are, the worse it is for you. If you're sort of motivated, you've got a shot. If you cater to what employers in America want you to do and how they want you to look, you can survive. But if you want to be yourself, and try to do things that fit you, and your skin, nobody cares about that. At the end of the day, hard-working America dominates and rules. And it's not fair."

The American Health Care System

2006-01-11T23:57:00.000-05:00

This was a big issue in the 2004 presidential election. If you recall, John Kerry just loved talking about how under President Bush, millions of people lost their health care coverage.

The truth of the matter is that the American system of health care is fundamentally flawed. At least that's the claim in Tim Harford's book, The Undercover Economist.

This will undoubtedly be some extremely boring reading for some of you, but I've scanned in the whole of chapter 5 of this book and posted it on Alli's website at this location. It's 27 pages long, so it can get a bit tedious, but try to endure it, and you'll learn something.

If you have the time and the inclination, go read it, and then go buy the book. You won't believe the trickery being pulled by vendors right under your nose--even the supermarket!

Tuesday News Roundup

2006-01-10T17:12:00.000-05:00

Investigators have discovered books in libraries across the country that are bound in human skin. Apparently, the practice was relatively common many years ago, and some of the books have survived to tell the macabre tale today. In a related story, Senate Democrats have vowed to rebind the Constitution when they finish skinning Samuel Alito.

A 106-year-old woman has been found dead, along with her 30-year-old caretaker, in an apparent double suicide. Notes discovered with the bodies revealed that the two had decided to kill themselves together, but when the woman was unable to bring herself to do it, the young man "helped her." Police said it was very similar to how Ike Turner used to "help" Tina with her eye makeup.

A young girl in Turkey has contracted bird flu after kissing her infected chickens, proving once more that Turkey and chicken don't go together well.

Hundreds of Muslim worshippers in Turkey suffered injuries while sacrificing animals. It is being reported that over 1600 people were hospitalized for wounds received during the sacrifice ceremonies. Authorities haven't determined yet what caused all the people to be wounded, but a source inside Turkey's national police force, who refused to be identified, has stated that confusion among the worshippers may be to blame. Apparently, when told to sacrifice animals, they just started cutting each other without realizing that it was livestock they were supposed to kill.

The South Korean scientist known for his pioneering work in cloning has been exposed as a fraud. Research done by an academic panel from the Seoul National University found that the doctor, Hwang Woo-suk, fabricated the evidence of his claim to have cloned human embryos. Woo-suk plans to plead not guilty of fraud charges, and as evidence of human cloning, he plans to call to the stand Brittany Spears, Christina Aguillera, Jessica Simpson, Ashlee Simpson, Mandy Moore, Avril Lavigne, Vanessa Carlton, and Michelle Branch. Said Mr. Woo-suk, "If ever there was empirical evidence of human cloning, it's those dimwitted no-talent women."

The recipient of the world's first face transplant is said to be recovering nicely, and it is being reported that she is "very happy" with the results. Apparently the woman, who is being identified by her first name only, Isabelle, has gained an average of two points to an 8 on the Man Scale, up from her previous average score of 6.

You can't take the politician out of the man

2006-01-10T17:06:00.000-05:00

CNN is reporting today that Bill Clinton had a chance encounter with some American troops arriving home from serving overseas. While meeting and greeting the soldiers, the former President was quoted as saying, "Thank you for your service."

But the real story here is what Bill Clinton didn't say. He didn't repeat his previous assertions that the Iraq war was a big mistake or that it is a quagmire that we are unlikely to win.

No, Bill didn't tell the troops that. Which just goes to show that you can take the man out of politics, but you can't take the politician out of the man.

A "Wicked" Novella

2006-01-09T23:14:00.000-05:00

If you're into good horror stories, you need to check this out. It's the first draft of a great story written by Mister Hand of The Wicked Truth, and it's got me clicking the "refresh" button about 57 times a day (there's your overly subtle John Kerry reference for the day) to see if he's posted the next chapter. The final two chapters should be out tomorrow, the 10th, so if you aren't the type that can stand waiting, just hang on until the end is published, and you can read it all at once.

Let me reiterate the warning in the sidebar link: if you're easily offended, just don't click on this one. You might just stroke out.

No Honor Among Bloggers

2006-01-09T23:04:00.000-05:00

This guy promised to trade links with the Sarge about three weeks ago. As you can see, Sarge linked to him (Roseville Conservative). As of today, you still can't find the Sarge on his site. Maybe some of you would like to drop him a line and let him know how you feel about empty promises.

Okay, okay, let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt. He actually has more than 12 readers to his blog, so he might be a bit busier than I. Still, he needs a reminder. Who knows? Maybe that lucky 13th reader will link from RC.

Next--Harry Belafonte: Idiot Extraordinaire

2006-01-09T21:29:00.000-05:00

You didn't think I was going to let this one go, did you? Today Harry Belafonte showed us again why nobody takes him seriously (as if the song "Day-O" weren't enough). While visiting the ultra-socialist/communist dictator Hugo Chavez, he made the following comment:

"No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says, we're here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people ... support your revolution."

It's a toss-up, but I've got to say that Idioto Supremo Belafonte has risen above the level of retardation exhibited by Pat Robertson. This guy calls George Bush the greatest tyrant in the world? Has he ever heard of Kim Jong-il or Fidel Castro? He calls George Bush the greatest terrorist in the world? Has he ever heard of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or Osama bin Laden?

I will say this, though. If George Bush is, in fact, the greatest tyrant in the world, it's only because he has successfully removed the previous greatest tyrant in the world, Saddam Hussein. I don't care what this nutjob says. Let him travel to Iraq and stand at the edge of the mass graves (or these or these) filled with thousands of Iraqi bodies. Let him visit the chambers where actual torture took place during Saddam's reign. Let him stand in the dank rape rooms run by Saddam's sons. Let him talk to the Iraqi Olympic athletes who were ruthlessly beaten for their defeats(or for no reason at all.) Let him visit the Kurdish survivors of the chemical attacks perpetrated by Saddam Hussein. Let him visit, indeed, and then let him talk about tyrants and terrorists.

The level of rhetoric in this nation has sunken to a new low today, albeit not much lower than where Pat Robertson took it. And you can bet that there won't be a single word of condemnation from the left in this country. Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, "Chappaquiddick" Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, Jack Murtha....they're all quick to condemn the president. How quickly will their condemnation fall today?

Don't hold your breath.

Pat Robertson--Idiot Extraordinaire

2006-01-05T20:09:00.000-05:00

I realize that I'm about to really tick off most of the people who normally agree with me, and I'm probably about to startle and amaze those who consistently disagree with me. And that's okay with me. Sometimes, you just gotta say what's on your mind.

I'm sorry, but somebody with some common sense has got to call this idiot out. His latest blubbering is about Israeli Prime Minister Sharon. Pat thinks that Sharon's severe stroke is punishment from God for dividing up the promised land.

"You read the Bible, he says, 'This is my land.' And for any prime minister of Israel who decides he's going carve it up and give it away, God says, 'No. This is mine.'"

Yeah, and the Bible also says that the cattle on a thousand hills is God's. But you don't see cattle ranchers and butchers falling over dead, now do you?

Pat is doing nothing but perpetuating this image of God as the bullied schoolboy, waiting in the heavens with his lightning bolt for someone to tick him off. It's nothing short of idiocy, in my book.

So at risk of being struck down myself, let me just say this: Pat Robertson, just shut the hell up. It's people like you who give Christians a bad rap.

And that's why I was pulling for Texas

2006-01-05T00:40:00.000-05:00

I love football. American football. Screw that European crap. Give me hard hits, long passes, high-flying catches, and innovative endzone celebrations. And honestly, I don't care too much who's playing. I just love climbing into my oversized recliner and watching the action. That said, I guess it will come as no surprise that I was up tonight watching the biggest college football game of the year: USC vs. Texas in the National Championship Rose Bowl.

Man, what a game!

I've gotta tell you that I was biased against USC from the start for several reasons. 1: I don't like the idea of college dynasties. Unlike professional football, where the best college players go to the worst teams, college teams can recruit the best players from around the country, and the best players typically want to go to the best teams. A college football dynasty can become self-sustaining if it goes on too long. 2: Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush seem to have gotten just a little cocky, and if there's anything I hate, it's arrogance.

Tonight, after the big upset win by Texas, Matt Leinart was being interviewed. He talked about how disappointing it was to lose, but then he made the comment that reminded me why I was pulling so hard for Texas. He said, "I still think we're the better team; they just made the plays tonight."

You still think you're the better team? Well, let's see. You lost. That's one. And two, it was your second loss of the season. I don't care what those officials say; you lost the game against Notre Dame, and everybody who can even spell the word football knows that without Reggie Bush pushing you, you never would have made it into the endzone on that last play anyway. So technically, you lost that game twice.

Yeah, I've got a problem with arrogance.

Congrats to the Texas Longhorns. They played a great game, and they showed some of the most amazing resolve I've ever seen in a football game during that 4th quarter.

Now let's just hope somebody else wins it next year.

Dinosaurs' Love of SUVs Causes Their Extinction

2006-01-04T22:13:00.000-05:00

No, I have no idea how many millions of years ago dinosaurs roamed the earth. I don't care. That's not the point of this. A study released today has found that some 55 million years ago, a dramatic shift in global temperatures caused a massive change in ocean currents and affected climates all over the world for thousands of years.

Scientists don't know exactly what caused the change in temperature, but of course, they're blaming it on "greenhouse gases." From the article:

What unleashed the PETM is unclear. Most fingers of blame point to volcanic eruptions that disgorged gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, or coastal reservoirs of methane gas, sealed by icy soil, that were breached by warmer temperatures or receding seas.

In other words, "We have no idea why it did what it did, so we're going to suggest some causes that fall in line with our theories concerning today's rise in global temperature."

Well, it's fishy to me. It's also quite expository. If global warming occurred 55 million years ago--and if my assumption is correct that there were no SUVs, Mack trucks, or evil oil corporations back then--then how strange is it of scientists today to point the finger at human activity when placing blame for the temperature shift we're seeing now?

What's more, why is it that the polar ice caps on Mars are melting too? Are the alien life forms that we haven't found yet emitting too many greenhouse gases? Or is it possible that the rise in global temperatures is because the sun is getting hotter? I mean, how much sense would that make?

Look, I'm no scientist. But I do have a smidgen of common sense, and my common sense tells me this:

1. If the sun gets hotter, the earth gets hotter. Duh.

2. If the earth has undergone cyclical climate changes for millions of years (ice age, anyone?), then why are we so surprised that the climate is changing now, and why are we so intent on blaming it on evil rich people and their SUVs?

3. As an extension of #2, science has proven that there have been ice ages on earth. How do they explain the ice melting away? My uneducated, ignorant redneck self suggests that perhaps it was a natural climate cycle that caused all the ice to melt.

Before you ask....no, I don't have an SUV. My wife and I both drive cars that get over 30 mpg, so this thing isn't personal for me. All I'm saying is this: before you go out and torch your next SUV dealership, take a deep breath and do a little reading. We humans aren't as powerful as you might think.

Another Christmas Gone

2005-12-26T09:24:00.000-05:00

I just finished reading a profanity-laced post on The Wicked Truth that totally denounced the idea of Christmas. It truly astounded me that anyone could possibly feel that way about Christmas, so I thought I'd record a few of my thoughts on the matter here. It's my list of reasons why I love Christmas.

1. No work for two weeks. I mean, could it really be any better?
2. Beautifully decorated houses
3. Time to see family and friends who are too far away to visit during the year
4. Turkey, ham, Christmas cookies, and other foods that cause me to gain weight
5. Gifts. Not so much receiving them these days, but giving them. It's just fun.
6. The "Christmas Spirit", where people are just a little nicer than normal
7. Those ringing bells at malls and other places that signify people helping people
8. The light in the eyes of children when they hear the words "Santa Claus"
9. Kids who resist waking up at 7:30 a.m. for school voluntarily get up at 5:30 a.m.
10. Cool, crisp air
11. The feeling that you're about to get a fresh start
12. The American economy gets a huge boost.
13. Christmas Day football!
14. Christmas picture cards hanging from the doorways of my home
15. Using the "Naughty" and "Nice" lists to extort good behavior from kids

And finally...

16. The chance to make Mister Hand feel like a total Scrooge

Merry Christmas everybody! I hope you had a good one, and I hope your New Year brings success and happiness. Here's to 2006!

News Roundup

2005-12-22T06:15:00.000-05:00

Saddam Hussein stated yesterday that the Bush White House lied when it stated that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction.

"The White House lies once more," Hussein said. "The number-one liar in the world, they said in Iraq, there is chemicals, and there is a relation to terrorism, and they announced later we couldn't find any of that in Iraq."

In other news, a poll taken after Hussein's comments went public shows that 72% of New Yorkers would vote for Saddam if he ran for Senate.

In the House of Representatives, 109 Democrats voted "no" on a resolution that confirmed the House's commitment to winning the war in Iraq. When reached for comment, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was too busy cracking open a bottle of champagne to respond.

New York City transit workers enjoyed their second day off work as the strike continued today. A judge has issued a $1 million per day fine against the leaders of the local union because the strike violates New York state law. Union leaders had been pushing for extended benefits for their workers, to include upping their average number of sick days per year from 13 to 25 and increasing the salary discrepancy between them and other high school dropouts to 62%. As it stands now, the transit workers, most of whom never graduated high school, make about 47% more than the average high school dropout. Union officials have blamed the small wage gap on a "mythical budget crisis" they say has been created by New York state politicians for the purpose of putting more working-class people out in the cold. One union leader, who refused to be identified, said, "We are well are aware that the New York state money tree is in full bloom. All we're asking for is for a couple of its branches to be cut off and sent our way. The state's claim that money doesn't grow on trees is a partisan lie."

In other NYC news, a group of black leaders has characterized comments made by mayor Michael Bloomberg as racist. Bloomberg's use of the word "thuggish" was called into question by some who stated that it was directed at a mostly minority union.

"We resent the idea that you would characterize a predominantly black and Latino union as a bunch of thugs," said City Councilman Charles Barron.

Councilman Barron has recently been in the news as he presented a resolution to city council that would officially request that the country of Niger change its name to one more racially sensitive.

A U.S. Navy Lieutenant has begun a hunger strike in front of the White House to protest being fired over his use of the name of Jesus in his prayers. He claims that his personal faith is being systematically rejected by the military and his prayers are being censored. The U.S. Navy "Handbook for Praying" does, in fact, forbid use of the word "Jesus." Other words forbidden in Navy prayers: "God, Lord, pray, ask, please, we, I, protect, keep, bless, Bible, and the phrase 'your will be done'." Words not forbidden in Navy prayers include "Allah, Buddha, paradise, cheesecake and jelly doughnut."

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled today that group sex in clubs is not illegal. Said Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin in her 7-2 majority opinion, "Consensual conduct behind code-locked doors can hardly be supposed to jeopardize a society as vigorous and tolerant as Canadian society." The ruling overturns the conviction of a man who was found operating a "swingers" club in which adults had consensual group sex. As was the case after the 2004 U.S. presidential election, visits to Canada's primary immigration website increased approximately sixfold in the wake of this ruling.

Law, fulfilled

2005-12-14T09:38:00.000-05:00

The execution of Tookie Williams has caused people on both sides of the death penalty issue to draw their weapons. Those who oppose state-sponsored execution have claimed that Tookie redeemed himself while in prison and should be kept alive to further his noble causes. Those favoring the death penalty claimed that multiple courts had upheld his legally issued punishment, and therefore the punishment should be upheld.

Two issues draw my interest in this case.

One: why can't those who oppose the death penalty just say so? Instead of coming out with their true beliefs--which are that state-sponsored execution is wrong as an ideal--they hang their hats on "redemption." It's a farce. Tookie's "redemption" has nothing to do with the protests being held outside San Quentin. Anger that the death penalty is law did.

Two: Tookie's "redemption" itself.

When I went to Parris Island to go through three months of Marine Corps boot camp, I found that there were a lot of guys who suddenly became "religious." In fact, I was one of those who found religion during my time there. But the problem with it was this: it was false religion. It was something I was doing to try to prop myself up when I was faced with something difficult. As much as it pains me to say, it was nothing more than something I found to usher me through my own weakness.

I submit that the same has happened to Tookie. Through over 15 years of incarceration, he was far from the model prisoner. He picked fights, attacked guards, ordered stabbings, and was even implicated in sexual assault of other inmates. Yet as time wore on, and as his execution drew nearer and his appeals grew fewer, he suddenly began to "find religion." It's the same old story that I encountered in my own life on Parris Island.

Unfortunately for me and Tookie, this is a problem because what we found wasn't real.

I have often heard it said that the true test of a man's character is found in how he responds to adversity. Perhaps there exists another version of that statement. The true test of a man's character comes not in how "reformed" he can become when facing disaster or in how much "good" he can do when seeing his own end in sight. No, the true test of a man's character comes in how much good chooses to do when other choices are present and promising.

Tookie failed that test, and he failed it so badly that he doesn't get another shot. In this case, justice was served.

Will House Democrats Be Fact-Checked?

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

Tonight I came about as close to vomiting as I have since I had that flu bug a few weeks ago. I wasn't too sleepy, so I sat up watching C-Span (I know, I'm such a party animal) which was carrying a bash-bush-bonanza hosted by a few House Democrats. Throughout their lengthy diatribes, I heard so many lies that it was hard to keep up with them, but there was one lie they kept repeating that really bugged me.

If you want to criticize the war in Iraq, go ahead. Certainly it's debatable. Want to criticize the tax cuts? Go ahead. Economic policy has been debated for eons. Want to talk about No Child Left Behind? Okay. Certainly it has its good points and bad. But there's one thing we need to get straight. This economy is doing well. Unemployment is down to 5%. For those of you who get their news from the National Enquirer, the average unemployment rate for the past 35 years is 5.785%. On top of that, the economy added 215,000 new nonfarm jobs last month. It was on this point that Rep. Meek, a Florida Democrat, really got my blood boiling.

If you followed the election of 2004, you know that one of the Democrats' primary attacking points was the loss of jobs since President Bush took office. One of their favorite lines was, "This president has presided over the loss of the most jobs of any president since Herbert Hoover." Again, for those who spent their time in history class weaving friendship bracelets, Herbert Hoover was president at the onset of the Great Depression. By making this comparison, they're trying to imply that George Bush has been worse for the economy than the Great Depression.

Tonight, Kendrick Meek (pictured above) repeated that exact line. He stated that since 2001, we have lost more jobs than we did during the Great Depression. Well, I've got some numbers for Rep. Meek that he obviously has not seen.

From January 2001 to May 2003, we did indeed lose 2.627 million jobs. I won't bother defending that record because the lefties out there won't listen anyway. They have no comprehension of the effects of an impending recession coupled with the burst of the dotcom bubble and the worst terrorist attack this nation has ever seen. What I will say is this: since May 2003, we have added 4.462 million jobs, which means we have netted 1.835 million jobs during the term of George Bush. Further, taking the pace since May 2003, which has been steadily uphill, we are on pace to add a total of 7.48 million jobs before the end of President Bush's term. Certainly not as impressive as the 20+ million added during Clinton's eight years, but still not a bad number.

It just irks me that these elected officials, who are supposed to be among the best and brightest of us, don't bother checking facts before they spout off partisan talking points written by the likes of Howard Dean during a presidential campaign that is now well over a year old! The fact is, all economic indicators point to a very strong US economy in spite of the uninformed and ill-intentioned comments of Representative Meek.

If you wonder what's going on in the economy, check here. You can find some of the most commonly used economic indicators placed in convenient charts going all the way back to 1948. If you choose "More Formatting Options" and then select output type "text, comma delimited" it's quite easy to copy and paste the chart into Microsoft Excel and do some quick statistical analysis.

Perhaps Rep. Meek just hasn't learned how to use formulas on Excel yet.

Liberal Bias Never More Apparent

2005-12-06T14:33:00.000-05:00

If you even glance at a newspaper while you're buying your morning coffee, you saw the headline this morning. It was Howard Dean, the Deaniac, at it again. This time he's really gone off the deep end as he proclaimed that we cannot win in Iraq. This guy has become more than just the leader of the lunatic fringe of the Democratic Party. He has now become the mouthpiece of none other than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi himself. He is nothing more than the Tokyo Rose of this war. He is a traitor to America, and he ought to be tried on the appropriate charges. How can you possibly dispute that Howard Dean is giving aid and comfort to enemies of the United States?

I know what some of you leftist terrorist-sympathizers out there will say.

"Howard Dean is just engaging in political debate, a practice that is protected by the United States Constitution."

With all due respect, (which ain't much) give me a break. If Howard Dean really believes this war to be unwinnable, that is a conversation that needs to be held in private. It is not a debate for the front pages of the newspapers. There was a time in this country where people put the security of our troops ahead of partisan battles. Do you honestly believe that every Congressman in 1944 believed we ought to attack the Germans at Normandy and risk hundreds of thousands of American lives on a battle that we could not be certain we would win? Of course they didn't! Of course there were members of Congressional leadership who doubted or second-guessed the plan. But it wasn't broadcast like it is today. No, that was a day when the word "honor" meant something.

That day has passed. Today, Howard Dean would sacrifice the lives of our soldiers--and make no mistake; his comments will cost American lives--for the purpose of gaining a political advantage. He has sacrificed the lives of American soldiers for the purpose of attacking a president with whom he disagrees. He has cost American lives, and you won't see that reported on the front pages of the newspapers.

No, the news organizations will simply report his words as if they are fact. They will report his comments in a manner that elevates him to hero status for being "brave enough to speak the truth." And once again, the Deaniac will get a free pass from the media.

Hey, MoveOn.Org....time to move on

2005-11-30T23:49:00.000-05:00

The story was out today that moveon.org had tried to pull a fast one. As is often the case with these rabid anti-Bush groups, they didn't let the facts get in the way of a good attack on George Bush. In case you haven't seen the story, I'll sum it up:

Moveon ran a television ad that pictured some soldiers standing around a table getting turkey while the narrator said "150,000 US troops won't be home for Thanksgiving this year." Trouble was, the troops in the picture weren't Americans. They were British. Of course, moveon's statement is basically true; there are indeed close to 150,000 American soldiers, airmen, sailors, and Marines who weren't home for Thanksgiving, but that isn't the point. The point is that moveon couldn't even take the time to get real pictures of real American servicemen. They probably just googled "soldier iraq photo" and stuck the first one they found in the ad.

It's just typical of such an extreme organization to ignore the facts while attacking President Bush. This ad wasn't born out of love for American troops. It wasn't born out of a desire to see them home with their families. The truth is, these idiots at Moveon.org couldn't care less about our troops because they, on the whole, regard the armed forces with contempt. This ad had nothing to do with our soldiers and everything to do with anger over Clinton's impeachment and Florida 2000. It had nothing to do with seeing servicemen get home to their families on a special day and everything to do with hating Republicans, and more importantly, George Bush.

So here's a "holiday" (don't dare say Christmas, now) tip for you moveon morons: the Clinton impeachment failed, and it was nearly a decade ago. The 2000 election is over, and you will never be able to change it. In fact, the 2004 election is over, and you will never be able to change that, either. You lost your majority in both the House and Senate, and it will be a while before you regain it. So get a clue, get a real agenda (other than hatred), and move on already.

Anonymous Mercer "Parents" Way Off Base

2005-11-28T13:13:00.000-05:00

In a recent special edition of The Cluster, Mercer University's student newspaper, there was a letter to the editor signed simply "Baptist Parents." In the letter, these anonymous parents decried the Georgia Baptist Convention's decision to sever ties with Mercer.

In this lengthy diatribe, the parents cited several "facts," but as those with an agenda are often want to do, they omitted several other "facts" that didn't further their point. Some of the facts they included:

"The Mercer Triangle Symposium (MTS)--the flashpoint of the current controversy--was a student-founded and student-funded organization with the clearly-stated(sic) mission of encouraging dialogue on issues relating to sexual orientation."

Of course, the point of this "fact" is to prove that Mercer's administration did not support or encourage the MTS in any way. The problem here is that it was not the existence of the MTS that set off the Baptists. It was Mercer's hosting of an event sponsored by the MTS--a "coming out day"--that did it. Student organizations exist for every purpose and belief, but when an event like this one--that is so profoundly contrary to Baptist doctrine--is held on the campus of a so-called Baptist university, it makes those Baptists angry, and it makes them want to stop sending their money to the university.

"J. Robert White, the Executive Director of the Georgia Baptist Convention, has been at odds with Mercer President R. Kirby Godsey since at least 1996, when Godsey published a book White deemed outside the bounds of fundamentalist orthodoxy."

This "fact" is supposed to set up the point that this vote really had nothing to do with the MTS, but rather was the culmination of years of animosity between the GBC's Executive Director and the President of Mercer. What this "fact" excludes is that it was not White who brought the motion to sever ties with Mercer to the floor of the convention! Rather, it was a pastor from Tifton, Georgia named Fred Evers. Although it has become obvious in years past that there is no love lost between Godsey and White, this was not some personal attack on President Godsey. Instead, it was a motion brought by one of the convention's delegates. It was a motion that represented the feelings of Baptists throughout Georgia that Mercer was departing from its Baptist heritage.

"MTS voted to disband itself over twenty-four hours prior to the Georgia Baptist Convention's vote to sever ties with Mercer."

Again, the "parents" are trying to make a point here that the MTS wasn't the reason for the GBC's vote by stating that the MTS wasn't even in existence when the vote was held. This point is absolutely moot. By the time the MTS disbanded, the damage was done and the motion was on its way. Mercer had passed the threshold, and there was no going back. The MTS could have changed its name to "We Hate Fags" and every one of its members vowed to commit to heterosexuality, and the outcome would not have changed.

These anonymous "parents" went on to draw their conclusions. Among their conclusions were these two, which I find to be vastly errant:

"White, in attempting to exert control over the process to select Godsey's successor at Mercer, sought, found, and fed a controversy which he then manipulated to his own political gain."

This assertion is ludicrous. The controversy was not "sought" by White. Instead, it was fueled by Mercer's administration. What else could be expected? You can't start hosting "Coming Out Days" on the campus of a Baptist University and not expect some reprisal. What's more, White has not gained an ounce of political capital from this vote. The leaders of the GBC are not Washington politicians. They are deeply religious men who simply want what's right to be done. To suggest that White used this maneuver to gain political power is outright slander.

"White's objective is to move Mercer toward his and other fundamentalists' definition of orthodoxy by enflaming(sic) the constituency of the Georgia Baptist Convention to demand and gain control over Mercer's Trustees."

Here's a tip, "parents": when Baptists found, fund, and send their children to a university, they want the university to believe and teach what they believe. I'm tired of the word "fundamentalist" having a negative connotation. When you see the word "fundamentalist," replace it with "person who won't change his beliefs because they are unpopular or politically incorrect." In other words, replace it with "vertebrate." (For you slow ones out there, "vertebrate" means something that has a backbone.)

So get over this "fundamentalist" slur and realize that there are some people in this world who actually stand for their beliefs, and those people aren't going to send $3.5 million per year to an institution that holds positions contrary to their own. It's that simple.

Sarge Was Wrong

2005-11-18T13:10:00.000-05:00

In a previous post, I obliterated the argument that the war in Iraq has parallels to the Vietnam War. Turns out I was wrong.

I discovered today that there is one striking similarity between the two wars. That similarity has nothing to do with the battlefield, or the type of war we're fighting, or the type of enemy we face, or the mindset of the enemy we face. No, those things are all quite different.

The similarity between these two wars I discovered today is the attitudes of members of the US Federal Government. Yesterday, another weak-kneed Democrat called for the immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Nevermind the absolute chaos that would reign there in the vacuum of American leadership. Nevermind the possible civil war that would erupt. Nevermind the fact that insurgents would probably take over the entire country and not only exterminate those who supported the American-led government there, but also turn the nation into one big training camp for Islamic jihadists.

Nevermind all of those things. "Let's get out of there," said Representative John Murtha.

Murtha served 37 years in the United States Marine Corps, so it is with reluctance that I call him one of my brothers; however, in this case, he seems to have forgotten the Code of Conduct that gets pounded into our brains at recruit training. Article 2 states:

I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

Murtha's suggestion is nothing but a thinly disguised surrender.

I discovered the parallel with Vietnam while getting my daily dose of Boortz this morning. Neal quoted a Vietnamese general who was interviewed in 1990. I couldn't believe what Boortz was saying this general said, so I researched it myself and found it.

Here's what the good General had to say on Vietnamese tactics during the war:

"We were not strong enough to drive out half a million American troops, but that was not our aim. Our intention was to break the will of the American government to continue the war."

In the early 70s, we had Congressmen whose wills were broken by the Vietnamese. Today, history is beginning to repeat itself. Representative Murtha is probably just the first. There will be more. We, as the people of this country, have got to stand up and tell our Congressmen that "cut and run" is NOT the American way. It's the French way, and by God, we don't want to be French!

You want to see this war end badly? Pull our troops out now. You've never seen a jihadist hotbed like Iraq would become. It's time we got some backbone and started realizing that the media don't decide who's winning this war. Our soldiers decide, and if we'd start listening to them more than we do those idiots at CNN, maybe we'd get a little bit of truth. Problem is, these Democrats "can't handle the truth," as Colonel Jessep would say. They need this war to fail because their nemesis, George W. Bush, is at the helm. Hatred of him supersedes any desire to see our good men and women come home in one piece.

Take a second today and visit this website, where you can find John Murtha's contact information. Then take another second or two and drop him a note telling him that surrender isn't an option. Tell him you believe America can win this war. Tell him you're sick and tired of this cut-and-run mentality that has infested the Democratic party. And tell him that as long as these Democrats keep supporting such a policy, your vote will go Republican.

Larry Elder is on the money

2005-11-17T14:19:00.000-05:00

I came across this column by Larry Elder today. Excellent, excellent reading. I have personally researched some of this subject matter myself--albeit not as far into history as Mr. Elder--and I find it quite amazing how good a job the Democratic Party has done of presenting itself as the quintessential party of civil rights.

In truth, the party has historically been quite obstructionist on matters of race relations and civil rights. It wasn't until after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that Democrats started catching on. You might say they finally saw the light. The trouble is, they took the Republican vision of truly equal rights and distorted and perverted it into what amounts to reverse discrimination. They want to take what whites once did to blacks and reverse it. Instead of a good man not being hired simply because he is black, they want good men not to be hired simply because they are white. Instead of highly qualified college candidates being rejected because they are black, they want white candidates to be rejected. In short, Democrats have done to civil rights what Osama bin Laden has done to Islam. They have hijacked the movement and twisted it to fit their own ignoble purposes.

The fact that Republicans had to take the lead on civil rights in spite of Democratic efforts for over a century makes it ironic now that black America, as a whole, sees Republicans as racists and bigots. With a bit of insight, perhaps attitudes would shift. Yes, if there is a political party in America that wants to keep black Americans on the plantation, it's the Democratic Party. Why do I say that? I say it because people--as a rule of thumb--are servants to their creditors. Whoever it is that you owe something will become, in a sense, your master. Oh, not at first. At first it's completely innocent. It's a business relationship, an agreed upon contract between two parties. However, when people go into the debt of others to the point where a dependency emerges, then people have lost their freedom. They've been enslaved. Just ask those who are sinking in credit card debt right now. Their entire existence, their entire purpose for being, is to serve their creditors. A similar situation has evolved over the past 40 years in American politics. If black Americans started realizing that more government programs and handouts don't make them more free, but rather more captive, perhaps the support for the expansion of social programs in the black community would wane.

But before we can reach that point, we've got to get people to read this column by Larry Elder, so pass it on!

There is nothing in this world that works to improve an individual's life situation better than education.

Just being me

2005-11-17T12:39:00.000-05:00

A Blonde's Answer on a Geometry Test

In this case, blondes ARE more fun.

(To my blonde readers, let me say that I'm really, really sorry.)

It's not often that an email forward--even one that is intended to be funny--makes me laugh out loud. So it was quite a shock to me when I opened this particular forward and found myself chuckling. See, there aren't many people in the world who could appreciate this gag like I do.

If you ask most people who know me, they'll tell you that I'm just like my dad. Same voice, same corny sense of humor, same everything. But those who are closest to me also know that I am, most certainly, my mother's son when it comes to one subject: math.

Being a math nerd can be a blessing or a curse, depending on your state of mind. In grade school, and on through high school, when popularity and "coolness" were everything, it was an enormous social handicap. Nobody likes that kid who always raises his hand to answer questions in math class(me). Nobody likes that kid who actually enjoys word problems, or who brags to his fellow 3rd graders that he knows how to do derivatives, or who asks his 8th-grade Algebra teacher about synthetic division(me, me, and...me.) And certainly there is nobody who likes that kid who, instead of playing video games or watching Mtv, would rather spend two hours doing 26-digit multiplication to prove that the square root of two is, indeed, a rational number(yep, me....and it isn't, but 1.4142135623730950488016887 is quite a close approximation).

However, when you're 29 years old, and when you start to realize that perhaps your abilities can translate into a somewhat lucrative career in engineering, the ole "math nerd" nomer loses some of that sting. You begin to realize that people who call you a "math nerd" will most likely be working for you one day. The nerds--I mean people--who come to such a realization at an early age are the ones who wind up multibillionaires married to supermodels. That's right--Bill Gates. Oh, to have had his foresight!

Still, I can't say I'm not happy where I am. I'm an "older" college student now, and things have changed since high school. The ladies at school love me. Of course, it's because I can help them with things I understand, like integration by trig substitution or how to develop the nth degree Taylor polynomial for f(x), but that's beside the point. They LOVE me!

So in the end, I guess you could say I've finally reached the goal for which I so desperately strove in high school, and I've done it by just being me.

Can the War on Terrorism Be Won?

2005-11-16T13:19:00.000-05:00

A recent caller to Neal Boortz's radio show asserted that the war on terror was similar to the war on drugs and the war on poverty in that it can never truly be won. There will always be terrorists, he argued, so therefore the war could never be truly over. Boortz disagreed, saying that this was a war we certainly can win. His argument was that by planting democracies, the extreme hatred of America would decline because people would begin to understand what a life of freedom is.

Who was right? Well, both of them.

Historically, wars have been won when one side or the other surrendered. When Americans think of war, they think of American soldiers battling soldiers of another nation on battlefields, where each country is wearing a uniform and can easily be identified and defeated.

This war isn't so cut and dried. The enemy we face in the war on terror isn't a national army with uniforms and clearly defined leadership structures. Instead, we fight clandestine forces with soldiers who often don't look like soldiers. In fact, our enemy often bears a strong resemblance to the very people we are trying to liberate, and I don't mean just in facial features. I mean in the way they act and how they conduct their daily affairs. Our enemy today is a quiet shopper in a busy market. Our enemy today is that innocent-looking woman who boards a bus, presumably just to get to the market or some job. Our enemy today consists of men who might seem quite normal on one day, and on the next day they kidnap civilians on dangerous highways and sever their heads for national audiences. Yes, the enemy of today is much different than that of yesterday.

This enemy won't be won over by the planting of democracy. I'm not talking about the foot soldiers who have been recruited into the war because they are angry at our invasion of Iraq. I'm talking about the organizers, the leadership, the founding members of this jihadist movement. Their opinions, their ideals will never be swayed by a vision of freedom because it is freedom they hate most. In fact, our efforts to plant freedom in the middle east will actually cause these jihadists to fight harder to further their agendas. The very foundation of Islamic jihadism is a desire to see governments rule by Sharia law. The spread of freedom will only serve to galvanize their hatred of all things Western.

In this sense, we will never win this war because these fundamentalist jihadists will always bear ill will against freedom and the American way. They will never surrender. They will never accept defeat. And in that sense, they will never be fully defeated.

On the other hand, this war can be won by so isolating these evil murderers that they lose their capabilities to carry out attacks. The reason these men have been able to fulfill their goals of killing Americans is that they have enjoyed the support of national governments in the middle east. The most obvious example of such support was in Afghanistan with the Taliban. Other examples include Iran and Syria, where the governments don't openly harbor terrorists, but they certainly don't discourage terrorism either. They covertly support terrorist operations, they allow the training of terrorists in their countries, and they refuse to answer to international pressures to crack down on extremism. Iraq was another example of such a country, and our invasion of it is why it has become the central front in the war on terror. Perhaps the terrorists weren't teeming in Iraq before our invasion, but they flock there now because they recognize that we, America, are trying to eliminate one of their havens.

If we as a country--and indeed we, as a world community--can eliminate governmental support and harboring of terrorist groups, then we can indeed win the war on terror. A terrorist organization that is constantly in fugitive status cannot plan and carry out attacks. A terrorist organization that receives no funding from governments cannot fund attacks. A terrorist organization that is the disdain of the entire free world cannot be effective. In this sense, spreading our form of government--freedom, capitalism, and democratically elected governments--can lead us to victory in this war.

Newton's Third Law

2005-11-15T22:22:00.000-05:00

Newton's Third Law states:

"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

Sir Isaac was once again proven correct today. The action was Mercer University's hosting of a "Coming Out Day" for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered people. The reaction was the Georgia Baptist Convention voting to withdraw its financial support from Mercer.

That's about $3.5 million in scholarships each year that aspiring Mercer students won't be getting. That's nearly 160 full tuitions per year, and it's gone now because of a single action.

President Godsey released a statement today in which he condemned the action taken by the GBC. His statement included the following:

“Mercer represents the very best of Baptist higher education. The University is educating students to become better citizens, to discern more clearly the difference between truth and error, and to sharpen their capacity to make discriminating moral choices. This was what the founding fathers envisioned when they established Mercer, and this is what the University is today.”

Well, not quite.

If President Godsey is suggesting that Jesse Mercer would have permitted a "Coming Out Day" on the original campus of Mercer University in Penfield, Georgia, then I would suggest he is mistaken. Even had it not been called "Coming Out Day," and even had it been merely a meeting "to encourage open dialogue about homosexuality," as President Godsey put it, I believe it still would not have fallen in line with the expectations of Jesse Mercer. Can you imagine a Baptist from the early 19th century supporting a meeting "to encourage open dialogue about homosexuality"?

That's not to say that we, as a university, were wrong to allow this form of free speech. This is, after all, America, and the event was neither sponsored nor supported by the administration. However, you can't say that this event was in keeping with Jesse Mercer's vision of Baptist education.

It has become obvious, after reading the statement from President Godsey, that the administration of Mercer is seeking to rid itself of its image as closed-minded and staunchly conservative. If such is the case, however, then President Godsey should expect no less than to be abandoned by those who consider themselves to be staunchly conservative.

It's simple physics. Mercer acted, and the Georgia Baptist Convention reacted. Newton's Third Law in action.

So why are we all so surprised?

French Doing What They Do Best

2005-11-11T13:16:00.000-05:00

After two weeks of rioting in Paris and as many as 50 other cities in France, the people there have finally had enough. Today, a group of about 200 French gathered near the Eiffel Tower to protest the violence.

What was their form of protest? They staged a sit-in. Yes, I know it's only 200 people out of a country of many millions, but this protest is such a perfect illustration of French foreign policy that it needs to be highlighted. What do the French do when they don't like something? They sit down and do nothing. Their answer is always passivity, their policy always to relent.

Just consider the French government's response in the first days of the crisis. The first response was, "We must not be providing them with enough. That's why they're angry. Let's work on better social programs." Not a word in those first days about cracking down on violence and detaining and/or deporting these foreign-born thugs. Not a word about the rule of law. Not a word about standing up on principle. No, their answer in those first days was to give in to the violent demands of the rioters. It took them nearly a week to start taking some real, proactive measures to quell the violence, and by that time, the rioters had mostly taken control.

France's domestic policy in this instance was a true representation of its attitude toward international "thugs" as well. Got some Islamic dictator acting up? Let's try to talk to him. Let's try to work it out. Let's see if we can meet some of his demands, and then maybe he'll straighten up. They just don't understand that violent people can't understand anything but violence. They won't respond to logic because they are, by nature, illogical people. The only thing they understand is strength, and a nation that refuses to show strength will eventually be overrun by violence. The past 15 days in France have so proven.

America, on the other hand, has (almost) always had the mentality that ruthlessness and violence must be dealt with head on, and it must be dealt with quickly and efficiently if it is to be stopped. For twelve years, we watched the United Nations pass resolution after resolution after unheeded resolution against Saddam Hussein and his Iraq. And for twelve years, America restrained her mighty armies while Hussein played games with the UN inspectors.

Twelve years was enough. In fact, it was too much.

So now we are engaged in a battle, and you better believe it is a battle to the death for these Islamic extremist thugs. Will it be a battle to the death for us? Will we stand up and complete the mission at hand, or will we falter? Will we become weak as we watch the daily images of violence from a war-torn nation? Will we eventually choose to acquiesce? What will be the outcome of this bloody battle?

The outcome will be decided not just on the battlefields of sand. It will be decided in the hearts of every American. It will be decided by the media and its choices on how to report the news of the war. It will be decided by the angry, anti-war rhetoric from American political leaders that reaches the eyes and ears of a determined and emboldened enemy.

We will determine the outcome of this fight as much as the soldiers do, America.

On which side will you stand?

Happy Birthday, Marine Corps

2005-11-10T14:09:00.000-05:00

Find this and other Marine Corps graphics at Leatherneck.com

My Marine Corps turns 230 years old today, and today I salute all those Devil Dogs who are in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting. Come home safe, Marines. OOHRAH!!

Update: Kelo Decision

2005-11-10T13:54:00.000-05:00

If you read "New London, Washington DC" from October 8th, you know that I was more than a little upset with the 5-4 Kelo v. New London decision handed down by the US Supreme Court. In that post, I challenged you, my readers, to contact your congressmen (for all you liberal bedwetter politically correct fruitcakes out there, "congressmen" is a generic reference to both men and women who serve in the US Congress) and demand action.

I started my own personal campaign by writing my Senators, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss. Below is the text of the letter I sent:

Dear Senator Isakson:

I am writing you concerning what I consider to be one of the gravest, most important issues facing our country today. Like many of my fellow Americans and Georgians, I watched with no small amount of trepidation as the Supreme Court handed down its Kelo v. New London decision.

Sir, this decision has put in jeopardy one of our most prized national values—the concept of private property. It is one of the duties of government to protect the property rights of private citizens, and I firmly believe that the Kelo decision has severely limited the government’s power to carry out this duty.

Therefore, I write you today to urge you to take action on this issue. Your constituency demands action of you, sir, and the group of people who voted you into office—a group of which I am a member—are asking for you to take a stand in favor of private property rights in America.

We would like to see a push for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that would severely restrict the use of eminent domain. Support for such a movement is widespread and traverses political parties, races, and other differences among the people. Already, you have undoubtedly seen the outpouring of sentiment regarding the Kelo decision; you have further most likely witnessed local governments across the nation springing into action to counteract the decision. Sir, local action is something upon which we simply cannot depend. We require action at the federal level.

Such a movement is no small undertaking, to be sure, but I believe it is a worthy task. It is my understanding that you are involved in several noteworthy organizations such as the Immigration Reform Caucus and the National Guard and Reserve Components CMO. These are honorable organizations, but Senator, their importance pales in comparison to the importance of retaining our most sacred rights as Americans.

Please, sir, I urge you to take serious action regarding the Kelo decision. I await your response.

Well, I received my response. Both of my senators wrote me back to tell me that they were cosponsoring S. 1313, a bill that would prevent federal, state, or local governments from taking private property solely for the purpose of economic development.

It's time now for phase 2 of the plan. You can find a list of the 30 cosponsors of this bill here. If your Senator is on the list, write him (again, a generic reference) and say thanks. If he's not, write him and tell him he better get on that list, or your name won't be on his list of voters next time around. The only thing these bloodsucking politicians really care about is getting votes, so let's use that to our advantage and start demanding action!

Again, if you don't know who your politicians are, you can find out here.

Get moving, before some rich developer uses the government to force you to "get moving."

Appeasement policy fails

2005-11-08T14:03:00.000-05:00

If there has been a single vocal opponent of the Iraq war that has stood above the rest, it has been France's Jacques Chirac. Of course, it has become obvious in recent months why he was so opposed to the invasion of Iraq--France was making big bucks off illicit oil-for-food deals with the Hussein regime.

Still, with the American media all but ignoring that particular story, it has been the French who have become the face of the anti-war crowd globally. It has, in fact, been France's longstanding policy to appease. The bodies of American GIs on the beaches of Normandy weren't even cold before the French began building their disdain of the United States, and that sentiment has only grown in recent years, presumably because of the "disastrous" presidency of George W. Bush.

Well, about 12 days ago, we found out what happens when you try to appease Muslim terrorists. They attack you. See, Muslim extremists don't understand acquiescence. They understand nothing but strength, and the French haven't shown it. They've shown quite the opposite, in fact. They've demonstrated over the past few years that they refuse to take a stand for anything. So when those "young men of African descent" (read: "Muslims") were killed while trying to escape from police officers who weren't chasing them, it wasn't much of a surprise to the educated world that other Muslims started rioting. It was even less of a surprise when these "youth of African descent" (again, read "Muslims") declared that they were turning France into another Baghdad because those whose IQs are three digits long knew that this had nothing to do with unemployment and blighted neighborhoods. This was another front on the Islamic holy war against all things Western. Those two Muslim boys that got served medium-well were nothing but an excuse for other Muslims to launch the assault they had been dreaming of for years, and they quickly seized on it.

Now that the world sees what happens when you try to appease these people (as if it did not learn that lesson in the 11th century at the outset of the Crusades), will we see a shift in attitude? I can guarantee you two things: one, the American left will ignore the religious leanings of these "youth." They will refuse to admit that it is radical Islam that is causing these problems. Instead, they will blame unemployment and poverty, as if being poor is an excuse to burn thousands of vehicles and hundreds of buildings. They will then try to translate what is happening in France to the situation here in America and use it to escalate their dreams of a socialist government in which individual rights are eliminated in favor of big government.

And two, I can guarantee you that those who are weak on Islamic fundamentalism will continue to be weak. I know this because weakness is an inherent trait. It's not something you can work your way out of. No, weakness is something you just can't escape. And those who are weak (France, Germany, Spain, et al) on terrorism are going to see themselves increasingly become the targets of Muslim hatred and violence. Why? Because Muslims thrive on the weakness of their enemies. And with a diet like that, they can live happily off the French and Germans for many years to come.

The joys of fatherhood

2005-11-07T13:12:00.001-05:00

It was less than three years ago that I was determined I was going to talk my wife out of having children...ever. I had seen the snotty little noses, the juice-stained shirts, and the disgusting diapers. On top of that, I had seen the smart-aleck little brats in Wal-mart and other public places that should be reserved for real human beings. I had seen those angelic little faces turn demonic with the utterance of a single word from their parents--"No." Yes, I had seen it all, and I had decided it wasn't for me.

The only problem was that I hadn't spoken about it to my wife. She had married me, of course, with the assumption that one day I would give her children; yet here I was, completely repulsed by the idea that I should ever be responsible for one of those little rugrats. I was in a pickle for sure!

Then we took a trip to Memphis to meet my sister and her family. She has two children--a son, who was eight years old then, and a daughter who had just turned three. As we spent those five or six days in a Memphis hotel with them, and as I watched my wife play with our niece, I started to have a change of heart. "Maybe these kids aren't so bad after all," I started thinking. Yes, maybe, just maybe, I could handle this fatherhood thing.

Nearly two years have passed since that little episode, and I just cannot imagine life without my daughter. Yesterday at church, she somehow scratched her nose so badly that the workers felt compelled to call us out of services to come get her. When I arrived--with no idea why I had been summoned--I was told that she had scratched her nose with her fingernails. "No problem," I said. "She does that all the time."

"No, she doesn't do this all the time, I can assure you."

Sure enough, she had raked a piece of skin off of her nose probably three quarters of an inch long. Somewhere deep inside, a little piece of me began to hurt. I didn't know what was going on. I mean, as hard as it is for me to admit, I'm not a naturally sympathetic or caring person. So why was it so painful for this little baby to have a scratch on her nose?

I can't explain it in any other way: it's just part of being a daddy. It's part of seeing someone--someone for whom you would gladly step in front of a bus if the need arose--in pain. And in that instant, I realized that once you're a daddy, you can never go back.

You can never go back to the days where it's only about you. You can never go back to the days when you don't feel someone else's pain. You can never go back to the days when you cringed at the mere sight of a family sitting down next to you at a restaurant and setting that carseat up on the table. You can never go back to viewing all kids as spoiled brats and wondering which jail they're going to wind up in.

No, those days are over when you become a father. Replacing them are days where your heart can be broken by an 8-month old who wants her mother more than she wants you. Replacing those old days are days where your hobbies include singing along with your kid's musical toys and making funny faces in an effort to steal a single smile.

There was a song a few years ago called "Goodbye 20s, Hello Minivan." It was a great song for daddies like me, because it really put things in perspective. One of my favorite lines goes like this:

"Selling that 4x4 really hurt my pride,
but the cold hard fact was the lack of room inside.
So long to my younger days, I don't cruise for chicks no more.
Now it's luggage racks, and fruit juice packs, and an extra sliding door."

Yep, those younger days are gone. But they've been replaced by something greater, something more fulfilling, and something more heart-warming than "cruising for chicks." They've been replaced by the joys of fatherhood.

Democrats abandon the "Blue Dress Doctrine"

2005-10-31T12:56:00.000-05:00

Well, the indictment is in. Scooter Libby has been indicted on five separate counts, including perjury and obstruction of justice. And just what do you think is going to happen next? What do you think has, in fact, already happened? The Democrats in Congress are crying out with fury, demanding that the President and Vice President apologize for the actions of their aides. They are demanding the resignation of Karl Rove. Basically, they smell blood. Well, let's not rush to conclusions.

Let's talk about what Scooter Libby has been accused of doing wrong. Well, first let's talk about what he hasn't been accused of doing wrong. He hasn't been accused of outing a covert CIA operative. "Why?" you might ask. "Wasn't Valerie Plame a covert CIA operative?" The short answer is no. She worked at the CIA, yes, but she was no Jane Bond. She was a desk jockey, nothing more than a pencil pusher whose status was not classified. Even her neighbors knew she worked for the CIA! So the crime that was originally being investigated was never committed, and I tend to think that the CIA was well aware of that before they ever requested the investigation. But that's another post.

Now on to what Libby HAS been accused of. He has been accused of lying to a grand jury (perjury) and making false statements to the special prosecutor (obstruction.) If he's found guilty, then he should serve time. Simple. If he's found innocent, he should be returned to his job as Cheney's chief of staff. Simple. That's America: innocent until proven guilty.

What amazes me more than anything is the agony of the left, as if their hero, Bill Clinton, did not commit these exact crimes during his tenure as President. The left circled the wagons during the Lewinsky debacle, claiming that a lie about his personal life was no justification for impeachment. Notice the doctrine: if you lie, but it is an inconsequential lie, then it is not a crime.

Now let's see if the Blue Dress Doctrine holds true for Scooter Libby. He lied to cover up a crime that was never committed. It was, as deemed by the left in Clinton's case, an inconsequential lie. Therefore, it must not be a crime.

But no, this won't be the rallying cry of the Harry Reids and Ted Kennedys now as it was in the 90s. No, they'll be calling for a bloodletting such as we haven't seen since Watergate, and they won't rest until they get it.

Just one more thing: let's make sure that WE are holding Libby to the same standards as we tried to hold Bill Clinton. As of right now, he is innocent. If he is proven guilty, then we should also be incensed and demand that he serve his time.

Fair is fair.

Honoring Fallen Soldiers = Leftist Bias?

2005-10-26T09:41:00.000-04:00

The headline is blaring across the front of every major news outlet in the country:

2000th GI Dies In Iraq

There are those on the right in this country who are screaming bloody murder that this story is making headlines. "It's leftist bias," they say. "They're trying to smear George Bush," they say.

It's rare for me to disagree when people claim that a left-wing, anti-George Bush agenda is dominating the landscape of the national media. And to be sure, that could be the case here. But we can't just forget about our fallen soldiers, America.

The anger on the right is because they believe the 2000 dead make George Bush look bad. Well, I'd submit to those who share that sentiment that you need to do some deep soul-searching and decide if you truly support this war effort.

The only time war deaths make a president look bad are when the war is unpopular and when people believe the cause to be unworthy of sacrifice. Take a look at two wars this country fought in the last century: World War II and Vietnam.

People don't look down upon Presidents Roosevelt and Truman because 295,000 American soldiers died in WWII. Those presidents are elevated to near-hero status for their war efforts for two reasons: the cause was noble, and we won the war. To the masses, both of those conditions must be satisfied in order for the loss of life to have been worth it. (Those with keener insight understand otherwise.)

On the other hand, you have Vietnam, in which neither condition was met. We didn't win the war, and most people in America considered the cause to be unworthy. Because the conditions for worthwhile sacrifice were not met, President Johnson is villified for the 58,000+ deaths in that conflict.

If you think 2000 deaths in Iraq make President Bush look bad, it is because in your mind, one or both of the conditions for worthwhile sacrifice are not being met. As an extension of that statement, if you're angry that the media are reporting on the 2000 deaths, then you either don't support the war or you think we are losing it. If somewhere deep down, you become angry when Lou Dobbs does a segment about one of our fallen soldiers, then you either don't support the war or you think we are losing it. If you're enraged that photos of the returning coffins have been shown, then you either don't support the war or you think we are losing it.

America, don't forget about our men and women. This war is real, and if you truly support the war effort and if you believe we can win it, then there should be nothing wrong with honoring those who have died for it. It is, in fact, our duty, our divine responsibility to honor them.

Race Double Standard Clearly Displayed

2005-10-24T22:28:00.000-04:00

Many of you saw the story on Drudge Report today. There are two young girls, twins, who are White Nationalists. They have been raised to be white supremacists, and they have, since a young age, been making music with lyrics that express that racist sentiment. It should come as no surprise that the headline read like this:

Young Singers Spread Racist Hate

Yep, it's "racist hate," it is. Do you agree? Well, I suppose I do. But once again, racism is condemned in one direction and embraced and celebrated in the other. If you're white and you don't like black people, your music album gets headlines that blare "Racist Hate." If you're black and don't like white people, your album gets 5 stars out of 5.

"No way!" you might say. Well, consider this review of Dr. Dre's 1992 album "The Chronic, by Steven Huey of the All Music Guide:"

"With its stylish, sonically detailed production, Dr. Dre's 1992 solo debut The Chronic transformed the entire sound of West Coast rap. ... What's impressive is that Dre crafts tighter singles than his inspiration George Clinton -- he's just as effortlessly funky, and he has a better feel for a hook, a knack that improbably landed gangsta rap on the pop charts. But none of The Chronic's legions of imitators were as rich in personality, and that's due in large part to Dre's monumental discovery, Snoop Doggy Dogg. ... He sounds utterly unaffected by anything, no matter how extreme, which sets the tone for the album's misogyny, homophobia, and violence. The Rodney King riots are unequivocally celebrated, but the war wasn't just on the streets; Dre enlists his numerous guests in feuds with rivals and ex-bandmates. ... No matter how controversial, it remains one of the greatest and most influential hip-hop albums of all time. "

Did you notice how doting and proud Mr. Huey was of Dr. Dre and his album? It's "one of the greatest....albums of all time"? Well check out these lyrics from one of the songs on this "great" album, from a song entitled "The Day The Niggaz Took Over":

"Ya see when niggas get together they get mad cuz they can't fade us
Like my niggas from South Central, Los Angeles
They find that they couldn't handle us
Bloods, Crips on the same squad
with the SA's thumpin, nigga it's time ta rob and mob
(And break the white man off somthin lovely,
I don't love them so them can't love me)"

Or consider this little jewel, from the same song:

"Creepin with the quickness to the cut
Bust one to his head while he munches on that donut"

Lovely, isn't it, that a song about murdering a police officer is included on "one of the greatest albums of all time"?

Yes, when white Americans spread racist hate, it's called racist hate. When black Americans spread racist hate, it's called a "classic." Now let's see all those people who were so incensed about the "finding" versus "looting" photo captions from New Orleans. I'd love to see if they're equally angry about this obviously racist discrepancy. But rest assured they aren't.

Angry Afghans

2005-10-22T05:48:00.000-04:00

If you've been watching the news lately, you may have seen the beginnings of a new story about the evil American Army. This one promises to be the next "Abu Ghraib," not because there is anything especially sensational about the story, but because it falls right in line with the goals and aspirations of the American and international news media. Those goals, of course, are to paint George Bush and America in the worst possible light. (See my previous post, Shameless)

What happened, you ask? Well, a couple of Taliban "soldiers" (and I use the term loosely) were killed in a firefight with American soldiers. The locals refused to come pick up their bodies and bury them, presumably because they were not Afghans, but Pakistanis. The Americans couldn't give up their position, as it was an extremely important tactical location, and after a couple of days, the bodies began to rot and stink. So if you're a soldier, fighting a battle against the 2nd tier perpetrators of 9/11, and you've got a couple of dead Taliban on your hands, what do you do? Spend hours digging 6-foot deep graves with your E-tool? I don't think so.

They burned the bodies. And the headline?

Stench Prompted U.S. Troops to Burn Corpses
The desecration of Taliban dead prompts outrage in Afghanistan

Yes, those Afghans are angry, because bodies are only to be burned in hell, they say. Yes, those Afghans are angry, because the evil Americans have desecrated the dead. They're angry, and you know what? Maybe, if we step outside of our world and culture, we can understand why they're angry. What I can't understand is why I haven't seen these headlines:

Iraqi Insurgents Burn Corpses of American Contractors
The desecration of American dead prompts outrage in Afghanistan

Nearly 3000 Killed in 9/11 Attacks
Deaths of innocents prompt outrage in Afghanistan

19 Dead in Bombing of USS Cole
Cowardly attack prompts outrage in Afghanistan

241 Dead in Bombing of Marine Barracks
Unprovoked murder of Americans prompts outrage in Afghanistan

Daily Suicide Bombs in Jerusalem
Intentional self-burning of Muslims prompt outrage in Afghanistan

20 Dead in Bombing of Saudi's Khobar Towers
Bombing in Muslim-led nation prompts outrage in Afghanistan

258 Dead in Tanzania, Kenya Embassy Strikes
Outrage in Afghanistan as locals say the peaceful religion of Islam is being misrepresented

No, you'll never see those headlines, or any like them, and do you know why? Because Afghans aren't outraged at bodies being burned. They're outraged at Muslim bodies being burned. Keep that in mind the next time CAIR (The Counsel on American-Islamic Relations) is in the news saying how these "horrible crimes" are causing a strain on America's image abroad. And remember that the next time some peaceful Muslim walks into a bus station crowded with children and their mothers and pulls the rip cord on Allah's latest blessing.

Reader's Digest: "Three Strikes Laws--Minorities Hit Hardest"

2005-10-20T18:20:00.000-04:00

If you're like me, you absolutely love the day when the new Reader's Digest hits your mailbox. Since I was a kid, I've always enjoyed all the jokes, humorous stories, and other regular columns in the magazine such as "That's Outrageous!" and "Everyday Heroes." As I've gotten older, I've started taking more of an interest in the other sections of RD as well; you know, the "grown-up" parts like book sections and real-life articles.

This month's edition contains an article entitled "Petty Crime, Outrageous Punishment" in which the author, Carl Cannon, lays out his argument against so-called "Three-Strike" laws. If you're not familiar, these laws require mandatory minimum sentences for a person's third felony offense. Sounds like a great idea, doesn't it? I mean, if you're a repeat offender--especially if you're the perpetrator of violent crimes--you should be taken off the streets for a long time, if not for life, right?

Carl Cannon doesn't agree. Well, let me rephrase that. Carl doesn't agree with the law as it stands now, because as it stands now, there are certain non-violent offenses that fall under the category of crime that is subject to the three-strikes provision, such as burglary, drug offenses, and in some cases, petty theft. Carl's argument is that these non-violent, petty offenses should not be subject to the three-strikes laws. He cites cases where men have been convicted of stealing (without using a weapon) such things as video tapes and have been sentenced to 50 years or more. In that sense, I must agree with him. These three-strike laws are another example of what I refer to as a "social miss." They are laws, they are a program which is extremely well-intentioned but poorly executed. Other examples of social misses are the welfare system and social security.

There is a point, however, on which I must vehemently disagree with Mr. Cannon. On page 155 of the magazine, he asserts that "the law also falls hardest on minorities. African Americans [this is a misnomer: the correct term is 'black' americans, as the majority of the people to whom he is referring have never set foot in Africa, and probably can't even name 10 countries on the continent] are imprisoned under three-strikes at ten times the rate of whites, and Latinos at nearly double the white rate."

Mr. Cannon goes on to explain this gap by saying that drug convictions are the reason it exists. Basically, in his attempt to defend black Americans, he is typecasting them as drug users and insinuating that they should not be held responsible for their crimes. Well, that is where I part company with Mr. Cannon.

There are a lot of laws that I don't like. Speed limits, seat belt laws, and, believe it or not, most drug laws. I know: if you're a regular reader of mine, you'll no doubt be shocked to know that I don't support the so-called war on drugs, and it's not because I want to use them!

Still, because I don't like the law doesn't mean I get a free pass if I break it, does it? If I break the law, I will be punished under the law. The same laws govern people of every race, creed, and color, and it's high time we stopped trying to excuse the actions of a certain group of people because we have lowered our standard of expectation of them. If I were a black American, I would be insulted by Mr. Cannon's stereotype. I would be insulted at his assertion that the black race is full of drug addicts and abusers, and therefore cannot be saved unless the law is changed to permit their behavior.

As is so often the case, people who are trying to come to the aid of black Americans are actually just perpetuating the stereotypes by their rhetoric, and if we're ever going to get past our racist history, we're going to have to stop doing that!

The Idiots of Hump Day--Volume 2

2005-10-19T07:10:00.000-04:00

Idiot #1: Spike Lee

This story comes from last Thursday. "Filmmaker" Spike Lee (and one must use the term "film" loosely when talking about Lee's productions) declared that he will make a documentary about Hurricane Katrina and that his film will consider whether the response was deliberately slow. "I don't find it too far-fetched that they tried to displace all the black people out of New Orleans," he said. Well, Spike, I don't find it too far-fetched that you, like the other race pimps, are just looking to make a buck off the suffering of others. Besides that, the argument doesn't even make sense. Let's see....hundreds of thousands of guaranteed Democratic votes being intentionally sent to Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama, which are Republican strongholds? It's not the most intelligent political strategy. Oh well, never let the facts or common sense get in the way of good sensationalism.

Idiot #2: Ted Kennedy
(As a side note, Ted Kennedy is also the winner of the "Most Likely To Be A Common Entry In The Future" contest

Another quote from last Thursday, where Ted "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy was discussing his thoughts on the 2008 presidential election. He has decided he will once again back John Kerry, even if Hillary Clinton runs. In talking about the 2004 election, Kennedy referred to the American people when he let loose with this nugget of knuckle-headedness:

"Every day, I think they regret that John wasn't elected."

Ted, in the words of Robbie Hart, "...go ahead, have a few drinks and, you know, drive home."

Idiot #3: The Race Rioters of Toledo

On Saturday, a group of self-described Nazis held a protest march on the streets of Toledo. What were they protesting? Was it equal rights for black Americans? No. They were demonstrating against black gangs that they claimed were harassing white residents. So what happened? Black gangs came out and started harassing these white residents. That's right. Members of the "Crips" and "Bloods" came out and began to riot. It's part of the standard response of black thugs when something they don't like happens. It was the standard response in Watts in 1965, and it was the standard response in Los Angeles in 1992, and it was the standard response Saturday.
These thugs took to the streets and threw rocks at police and ambulances, they set fire to a local bar, they overturned vehicles, and they generally terrorized the community until over 100 of them were arrested and the crowd was dispersed. It appears these people were putting to use the words of dead rapper Tupac Shakur, who in his song "To Live and Die in L.A." spouted the following lyrics:

"We might fight amongst each other, but I promise you this: we'll burn this b**ch down, get us pissed."

Such a dignified response to adversity, don't you think? "Let's just burn our community down!"

Idiots.

Idiot #4: The Nazis of Toledo

What? You didn't really think these idiots were going to get a free pass, did you? Let's do the list:

1. They are Nazis, which is basically about white supremacy. They hate people
because of their skin color. That alone would land them in this list.
2. They planned a march that wound its way right through the black neighborhoods of
Toledo. What did they think was going to happen?

Idiot #5: People who play the Powerball

The Powerball Lottery went up to $340 million for today's drawing, and it's got people all a-flutter. (See the story)What astounds me more than anything is that ticket sales go up so much when it's $340 million as opposed to when it's mere chump change, like $80 million. It's like people who play the lottery don't see the point for $80 million, but $340 million? Sign me up!

I heard a long time ago that the lottery was punishment for those who fell asleep in math class. Neal Boortz calls it a tax on the stupid. I'm inclined to agree with both illustrations--especially the one proposed by Boortz. The lottery is a good thing if for one reason only: it is the only tool that can be used by the wealthy to even the tax scales, since lottery players are overwhelmingly poor. If you don't believe that, then ask yourself this: when was the last time you saw this headline:

"CEO of ______________ Corporation wins Powerball"

So thank your local Powerball Protege for ante-ing up his fair share (even though he probably won't understand what you're talking about), and then kindly hand him a book on probability. As for me, well, I'm going to count the money I made from the lottery revenues given me in the form of the Hope Scholarship. After all, I've got to pay the tuition to my math classes somehow, don't I?

The New Madonna

2005-10-17T14:47:00.000-04:00

Oh, the joys of youth. Back in the 80s, I rarely even noticed the artistic works of a young pop star named Madonna. I was too busy playing baseball and BB war for all that. But she was big. I mean big. Songs such as "Like a Virgin" (something she undoubtedly knew little about), "Like a Prayer" (ditto), "Material Girl," "Express Yourself," "Justify My Love," and others were all over the radio and the hearts of young America. Alas, it was a love affair that was doomed to fail.

Why? Because Madonna, like the people who wore those ridiculous rubber bracelets and leg warmers, had to grow up.

Well, it's official. The author of "Sex"--a book about...well, you know--is now preaching to the world that we better change our ways. Haven't seen the story? Here's the quote:

"[People] are going to go to hell, if they don't turn from their wicked behavior."

Well, let me be the first to say it: Madonna, Don't Preach. You've got a lot of years of over-the-top, cone-breasted, skimpy-outfit-wearing, sex-exploiting, on-screen-lesbian-kissing, religion-ridiculing acts to atone for, and until you've paid your dues...well, take my advice. It's the same advice I've got for Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Al Gore, Cindy Sheehan, and a host of others.

Do us all a favor and just shut the heck up.

Carol Lin: Iraq vote all about Bush

2005-10-16T22:11:00.000-04:00

CNN's Saturday night coverage of the special vote being held in Iraq began with this comment by anchor Carol Lin: (this is a paraphrase, as I did not write down the exact quote.)

"Iraqi voters went to the polls today to vote on the new constitution, with nothing less than George Bush's presidency hanging in the balance."

It is just astounding to me how slanted the news media have become. Across the sea, in a land where totalitarianism and dictatorship have been the order of the day for decades on end, an oppressed, embattled people went to the polls to determine if the constitution their elected officials had written would become law. At stake in this vote was the very future of an entire nation. At stake in this vote was the difference between a peaceful, democratic society and a violent, oppressive regime under the likes of Saddam Hussein. At stake in this vote were the futures of millions of Iraqi children. At stake in this vote were the very lives of those who have fought to make Iraq secure. At stake in this vote were the efforts of American, British, Australian, and other troops who have bled red blood into the sands of Iraq.

And in spite of these crucial elements of the vote in Iraq, Carol Lin has the audacity to say that the most important thing hanging in the balance--as Iraqis brave suicide bombers and mortar attacks to go to polling places--is the presidency of George Bush. It's just absolutely absurd. It is the most blatant slap in the face of Iraqis and the soldiers who have fought to liberate them that I have ever seen from a news anchor. To suggest that the legacy of George W. Bush is more important than the freedoms of an entire people is more than asinine--it is an insult to human decency itself, and it is symptomatic of a greater ill in American media today.

That greater ill is an insatiable desire to paint George Bush in a negative light. No matter the issue, be it domestic or foreign policy related, the news media in America--and indeed the entire world--are intent on casting George Bush in the mold of liar, bully, imperialist, and cheater. And no matter the story, there must be an anti-George Bush spin.

If we are to move forward as a nation, we must hold the media accountable, and to a large degree, we have already begun doing that. The so-called legacy news outlets--ABC, CBS, and NBC--have already begun a steady decline in viewership. CNN and MSNBC, the original cable news networks, are following suit. Fox News has dominated the news competitions for years now, but we must be careful. Slant is slant, no matter in which direction it is aimed. Hold all news agencies equally accountable, no matter which way they direct their bias, and we all win.

The Idiots of Hump Day--Volume 1

2005-10-12T18:42:00.000-04:00

The news was full of idiots today, and it caused me to think of a new column: The Idiots of Hump Day. I think I'll collect stories throughout the week each week about the idiots of the world, and on hump day each week, I'll bring them to you, my fine audience.

To kick this thing off right, I'm going to start Volume 1 with the Idioto-el-Supremo, Mr. Al Gore. Let's get right to some of the quotes attributed to him today in an AP article.

"[If I had been elected in 2000], We would not have invaded a country that didn't attack us."

Well, Mr. Gore, does that mean that you would not have invaded Afghanistan? The country of Afghanistan did not attack us. They harbored those who did and were state sponsors of terrorism, but they, as a nation, did not attack us. In fact, they were quite similar to Iraq. Oh sure, Iraq didn't directly harbor those who planned and executed the 9/11 attacks, but a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda has been proven, no matter what Howard Dean wants us to think.

"[If I had been elected in 2000], We would not have taken money from the working families and given it to the most wealthy families."

This is a classic Democratic strawman argument. Tax cuts for the rich (even if the tax cuts are ONLY for the rich, which they weren't) does not equate to taking money away from the so-called "working people." I also find it funny how the left in this country use that phrase, "working people" to refer to the poor, as if wealthy Americans don't work.

"[If I had been elected in 2000], We would not be routinely torturing people."

Torture? So putting panties on the head of a terrorist amounts to torture? So putting a terrorist on a leash amounts to torture? So forcing them to remain in "stress positions" for lengthy periods of time amounts to torture? Hey, Al, why don't you ask the former residents of the Hanoi Hilton what THEIR definition of torture is? Then, after talking to brave men who were actually tortured, you can lecture us on the subject.

This guy has just gone plain loco man!

Idiot #2: Louis J. Vogel

Have you heard about this guy? He goes to an Octoberfest celebration and uses his digital camera to snap sexually explicit photographs of unsuspecting women and children. Must've been pulling the modern version of the ole' Mirror-on-the-bottom-of-a-cane routine. What a schmuck.

Idiot #3: The entire cast and crew of moveon.org

I scanned the moveon.org "Action Forum" this afternoon, as I often do when I'm in need of a good laugh. In fact, I scanned the 500 latest posts. Among those 500 posts, the word "impeachment" was present 174 times. 174 times! Can you believe it? They are so rabidly angry about Clinton's impeachment that they just can't sit still until they get revenge. And of course, revenge comes only in one form: impeaching George Bush. It's the GOTCHA BACK! mentality. No, revenge just couldn't come in the form of nominating decent candidates and then getting them elected. It couldn't come in the form of trying to use the political process to move their agenda forward. It couldn't come in the form of convincing portions of the conservative base to see things their way. No, they can only get revenge if they "get us back" by impeaching George Bush. Well, Moveon.Org....it's just not going to happen, so quit wasting your breath and your bandwidth!

I guess that'll be all for today. See you next week, when I'll highlight the next round of bloomin' idiots. Of course, I'm always open to your submissions, so if you come across something truly idiotic, send me the link.

NOPD Victim: It's Not Racism

2005-10-11T14:28:00.000-04:00

If you saw the video of Robert Davis being beaten by New Orleans police department, you've probably been waiting for the charges of racism to surface. I mean, if white police officers are beating a black man, it must be because they hate black people, right? Rodney King set that precedent. He also set the precedent that reversed the "double jeopardy" portion of the 5th amendment (as well as our national policy of not negotiating with terrorists), but that's another post.

So today, more than a decade after the King incident, we have Mr. Robert Davis. He is accused by New Orleans police of being publicly drunk and resisting arrest, and they give him a good old-fashioned beat-down. I don't know what led up to the beating, so I can't say with any certainty whether or not the police had the right to do what they did. I don't know how he resisted, or what he was doing, or anything about that. All I can do is make a judgment based on the video I saw, and based on that short clip of video, it looked to me like the police officers were out of control and out of line.

Of course, the media just can't wait for Davis to claim racism, because that would incite another controversy that they could probably find a way to blame on President Bush, so that's the first question out of their grubby little mouths. Davis's response?

"I hold no animosity against anyone. I want to thank the new police chief for his quick action. I really do."

And regarding the issue of racism, Davis's lawyer says this:

"I know there is a big temptation to go there, but my client firmly believes that is not what is involved here."

I want to give Mr. Davis a huge round of applause and a kudos from the whole civilized world. In the age of race warlords like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, it's refreshing to know that there is somebody out there who gets it. What is "it"? "It" is that it's not always about race. Not everything bad that happens to black people is because they are black. Sometimes, life just sucks, no matter what color you are. In this case, it was probably a product of some miscommunication and some very stressed, emotionally depleted, overworked police officers.

Thank goodness for people like Mr. Davis. Now if we could just get the Jacksons and Sharptons of the world to shut the hell up, maybe we'd get somewhere. I suspect that will never happen. They'll probably have a loudspeaker made into their tombstones so they can complain that all their flowers are white.

But until then, we'll just have to revel in the small victories, such as the existence of the Robert Davises of the world.

America: the great role model

2005-10-10T11:06:00.000-04:00

For many years now--perhaps since her very birth--America has served as a role model for the rest of the world. We aren't perfect by any means, but we have set the very standard for human rights and equality. We have set the standard for true government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." We have set the standard for fair and free elections. We have set every major standard for a just society in the world today. As such, it is not surprising to note that America has been the country that other countries want to be. People don't get on boats and travel thousands of miles in subhuman conditions to land on the coast of China, now do they? (I heard a quote similar to that somewhere once.)

No, they come to America, because we are the land of opportunity; we are the country--indeed, we are the people--they want to be, whether they admit it or not.

So when I read this story on Drudge yesterday, I wasn't surprised. Let me give you the headline:

India Quake Survivors Complain of Slow Aid

It's amazing--and rather unfortunate--that we can now confirm that every part of our society is being mimicked by others! Not only our free elections, or our equal rights for all, or our representative government are being imitated. Now, our class of social whiney-butts is being imitated too!

Oh, the joys of being the role model for the world. Next thing you know, we're going to see Gay Days at Pakistani Disneyworld. I just hope they put those burqas to good use.

Terrorist earthquake

2005-10-08T22:20:00.000-04:00

You remember the quote. It was attributed to the director of the Kuwaiti Ministry of Endowments, whose name is Muhammad Yousef Al-Mlaifi. Here's what he said:

“The terrorist Katrina is a soldier of Allah. I opened the Koran and began to read in Surat Al-R’ad (‘The Thunder’ chapter), and stopped at these words (of Allah): ‘The disaster will keep striking the unbelievers for what they have done ...’”

Yes, according to Muhammad (such an original name), Hurricane Katrina was the work of Allah, who was punishing Americans for being "unbelievers."

Well, it looks like ole Allah is back at it. This time, it's a devastating earthquake in the heart of Muslimland, Pakistan. Yep, our buddy Allah is striking down those "unbelievers" in spectacular fashion these days. I mean, he smote over 50 times as many of those muslims over there as he did American unbelievers in Katrina. Amazing, isn't it, how the goodfella Allah works?

(A quick aside: Let me credit "Angels On My Side" of Free Republic for pointing out that the latest number of 18,000 dead may be the result of Ray Nagin's cousin working the earthquake. Quite an astute observation!)

So let me say it, for the record.

The earthquake in Pakistan is a soldier of Allah. The almighty Allah is striking down those who have reduced his religion to a stick of dynamite and a rip cord. He is striking down those who would shoot school children in the back as they flee. He is striking down those who would execute school teachers in their classrooms. He is striking down those who would commandeer airplanes and use them to murder innocent civilians in his name. He is striking down those who slit the throats of bound captives. He is striking down those who would carry out "honor killings" of defenseless women. He is striking down those who would abuse their women. He is striking down those who, in his name, carry out the most gruesome, heartless attacks in the history of mankind. Yes, he is striking them down by his soldier, the earthquake.

Allah Akbar, indeed.

New London, Washington DC

2005-10-08T19:42:00.000-04:00

The story has been on the back burner of the news agencies for several months now, but it's finally coming to a head. Let me give you the rundown:

The owners of the Washington Nationals want a new baseball stadium in Washington DC. They chose a spot where they wanted to put it, and they made offers to purchase the land from the people who currently own the 21 acres they want. Ten of these landowners never responded to the offers, and of the remaining 13 landowners, many rejected the offers. In a free-market, "ownership society", as George W. Bush puts it, that would have ended it, and the team's owners would have had to pick a new location. Not in the new America. Not in the post-Kelo America. No, the team's owners are simply going to use the police power of government to steal this land from its rightful owners through the use of eminent domain.

Oh, the owners will get "fair market value", but what is that? Can you put a pricetag on land you love? Here's another example: how much money would you accept in return for all of your photo albums? Are they simply worth the value of the albums and the price of photo processing? Of course not! And this land isn't simply worth the value of the land. It is private property with which these people do not want to part. But they're going to part with it, because the government is going to take it and give it to other private citizens simply because they can bring in more taxes with it.

Fresh off the heels of the Supreme Court's Kelo vs. New London decision, the private developers who want to steal land from its rightful owners in Washington DC and use the land to build a private sports structure have new confidence. The highest court in the land has given wealthy businessmen free reign to steal from honest landowners to further their own greedy causes. Any American worth his citizenship ought to be outraged, because the Kelo ruling was pure putrid garbage, a kick in the groin to our beloved belief in private property rights. Whose home will be next? Will it be yours? Who's to say Wal-mart doesn't step in and turn your back yard--I mean literally YOUR back yard, where you've played with your children for years, perhaps where you yourself grew up--into its latest 15-acre parking lot?

Folks, it's time for us as Americans to stand up against this threat. This threat is real, and it won't go away with a complacent population. It's time to take real action. I don't mean paying lip service to action; I mean TAKE ACTION, and NOW.

I'm going to help you. Here is a website where you can enter your 9-digit zip code and locate information about all of your state and federal officials. Here it is:

Project Vote Smart

If you don't know your 9-digit zip code, there is a link on this page where you can enter your address and get it. Then enter it in the search engine, and you'll get information about elected officials from your district that you probably didn't even know you had! It's a tremendous resource.

There are two actions you need to take.

First, contact your federal Senators and Representative and tell them you want a constitutional amendment that will severely restrict the government's power to use eminent domain.

Second, contact your state Senators and Representative and tell them you want a STATE constitutional amendment that will do the same. If we're to get anything done, we've got to attack this thing on all fronts.

It's time to get real about your involvement in the political process. I know, it seems like this faraway thing that doesn't affect you, but don't wait until some owner of some baseball team wants to tear down your beloved home and build a stadium. By then, it'll be too late.

Eminent Danger

2005-10-04T12:22:00.000-04:00

Who is that man?

This is another of the obviously photoshopped pictures I received from my mother in the email today. Like the photo of lady liberty, this one caused me to think of current events and our national politics. I know--I'm weird. How could a shark make me think of American politics? Truth be known, I could probably write about 1000 posts relating sharks to politicians, but I'll save that for later. This particular picture led me to one thought:

Who is that man? That man is the Republican party. And the shark? It's not other politicians--it's the American voting public. And the attack is eminent, if not inevitable.

Our Republican leadership has betrayed us on one of our most hallowed fronts: controlled spending and fiscal responsibility. The notion that "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" is absolute nonsense, and I truly believe the public is growing weary of the unrestrained spending of Republicans in Congress. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats in this arena right now is that Democrats will raise taxes to pay for their expenses, while Republicans just borrow the money. Neither party has demonstrated any fiscal restraint in the past 5 years. Why has it become so bad? Well, brace yourself. If you've read anything I've ever written, you know it's not often I take a position like the one I'm about to take.

The problem is single-party rule. It NEVER works. Check your history books. I don't care how much you separate powers and institute checks and balances into a political system. If the same party rules all the branches, it is always bad for common sense. I am still a firm believer in the adage that "absolute power corrupts absolutely." That's why I'm not so quick to acquit Tom Delay. It's entirely possible that he is corrupt!

I'll be honest with you. I don't want Hillary to win the presidency in 2008. But if the Republican Party retains its control of the House and the Senate, it may take somebody like Hillary to balance the scales.

Now pick your jaw up off the ground and think back to 1992. Bill Clinton wins the presidency and has a Democratic Congress. He starts going crazy with liberal spending schemes, and two years later, America votes in a Republican majority in Congress. A few short years later, we've got ourselves a balanced budget. It's amazing what can happen when the legislative and executive branches of the government are forced to compromise with one another. But what happens when they are both on the same side? Well, just check out our deficit right now and you'll see.

It's coming for the Republicans, alright. Like the man in the photo, they've had some success recently that has caused them to start taking their position for granted. And like the man in the photo, they have no idea what is about to hit them.

Shameless

2005-10-04T12:01:00.000-04:00

What does this remind you of?

I received this in the email today from my mother. As soon as I saw it, I had one thought: the mainstream media in America have reduced our national pride to this--a view up the dress of lady liberty. It occurs to me just how gleefully they report our national failures, from the response to Katrina to the daily deaths in Iraq.

No country is immune from mistakes and the ensuing embarrassment. The French and Germans had their ties to the UN Oil-For-Food scandal. Russia had its truck convoys crossing the Iraq-Syria border in the days before the launch of the Iraq war in 2003. China had its Tiananmen Square massacre. For our part, America has had her prisoner abuse (NOT "torture", as some have portrayed it) scandal at Abu Ghraib and her botched election of 2000. These things are embarrassing to Americans, but there was a time when we would have reported them and moved on.

Not today.

Today, our media love to replay these nationally embarrassing moments time and time again for the international audience. They love to spread the Abu Ghraib photos all over the screen for months at a time, but the photos of burned US contractors in Iraq get no more than a passing mention. They love to replay the footage of pollsters counting the "hanging chads" that resulted from our antiquated voting system, but the footage of those jumbo jets slamming into the World Trade Center has vanished into history, never to be shown again. And how many days out of the last 2 years have we not seen a report on military deaths in Iraq lead the news, while the good news from that vast country is somehow shuffled to the rear of the broadcast?

There has been much speculation in the past 10 years or so about "media bias"; it has come from Democrats and Republicans alike. They both think the media is biased against them. (I must say that I find it hard to believe the claims of Democrats when 80% of the media claim to be Democratic, according to a poll...but, whatever.)

Still, there is one aspect of our media that cannot be denied by either side of the political aisle. Our media love to revel in America's shortcomings. They love to see us humiliated. And they love that "money shot" right up ole' Lady Liberty's dress. It sells like nothing else.

The elusive breakout game

2005-10-03T18:43:00.000-04:00

I finally got to take to the golf course again today. It was my first game in over a month, so I went into my 9-hole round with about 25 golf balls. I figured that ought to last me through at least 7 of the holes, which isn't bad. I've got friends that go out and buy those $4.50 each golf balls--you know, those shiny, "Extra-Long", or "Extra Soft" golf balls with names you recognize, like Callaway, Nike, or Titleist. Personally, I prefer the knockoff versions, like "Galoway", "Nikke", or "Flymax". I've learned that these balls make the same distinctive sound as the expensive ones when they hit the surface of a pond.

Anyway, I took to the links today after a long hiatus. It wasn't quite what I had expected. It was a gorgeous day, which suckered me into a false sense of calm about what I was about to undertake, but it wound up being not that bad. I actually pulled off a 47 for 9 holes, and I ended with a net loss of ZERO golf balls. That's right--zero. Lost one ball on number 3, then found one on number 8. It was great exercise, too, because the owner of the ball I found was quite fast. I think my youth finally did him in, and he resigned to dropping a new Callaway in the middle of the 9th fairway, where I found his original shot. These showoffs who hit the fairways need to be taught a lesson occasionally anyway.

I'm digressing. I wanted to get to this concept of the "breakout game." We golfers (and I use the term loosely) who are shooting in the 90s and 100s always keep coming back, and some people often wonder why. Why would you persistently and purposefully put yourself in a situation where you know you're going to end the day in utter frustration? Why would you subject yourself to the abject humiliation that accompanies slicing ball after ball into the woods? It's a mystery for the ages, but I've solved it. Why do we do it? We do it because we always think that next game is going to be the "breakout." We think that all the hours of practice, all the buckets of range balls, all the 2-inch-deep divots, all the lost golf balls, all the thrown golf clubs, all the pieces of bark we've knocked off pine trees.....all these things are going to weave themselves into the perfect swing, repeated 72 or fewer times in one perfect, awe-inspiring, Tiger Woods-defeating day.

Sorry golfers are bound to the game by their own egos. Every blown shot has a reason. The lie was no good. The wind knocked it down. The club must be warped. I heard a dog bark during my backswing. A gnat burped in my eye. One excuse is as good as another because they all lend themselves to the same thing: an out for us. An escape from the torturous truth that perhaps we just don't have what it takes.

There was nothing more demoralizing for me than an interview with a professional golfer that I saw on television one day . The interviewer asked him, "How do you account for your success through the years?" The golfer, who had won tournament after tournament, stuck a pin in the proverbial bubble of my golfing aspirations when he said this:

"I was born with a natural rhythm, a natural feel for the golf club. Without that, I never would have broken 90."

Nothing about hours of practice. Nothing about lessons. Nothing about grueling 12-hour days on the driving range. Nothing about starting from square one and grinding out success. Oh no. It was "nature" that did it for him.

I hate this game.

But I'll be back.

The terrible truth about Sears

2005-10-01T11:14:00.000-04:00

Could she be any cuter?

We took my daughter to Sears yesterday to get some pictures taken. We're not into the $100-an-hour photographers, and Sears normally does a pretty good job, so off we went.

It didn't take long to realize that it was going to be a bad day. I don't know if you've ever tried to make a 6-month-old smile on command, but it ain't easy. Nevertheless, we were there, with our squeaky toys in hand, making grand fools of ourselves in our attempts to elicit a smile from our little angel.

Let me say, as an aside, that if they were to hide cameras in those photo studios when babies are being photographed, they could generate enough material to keep America's Funniest Home Videos in business until the second coming.

Anyway, we walk into Sears, and I recognize the manager, who was excellent with Alli last time. She's standing there with two other girls who have that "I'm new so don't expect much from me" look. But I was not afraid. Christal was there, so no need to fear. That's when things took a downward turn. While the "oh my gosh, why'd I put white-out on my computer screen" girls had me distracted, Christal slipped out. We had officially been fed to the wolves.

For once, a couple of young people working in a business lived up to my expectations. They were, indeed, terrible. They seemed to be waiting for that perfect shot--you know, the one that would land Alli a multimillion dollar modeling gig. They missed about 90% of the smiles Alli gave them because they were too busy playing with the toys that were there to distract and amuse Alli! (It turns out these toys can distract and amuse kids of all ages.)

Regardless, as you can see above, we did manage to get a few great shots of Alli. We actually left the store happy. Well, let me rephrase. We were happy when we left the store. But now we've got a few great pictures of our precious, and I love nothing more than putting them out there for the world to see. Who knows? Maybe that modeling gig isn't so far away after all.

And while I'm on a roll today...

2005-09-30T13:27:00.000-04:00

Let me talk a little bit about Tom Delay. If he's found guilty, I say throw him under the jail where crooked politicians belong. The truth will come out in the trial. But let me say this: the prosecutor, Ronnie Earle, has severly compromised his integrity in the investigation by granting "extraordinary access" to film crews. It's just downright asinine. He has positioned himself for criticism of what appears to be a partisan politican attack. How else can we describe his decision to allow film crews in? He wanted to use this "investigation" to paint Tom Delay, and by association, all Republicans, in a negative light. Only from the American left could we see such a low. I mean, you didn't see Republicans hiring film crews to record the investigation of Ted Kennedy when that young girl drowned in four feet of water in the back of Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick, did you? Of course not. It was an official investigation, and it wasn't subject to Hollywood's rendering. Times have changed a bit.

Then there's John Roberts. Whew! What a battle! Not. John Roberts had their number from the get-go, and they knew it. That's why 22 Democrats joined the Republicans and the one independent Senator in voting to confirm him. Next go-around? It doesn't matter who Bush nominates; the left will paint him/her as a right-wing fundamentalist extremist who wants to institute a Christian Theocracy and do away with Halloween. It's going to be so entertaining.

Speaking of Halloween, where has Michael Jackson been lately?

Okay, I gotta run, for real. This gig doesn't pay well. Peace.