Friday, December 30, 2005

Quick and Dirty IQ test

My score:

Your IQ Is 140

Your Logical Intelligence is Below Average

Your Verbal Intelligence is Genius

Your Mathematical Intelligence is Genius

Your General Knowledge is Genius


I'm sure no one will be surpised by the scores, especially the first one. My question, though, is where it gets the first one. Maybe since I see that I got the right answer on all of them, that indicates another problem.

Ideas?

Idiot

What kind of moron, when packing for an airline trip, fills condoms with flour as a joke? Surely any reasonable person would immediately think about drug trafficing. I think probably cause was given just because of the packaging.

She says it was a joke, but it wasn't very funny. I think she should get crap.

Nuttiness at Lean Left

Read one of the comments. That guy really needs some help, or drugs, or both.

Blacks and racism

I see a lot of logic in this. I've long considered a vast amount of the racism claims to be excuses for poor personal performance.

My political profile










Your Political Profile



Overall: 85% Conservative, 15% Liberal

Social Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

Personal Responsibility: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

Ethics: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

Defense and Crime: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal


Odd.

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Light day for me

Blogging will be light today. I had a good, if frustrating, discussing at SayUncle yesterday regarding why Bush didn't break the law when he ordered the NSA wiretaps. In short, court precedent supports the president's claim. Court precedents are apparently too hard to understand for some on the left. SayUncle, always the vigilant defender of our God-given rights, is erring on the side of limited government. While I support his stand in that sense, I don't support his notion that Bush has stepped in it. Legally, there is nothing that prevents Bush from doing what he did. FISA has been since determined, by court decision, to still allow for the President to ask for wiretaps as part of his Commander in Chief role to gather foreign intelligence. That is what he did.

There's more detail to the issue than just that, but I don't feel like going into it.

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

FISA vs. the Constitution

Bush didn't lie

Would our Wall Street do this?

So, they trade with bombs dropping and people getting killed. Raise a rumor about poultry measles a world away, and ours huddles in fear...

Time to make the donuts...

I stopped by Dunkin Donuts this morning and got a couple to honor this pioneer of work ethic.

How many of us watched those commercials. The commercials were funny way to show that work ethic is important. This character got up at all hours, sometimes even passing himself in the doorway, to do his job. I know it is silly, but when I was getting up at unearthly hours to stand watch, study, or go exercise, it was a rallying cry for me of sorts. Now, I just eat a lot of donuts.

AP: DHS Failures?

Some highlights:


The Homeland Security Department officially opened its doors in March 2003. It was created in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to bolster protections of potential domestic targets.

Since then, according to the report, the department has failed to:

-Compile a single, comprehensive list prioritizing protections for the nation's most critical and potentially vulnerable buildings, transportation systems and other infrastructure.
-Install monitors at borders and every international seaport and airport to screen for radiation material entering the country.
-Install surveillance cameras at all high-risk chemical plants.
-Create one effective network to share quickly security-related intelligence and alerts with state, local and private industry officials.
-Track international visitors through a computerized system that takes their fingerprints and photographs as they enter and exit the country.



One by one now:

1. Single and comprehensive? Not going to happen. Threats change, risks change, exposure changes, the players change, the priority changes. From a risk management standpoint, one single, comprehensive list is a blue-print to failure. They need to be mobile and responsive, but with a firm procedure in place for periodic review of threats, exposure, agents, etc.

2. Good luck with that one. I don't see that as very feasible.

3. Could be done, and should be done.

4. I hear there are some frequency issues with the radio aspect of this. I also hear that the reason the DHS can't get the frequencies is because of the MSM lobby.

5. Wait! The Dems just got upset because the Bush Administration did a little poking and prodding of the foreign nationals already. What makes the Dems think they'll like this tactic any better? Oh, wait! I understand. It is a play, a trap. They get Bush onboard with this, then try to impeach him on an unreasonable search and seizure, or on privacy issues. Pretty clever!

Once the Dems realize that these measures will put the safety and welfare of citizens above that of the foreign aggressors, they'll back off. After all, no one deserves rights more than the criminals; certainly not the victims or intended victims.

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Christmas

I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas. The Mrs. and I just passed a milestone: our last sane Christmas. Next year, we'll have a little bundle to make things crazy.

This year was a giant, aggravating mess. A couple of undisciplined kids (as in, not disciplined by their parents!) made the holidays a headache. Next year, the Mrs. and I are considering being a little more formal. As it is now, we have a short Christmas at home, then head to her parents for breakfast and to watch our niece and nephew have their Santa experience. The niece and nephew have Santa at the in-laws primarily because she pays for it, and partly because she has a chimney. That could make our Christmas a little rough in the following years as V2.0 begins to understand that Santa visits Grandma's for her cousins.

To combat this, the Mrs. and I are considering making Christmas morning our family time, while allowing the niece and nephew to get Santa over with, and clean up the mess. This will provide a less hectic event for all involved if we don't try to cram the family Christmas in with a partial Santa experience.

The BattleAxe will not like this. I suspect that the Old Man won't either, but he'll be more reasonable. The BattleAxe will probably raise a stink.

So, here's my plan: depending on when the good sister-in-law (different brother of the Mrs.) and her family have Christmas (lunch or supper), I think I'll plan some Christmas fun with my 'rents, then we will all meet at the BattleAxe's house for the Mrs.'s family. Next year, the good brother and the good sister-in-law will have a bundle of their own, so it will be doubly important to reduce the insanity.

How have you all dealt with it? How do you deal with incapable parents, crazy kids, infants, and the general Christmas insanity? Any tips will be appreciated.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

A way to end terrorism

If we cancel the Patriot Act, will the Terrorists quit?

Christmas insanity

Someone tell me where the government (local, state, or federal) get the authority to make these kind of decisions? No part of the Constitution gives them the ability to prohibit the free exercise of religion, so where do they get the chutzpah?

Should I sue Mattel?

I'm a victim of G. I. Joe!!

Death penalty and the 10 Commandments

So, I'm reading the Federalist Newsletter, and I see this:


"No passage in the Bible -—Old or New Testament- —disapproves of the death penalty... The penalty for those who violate 'You shall not murder' (Exodus 20:13) is made explicit just a few lines later: 'Whoever strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death' (Exodus 21:12). The text goes on to specify that this applies only to deliberate murder, not unintentional killing. Accidents are not capital crimes. But for a willful killer, there can be no sanctuary: 'Take him even from My altar and put him death' (Exodus 21:14). Similar declarations appear in all five books of Moses, nowhere more dramatically or universally than in Genesis. Speaking to Noah after the Flood, God enjoins him -and through him, all of human society- —to affirm the sanctity of human life by making murderers pay the ultimate price for their crime. 'Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has man been made' (Genesis 9:6)... Scripture could hardly be more explicit... When murderers keep their lives, human blood is cheapened. That is why reverence for life and capital punishment belong to the same ethical tradition. Civilized communities have not only the right but the responsibility to execute murderers. It may be a difficult responsibility to carry out. It may involve an assertion of moral authority that modern thinkers condemn. But easy or not, popular or not, the duty is ours to perform. The protection of human life is a grave obligation -never more so than when it involves taking a life away." -—Jeff Jacoby


When Jesus came upon a mob trying to stone an adulteress, he said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Is that forgiveness? If so, are we still required to kill murderers? How far do we take Jesus's example of forgiveness?

Oh, and for moderate_christian and fuzzy_beaver, look closer at Mr. Jacoby's more accurate translation of Exodus 20:13.

LaShawn Barber tells it like it is

The Darker Side of Christmas

Merry Christmas from Bob corker

I just got a nice "Merry Christmas" email from Bob Corker. I went to his website. He is running for the Senate seat Dr. Spineless is leaving.

He appears to be conservative. Some information:

  1. Self-made man, started his own construction business and made it successful

  2. Appears to like low taxes

  3. Appears to support free religion

  4. Appears to be a 2nd Amendment fan:

    As Senator, I will protect the Second Amendment’s guarantee of our right to bear arms and reject attempts to limit the freedom of law-abiding gun owners. The best way to stop crime is to capture and imprison criminals—not to impose new burdens on law-abiding citizens. During my tenure as Mayor of Chattanooga, we cut violent crime in half in 3 years by putting repeat criminals behind bars.



If any of you know Mr. Corker, I'd like to ask the following questions:


  1. What is should be the major goal of the federal government: abiding by the limited powers defined in the Constitution, or avoiding violating the protections detailed in the Bill of Rights?

  2. Is the Department of Education, CMS, Welfare, and the "Bridge to Nowhere" constitutional? Explain what you think makes them constitutional.

  3. Should a TSA screener pay more attention to someone matching the profile of almost every other attempted or successful terrorist, or is that wrong?

  4. Should we let the UN take over the Internet?

  5. Should abortion (other than emergency or health-related situations) be legal?

  6. Do you believe we are winning in Iraq?

  7. Have you read, and do you understand, the Federalist Papers?

Honey, can I have one of these?

Evolution vs. evolution

'Triple H' has another good discussion today with what I consider a typical liberal debater. This guy will not let anyone else speak.

My reasoning against Evolution (with a big E) is that we have no evidence that new genetic information has evolved. Sure, if I marry a short woman, and my children marry shorter women, etc, then my offspring have a chance to be smaller. But there is a difference between the selection of traits (or genetic choices) and the creation of new genetic traits (new genetic choices).

'evolution' (with a small e) is really just a change because of choices/adaptation to external forces. 'Evolution' is a mutation large enough and repeated enough to cause a change in a species. We have no evidence this has ever happened. We have the Monkey-to-Man picture, but we have no evidence this ever occurred.

Any thoughts?

Seriously, put them in jail and throw away the key

All of us in the private sector should consider something. If we demanded that our boss pay all of our retirement, let us retire at 55, and give us a 24% pay raise over the next 3 years, we'd be laughed out of the building. Why do these nitwits, who make more than any other untrained, uneducated profession in the area, believe they can hold NY hostage? Because the city lets them. If Bloomberg would fire the bunch of criminals, we could hire monkeys to do the work. The monkeys would be less like to throw poo...

Those whacky leftists!

For those interested in where AQ in Iraq is heading next...

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

From Derb on the Corner

From John Derbyshire on The Corner. I snorted. I honestly snorted.


***PSYCHIATRISTS' CHRISTMAS CAROLS FOR EVERY DIAGNOSIS

Schizoprenia --- Do You Hear What I Hear?

Multiple Personality Disorder --- We Three Queens Disoriented Are

Dementia --- I Think I'll Be Home For Christmas

Narcissistic --- Hark The Herald Angels Sing About Me

Manic --- Deck The Hall and Walls and House and Lawn and Streets and Stores and Office and Town and Cars and Buses and Trucks and Trees and Fire Hydrants and.........

Paranoid --- Santa Claus Is Coming To Get Me

Borderline Personality Disorder --- Thoughts Of Roasting On An Open Fire

Personality Disorder --- You Better Watch Out, I'm Gonna Cry, I'm Gonna Pout, Maybe I'll Tell You Why

Obessive Complusive Disorder --- Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells

ADHD -- Hark the herald angels sing ba-rum-pa-pum-pum in the little town of Bethlehem up on the housetop in a winter wonderland one foggy Christmas Eve hey how bout them Bears no I don't want to switch to Sprint but thank you for shopping at K-Mart.

Maybe Ann Coulter will stop sending me those coded messages, too!

Who knows? If this lady wins, maybe I can get a restraining order to prevent Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin from mentally throwing themselves at me every time I visit their website.

I mean, honestly! Look at Michelle's picture on her blog and tell me that she isn't saying, "Come on, JJ! Be my guest blogger!"

The nerve of some people!

Jonah Goldberg is on to something

From The Corner on National Review (Jonah Goldberg):


Every year I introduce this thought into the Corner and it always stirs the yuletide pot nicely.

You know those Kay Jewellers commercials? The tagline is: "Every Kiss Begins with Kay."

So, once again: If every kiss begins with a diamond or other bauble from Kay, then you're either dating, or married to, a whore.


Which fits my view of all of those diamond commercials:

A man yells at the top of his lungs that he loves the woman he's with, and she glances around embarrassed. She doesn't want to return the sentiment. When he whips out a diamond, she'll grudgingly whisper that she loves him, but not loud enough to be heard by anyone.

A man expresses his desire to marry his wife all over again, and she's not impressed. When he whips out the diamond, then she's impressed.

It isn't about love. It's about bling! Luckily, I got one of those rare, wonderful women most men only dream about...

Yet more Bush and NSA

Shouldn't she be happy?

The she-clinton is getting more abortions. She should be dancing in the streets. More babies will die without a chance to enjoy basic rights.

For those with liberal family members (or friends)

Bush and the NSA again

Good review of the FISA, NSA, and Bush issue

Food for thought...

Oh, FoxNews, I'm so ashamed.

This is too funny

Okay, considering the villification of Rice, Powell, Thomas, Estrada, and other people of minority status who do not toe the liberal line, you'd think the Liberals would be getting tired of divisive tactics. Apparently not.

Where's the outrage?

Okay, where's the outrage over this, my liberal friends? Original here.

"I'd vote for a Democrat if..."

I've heard this phrase many times, but I never thought about what it'd take to get me to vote for a Democrat in a national election. Sure, I may vote for Bredesen if no one can offer a better alternative, but I can't see how I'd vote for a Democrat, considering what most of them stand for. I am all for voting for the best person for the job, but when a Democrat gets elected, all he ever stood for is gone. Just look at algore. He lost his ever-loving mind. Washington is a numbers game anyway, but adding to Babs Boxer's numbers is a bad idea.

But, in the spirit of camaraderie:

1. The Dem believes that the 1st Amendment actually prohibits the government from interfering with our right to free religion. Most believe it means freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

2. The Dem believes that 3 listed federal powers are enough: regulate interstate commerce, secure treaties, and protect our turf.

3. The Dem refuses to buy into the whole liberal idea of "No personal responsibility for anyone!"

4. The Dem is a constructionist.

5. The Dem has character.

If those five objectives are met, I might vote for him. I would just worry that putting a Dem in DC might cause him to be corrupted by the hetero-haters, the tax-n-spenders, or the can't-we-all-get-along-ers.

You may now post your qualifications for voting for a Democrat (or a Republican, if you are a flaming, no-good, liberal, ne'er-do-well (Just kidding)).

Running for cover

Get ready for a lot of Dems to run for political cover now that Bush has stated he told the leaders of both houses about his NSA tool usage.

Let me clear up some things for you:

1. The NSA was not tasked with monitoring your phone calls. They were tasked with monitoring potential terrorist activity.
2. I consider this a reasonable usage of the Presidents war-making powers.
3. If this could have prevent 911 (and it could have), would you have backed it?
4. If you found out, without a shadow of doubt, that this program has prevent terrorist activity, would you loosen up?

I find the Dems increasingly spineless. They knew this was going on, agreed with it (!), and now want to distance themselves for doing the right thing. Pretty weak...

So many titles running through my head!

Could have been:

"Where's Al Gore when you need him?"

"So, GW stole this election, too?"

"Call SCOTUS, they have more contract work to do!"

"The Sunnis are the Arab liberals?!?"

Oh, my head!

Some meat and potatoes for moderate_christian

I was listening to the radio this morning, and I kept hearing things that upset me.

The host (HHH) kept asking whether our "Constitutional Right" to privacy should be protected. I'm really not a fan of the Bill of Rights. There! I said it! I hate the Bill of Rights. Here's why:

1. The Bill of Rights has only served to confuse people. We do not have right to free speech in the BoR. Look for it. Oh? The 1st Amendment? Nope! That just says that the federal government can't interfere with our right to free speech. It is a protection, not an enumeration of our right. The Bill of Rights is a holdover from times when the monarchy held all power, but gave some up to provide rights to his subjects. We, as Americans, hold all the power, therefore, we don't need some handed back to us in a Bill of Rights.

2. The Bill of Rights has changed the way our government works. It no longer works as intended. The Constitution lists some limited powers given by the people to the federal government. The President's war-making powers are in there somewhere. It is a very limited list. Since people have placed an undue amount of importance on the Bill of Rights, the main body of the Constitution has been ignored. We now look to the BoR to determine if the government can do something, rather than the Constitution. We have moved from a "default deny" government (think firewalls), to a "default accept, with some restriction in the BoR". This has limited our rights, our property, our money, and our lives. Those of you who champion the Bill of Rights should remember what Hamilton said in Federalist #84. BoRs are "various exceptions to powers not granted" and "provide a colorable pretext to claim more [powers] than were granted."

3. What does this mean? Well, the President has the right to conduct wars. If we had an occupying army in our midst, we'd expect the government to do what it takes to kick them out. Well, we have that now. This whole NSA hullabaloo is nothing more than the president exercising his Constitutional war-making powers. He has not infringed upon any rights we hold. Check the BoR and see (just kidding. I wanted to see if you were reading).

4. What else does this mean? We have the right to do anything we want. If we want to engage in unnatural sex acts, we have the right. If we want to fornicate, we can. If we want to practice Christmas, but hold an "Airing of Grievances" a-la Festivus, we can (and did this Sunday). We have all the rights in the world, as long as they do not interfere with the free exercise of someone else's rights. Abortion interferes with someone else's right to live, just like murder. We live in a civilization where we must self-regulate our actions to protect the free exercise of the rights of others. Spreading disease interferes with the free exercise of someone else's rights. I'm all in favor of people committing whatever unnatural act they can devise, but not when it interferes with someone else. I may not engage in such acts, but that is my right.

5. My final point: none of this comes for free. We have the responsibility to hold ourselves accountable for our actions. We have enacted laws to protect people, and those laws are being broken. We all must do what we can to protect the free exercise of these rights. If we find someone interfering with the rights of another, we must intervene. No one person's rights top another. A woman's right to have promiscuous sex does not top the right of an unborn human (with all rights and privileges gained at conception) to live. At some point, we have all chosen not to exercise a right. I think we should choose that more often. If the government believes you intend to interfere with the free exercise of someone else's rights, it has the duty and obligation to step in. If that means declaring war on domestic terrorists, so be it.

6. Okay, my really final point (heh): We have these rights not because we are American, but because we are children of God. If we believe we have God-given rights, shouldn't we feel compelled to help others exercise these rights? My primary support for the war in Iraq (and the war on terrorism) is that we have the obligation to spread freedom and protect free people. Our freedom was earned by others, and we must pay it forward. Dictators and terrorists intend to prevent others from freely exercising rights. That must be stopped, but in the most reasonable means necessary.

Okay, moderate_christian? Does that take a better tone? Thanks for calling me on yesterday's antagonistic rant.

Update: Fixed some typos. Let me know if you find more, or have a grammar lesson for me...

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Liberals are, by definition, unhappy

Just trying to get things cooking for the week. Most of this is tongue-in-cheek.

Is it me, or are the liberals trying to change things, just for the sake of changing them? They don't like the natural laws of sexuality (man + woman = good), so they try to change them. They make a big mess of things, leave a lot of people confused and broken. They call it a job well done because now everyone is unhappy. Conservatives change those things that require change (slavery, for example), but generally try to keep things normal.

Oh, and responsibility seems to be a big target for the liberals. If a person can go out, have sex with 25 people, infect all 25 of them with AIDS, and not have to tell them, a liberal is happy. The liberal is for the right of the AIDS-ridden malcontent to live his life the way he sees fit. As for the others, tough noogies.

Just a little thought for a Tuesday morning. Discuss. Any name calling will be deleted. My blog, my rules. If fuzzy calls me any names, I'll shave him... Just kidding. Fuzzy, have at it! Make it good, though.

Friday, December 16, 2005

More evidence of a lack of responsibility

Yet more evidence that the current Liberal culture is intent on removing responsibility from sex.

This is really sad. Good job, liberals!

Kennedy Hypocrites

Sense, anyone?

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Misplaced priorities

Leaving aside the issues with the Patriot Act, I've identified yet another Democratic shortcoming.


[Feingold's] threat gained ground Thursday when Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the original Democratic co-sponsor of the 2001 Patriot Act, announced that she would support a filibuster. She and others predicted the act would be extended in some form, but without agreement on key changes.

"What will be lost is the much-needed sense that the Patriot Act represents a broad consensus," Feinstein said on the Senate floor. "Having a consensus bill is of paramount importance."


Perhaps I'm just naive, but shouldn't she have said that an effective bill is of paramount importance? Are we the UN, now? Why do we have to have a concensus bill? Why can't we have an effective bill, however that is defined?

Maybe I'm just being picky...

Nutty Hezbollah

Home defense

Okay, in the next few months, I'd like to spend a little money and get a weapon. I'm also going to try to spend a little money to get an alarm system. If anyone has any clues about what a good pistol would be, and who has a good monitoring service for an alarm system, I'd appreciate the knowledge transfer.

Some information I'd like:

  • caliber to stop an invader

  • # rounds in the clip to handle a home invasion (I'm a superior marksman in the .45, or I was in the Navy)

  • weight, in case the Mrs. has to use it

  • type of ammo most appropriate to stop a home-invasion scenario

  • the name of a good shooting range to bone up

  • location of a good training class, perhaps with a CCW class

  • information on trigger locks, such as pros and cons

  • some good gun cases to prevent little hands from touching the gun

Discussion of the Patriot Act

While I'm very sensitive to government's ability to claim more powers than were granted (Hamilton), I do not have enough information to determine whether the provisions of the Patriot Act are in violation of those powers granted to the government in the Constitution.

I know many, many people are concerned with some provisions violating the Bill of Rights, but I'm not concerned with the Bill of Rights. After reading Federalist #84, the Bill of Rights has caused more problems than it solved. It has provided a 'colorable pretext' for the government to claim more powers than were granted. It has become a yardstick by which the federal government judges its actions. It has become the ultimate protector of our freedoms, while the main body of the Constitution should be the ultimate protector of our freedoms. The main body of the Constitution lays out, in detail, those powers the government has. According to the Constitution, they have no others. By adding a Bill of Rights, the federal government has been allowed to move away from a very limited listing of powers. The Bill of Rights has become an 'everything but' type of document: as long as they don't do anything of the things prohibited by the BoR, they are good. That is bad.

I know most of you liberals want a strong, nanny-state federal government. I'd rather move back to the original intent, where only limited powers reside with the federal government.

Back on topic, if someone has any specific abilities/powers granted in the Patriot Act that violate the main body of the Constitution, I'd like to hear them.

THIS is what we mean by liberal slant!

Capt. Ed on Anti-Alito campaign failures

And most Americans can't get their overweight children to exercise...

No late fees, huh?

I guess we will stop our membership here. The Mrs. and I rent a lot of movies. She watches them, while I rarely even have time to keep up with Smallville. Too many MMORPGs to play...

If our local Blockbuster decides to re-enact late fees, I'll have to pitch a fit. We signed up for their program with the understanding that we will have no late fees. We'll see how this turns out.

Spend time getting to know Mitt

I'll try to find out more information on Mitt Romney and start posting. He appears to be interested in a presidential run in '08.

History Lessons - 20051215

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

On a completely new topic

I'm trying to pick up a little Microsoft programming. Most of my previous programming included shell scripts, Perl, and a very minute amount of C. All of it in Linux. I'm starting my Windows programming quest where most do not start it: at the best-practices end. I'm learning about testing, error control, user input checking, etc, while I learn Visual C++. I dropped Visual Basic because I want to code video games.

Some interesting points on what the founders didn't intend

This article brings up an interesting point about what our founders intended. As the author points out, our founders placed Washington in a malarial swamp intending for our legislatures to spend as much time out of session as possible. Since our founders never foresaw the advent of air conditioning, and therefore a permanent legislative session, I think we ought to remove AC from the government buildings. The lefties bring up the "the founders never intended..." argument a lot, and here is a good one. Let's bring the government under control and remove air conditioning.

Read the whole thing. Our 95 theses, indeed.

Betrayal of the Struggle, by Walter Williams

Publish Barret, Bury Clinton

Tanker or no tanker?

History Lessons - 20051214

Because the Mrs. said so

The Mrs. declared that I should find this video and post a link. The commentary is via Michelle, the video is via the Political Teen.

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Last Minute Liberal gift ideas

Oh, my ribs!

SayUncle is standing on the wall, defending against government intrusion into our God-given rights

Heh

Considering what the Mrs. and I are expecting, this is interesting

Argument for the death penalty

More info on Tookie's justice

Good info.

After hearing those leftist nutjobs singing a rehashed peace song (here), I thought I'd come up with some of my own:

"Hey-hey, hi-hi, that murderer Tookie's got to die!"

"He took drugs, he did harm, he'll get a needle in his arm."

Feel free to add a few of your own.

P.S. Oh, that's just not right. Lord, I apologize. Please be with the victims of Tookie's misdeeds.

In case some haven't seen it, the 'white flag' commercial

A look into the liberal agenda

My first complaint!

I'm so proud!

I've heard a complaint about me not commenting on some posts more than I have. I've decided that one of my missions is to point out what my loyal readers may not have seen on their own. I'll point out some Washington Times pieces, some regular columns, etc. If I see something that requires more than just a link, feel confident that I will give you my opinion, whether you want it or not. Then again, you are reading this, so maybe you do want my opinion...

Pruden's piece - 20051213

How about a mother's health rule to prevent abortion?

Lack of management

As some of you know, I've got some experience in government arenas, starting with a stint I pulled in the Navy.

Every gubmnet organization I've ever dealt with have administrative security controls in place to prevent the removal of classified material from a classified environment. Most organizations will strictly control access to classified material, and closely audits this material.

What kind of circus is the State Dept running up there? Is Hazel O'Leary in charge? Some of you know that some government agencies uses different colored badges to denote those holding certain clearances. Rumor has it that she wanted to discontinue the use of colors because it may have damaged the self-esteem of those without a clearance.

Positive Article about Alito

Well, it is coming from a more middle-of-the-road paper. (heh)

History Lessons - 20051213

On balance - 20051213

Mice with human brain cells...

... kind of like Howard Dean, but the other way around.

Monday, December 12, 2005

Justice.

Hurrican deaths not as reported

Amen!

Psycho Dems attack a good man

These are neat!

Thanks, SayUncle!

SayUncle is a really smart man

I've said it many times, but his closest friends disagree. Maybe now he has proof

Michelle posts about Tookie

Why kids are fat.- and Adding Dr. Helen to my link list

heh

From Inside Politics


Warning to Democrats
"The GOP team working with the White House to win confirmation of conservative Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito is putting out a warning to Alito's Democratic critics: Question his ethics and character at your own peril," Paul Bedard writes in the Washington Whispers column of U.S. News & World Report.
"In their sights: Sens. Edward Kennedy and Joe Biden. 'We're absolutely prepared to have an ethics debate with Teddy Kennedy,' says one insider who mentioned the 'C' word: Chappaquiddick. 'Questioning Alito's credibility and character will be hit back hard,' said one of the Alito supporters."

Some Dem Kumbayah

Please, don't say mean things to us anymore!

Okay, Frist, Graham and the rest are getting a little shell-shock. All the mean words coming from the left has prompted some sentiments of "please don't hurt us anymore".

My vote is that we continue to nail the White Flag Democrats on their French-inspired strategy of giving up.

Capt. Ed says it all

Radio fun

So, I'm listening to the radio and I hear some sad voices singing: "All we are saying is let Tookie live."

How absolutely sad. This man kills four people, started a major criminal enterprise, plays nice before his scheduled execution, and the liberal idiots line up on his side. Have they no shame? I'm not a huge fan of the death penalty, but he's been convicted and a jury of his peers chose this punishment.

Why are these liberal weenies lining up against the families of his victims and the families of the people killed by his cadre of sociapaths?

Can they not line up on the side of the victims for once? Why are they putting all their weight behind this murderer?

Also, why did they have to use that song? If someone has proof that liberals are really cartoon characters with real skin, I'd like to see it. I've suspected it for a while, but a little proof would go a long way to convince me.

I need a Mosquito

History lessons - 20051212


From an Aug. 25, 1998, press briefing with Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering responding to criticisms of the Clinton administration's missile strike against the al Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, Sudan, in retaliation for the Aug. 7 al Qaeda truck-bomb attacks against two U.S. embassies in East Africa:
Q: Ambassador Pickering, do you know of any connection between the so-called pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum and the Iraqi government in regard to production of precursors of VX [nerve gas]?
Mr. Pickering: Yeah, I would like to consult my notes just to be sure that what I have to say is stated clearly and correctly. We see evidence that we think is quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq. In fact, al Shifa officials, early in the company's history, we believe were in touch with Iraqi individuals associated with Iraq's VX program.
From June 24, 2004, "Today" show interview with former President Clinton:
Katie Couric: What do you think about this connection that Vice President Cheney continues to assert between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda?
Mr. Clinton: All I can tell you is I never saw it. I never believed it based on the intelligence I had.

Friday, December 09, 2005

Pure idiocy

Okay, this is a bad way to think.

Some highlights:


...research shows that the main roots of continued gender inequality in the workplace (and home) rests in the asymmetry of the “exit” strategy from childrearing -- the power garnered by men through this implicit threat.

Why is it that men seem to exit from child rearing responsibilities much more often than women do?

One answer may be because of paternity uncertainty. Since a dad can never know that a child is his, he has a weaker attachment. This evolutionary psychology argument should be made moot by genetic testing.


I can give two reasons for this lack of responsibility among boys (not Men) today:

  1. Liberals are intent on preventing the immature among us from having to live with the consequences of his actions. Abortion is seen as a 'right' to prevent boys and girls from having to live up to the consequences of their decisions.

  2. The sexual revolution has encouraged boys and girls to think only in terms of sexual gratification without having to consider the consequences of bringing a child into the world, should the couple choose not to murder the baby.



The author tries his best to not discuss morals. Morals have made us more than mere animals. We are no longer pack-oriented animals where one Alpha male sires children by all women. We mate based on love, honor, responsibility, and sexual desire. When we, as a society, remove love, honor and responsibility from mating, we deserve what we get.

This, my fine liberal boy, is what the liberals have caused. A family structure based on a strong, moral, and responsible man has been deemed 'wrong' and 'evil'. When you take men out of the picture and rely on boys to procreate, this is what you get.

Enjoy.

And another Narnia review

Narnia review from the National Review

Yes, in my name!

Rush is talking about 'coercive tactics', torture, and questioning.

The message from the Left (and McCain) is that torture should never occur. My answer is this: the job of the federal government is to protect me from outsiders. Do what it takes. Play 'smacky face', water-board, prevent sleep, cut off appendages, and threaten with death if it takes it. Heck, kill someone in front of them, and tell them it will happen to them as well.

These are bad people intent on killing Americans. I will not endorse a candidate who puts their 'right' to not be tortured above my right to live a peaceful life. They are the aggressors and should be treated as such. They willingly give up any right to civility when they engage in activities that threaten us.

As Maggy might say, "don't go wobbly, GW."

Thursday, December 08, 2005

Eewwww

History Lessons - 20051208

On Aug. 14, 1998, President Clinton signed into law the "Iraqi Breach of International Obligations," which had passed the Senate unanimously and the House 407-6. The law reads in part:
"Resolved... [t]hat the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations, and therefore the President is urged to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations."

Couric = Dunce

Katie Couric interviews a former Air Marshall, Tony Kuklinski. Some hightlights:

The former AM says that, by all accounts he's seen, the actions were necessary.

Couric: Do they always shoot to kill... <second guessing>.

Good answer by the former AM.

Couric mentions the guy killed by mistake in London. Apparently, she doesn't see the difference between a police mistake, however well-intentioned, and AMs facing a man claiming to have a bomb. This useless liberal has no idea about real life. The former AM is talking statistics, talking about the chance of injuring the innocent, and trying to prevent disaster, and she's asking if more training could fix the "problem". She is really useless.

Well, it's true!

They are stupider than she is.

Canadian Brass

My Mrs. ordered music from the Canadian Brass site. She ordered, among other things, parts for a hymn book. She got them yesterday, and the horn part for the hymns was missing. She gets a little worked up, prepares for a run-around, and calls the company. Before she even got a chance to say anything other than her name, the sales person said he knew why she was calling, explained that the part was unavailable when the main package was sent, and that he'd already sent the missing part out. Ten minutes after she got off the phone, the new part was delivered.

That is what I call service!

Machines don't kill people...

Wait, let me get this straight: someone will use a machine to end a life, rather than end the life himself. I'm not sure I see the difference. A doctor can attach a special machine, set a timer, and the patient dies, but the doctor didn't kill him. Maybe I'm missing something.

The first word that popped into my head: spineless. How are they NOT ending the life when they are setting the events in motion? Can someone explain this to me?

Maybe they should stop pointing fingers...

If the Dems weren't too busy pointing fingers, claiming racism, and trying to make political points, some of the federal issues surrounding the rebuilding could be started and finished. Federal highways need to be rebuilt, and any federal infrastructure (regulating interstate commerce) could be repaired.

Once the federal work is done, however, it should be in the laps of the local politicians. The federal government should get out.

New drink, old jitters

I'm not sure what to think of this. If someone wants to send me a sample, I'll try it out...

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

My church usually has an extra session to get it all in...

Amazing. My church, which I truly love, has a Christmas Eve session so that we can give more attention to the reason for the season. These churches will close doors so that their congregation can concentrate on the pagan/secular/selfish motives behind Christmas. I'm not sure what I should feel about this. I guess I shouldn't feel disgust, but I can't help it.

Pull out their nose hairs!!

Cry me a river...

Again, the burden of protecting the citizens of New Orleans was squarely on the shoulders of the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans. The Governor and the Mayor were responsible. Anyone who's been in local or state government will tell you that they have contingency plans for evacuation and shelter of citizens in the case of emergency. Those plans should be the first measures to be implemented to protect the life and health of citizens. The plans in this case were not followed.

Honestly, can anyone say they believe the federal government does anything with haste? There is a logical order here, and the voters of Louisiana and New Orleans failed by putting those people in office.

Next time, put in someone competent. Take responsibility for your voting habits. There's no racism here.

If the Dems had a vision, I'd be worried

For various reasons, I've been reading Covey lately. I think the apt analogy here is that the Dems have management, but no leadership. They know how to rope-a-dope the press, they know how to spout vitriol and bile, and they know how to gainsay just about everything a Republican says. The problem is that they have no idea where they want to go. They know that they don't like Republicans, but they haven't presented an alternative.

Gainsaying doesn't win an election. Presenting a definable alternative, like the Republicans in '94 did, will win the election. The Dems alternative, which they will not admit, is a Socialist Nanny state beholden to the UN. Americans won't go for that message. They'll have to tone it down then try to do it on the sly.

Stop funding colleges!

My opinion, and I know this will make me unpopular, is to stop federal funding of colleges. Show me where the Constitution gives the power to the federal government and I'll reverse course. Now, don't cry about "if the Nanny state doesn't fund these liberal hotbeds of fanaticism, who will." I don't care who does it as long as it is not the federal government.

Read the Constitution.

Like I said...

Party of defeat. I just never expected them to buy into the idea this whole-heartedly. Now, the only way Dean and DNC can win is if we lose. Victory in Iraq makes them look like idiots. Errr, even more like idiots.

Way to go, UN!

Yep, the UN does a fine job. Just look at how effectively the UN stopped Iran from getting nukes.

History Lessons - 20051207

Notice the part about "The burden has always been and remains on Iraq to disclose and dismantle its weapons of mass destruction capability." Kind of makes the whole "didn't find WMD" complaint useless...

Message to the Dems...

Good news is getting out, and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Finally!!

The Mrs. is finally reading my blog. It's about time! Hi, dearest wife!!

Huh?

Washington Times piece on Michelle

A must read, and not just because it talks about Michelle.

History Lessons

The Washington Times has started putting these out. I get it through an RSS feed.


From transcript of June 24, 1998, "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" (PBS):
Margaret Warner, host: The Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector, Richard Butler, briefed the Security Council this morning on the latest findings of the U.N. special commission he heads known as UNSCOM... Tell us in some detail what it is you found.
Ambassador Butler: We've been excavating in the desert northwest of Baghdad for the remnants of special missile warheads that Iraq said it destroyed there by explosion... We took some pieces of those remnants that we dug up out to a laboratory for analysis... And what that analysis found was that some of the warheads had contained the chemical nerve agent VX. Now what's really interesting about this is that Iraq has always robustly denied that they ever put VX into weapons, in other words, weaponized it. Even as recently as a week ago, when we mentioned these lab findings to the Iraqis when I was in Baghdad, they still said they never did it. Now, that's a problem, because this lab analysis is utterly unambiguous. It couldn't have been anything else.

Children

I love Neal Boortz. He's a hoot.

He's on a tirade about our child-centered society. He often complains about out-of-control children, and the weak parents following them around. He thinks spanking, or " their a$$e$ out".

I got into a conversation with a lady who is probably my favorite cousin outside of the immediate family. Somehow, a conversation of Dr. Spock was started. I voiced the opinion that I wasn't a big fan of Dr. Spock because he wasn't a fan of spanking. She agrees and considers spanking a very useful teaching tool.

Look around sometime and see if you agree. Spanked kids generally behave better than kids who spend time in time-out. Kids who's parents are afraid of "hurting the child's feelings" are out of control and need serious attitude adjustments.

As some know, my Mrs. and I are expecting our first in a few months. I intend to spank as a means of reinforcing lessons and punishing bad behavior. When the child is old enough to understand the difference between behaving and misbehaving, I may attempt to use other means of disciplining her, but until she is able to reason, little bits of pain will be my chosen approach.

Spanking works, when done with love and moderation. I intend to sit little Miss Katie down, explain what she did wrong, tell her how to avoid getting punished in the future, and then spank her. I'll follow it up by telling her that I love her, and that spankings happen when she misbehaves.

When she's older, I'll try to replace the spanking with an announcement of punishment, such as grounding or taking something away. I'll have to pay attention to determine what is important to her, and what will have the best chance to drive the lesson home.

I'll accept any advice, especially from tacfolder. He knows what I was like, so I'm sure he'll have some hard-earned wisdom on how to deal with what will surely be Version 2.0 of me. I'm not sure my mom ever cursed me with the Mother's Curse, but if she did, tacfolder should post and give me some advice. I'll also talk to the BattleAxe about how to deal with someone who follows in the Mrs. footsteps.

News viewership for those under 35

Hal Hill (WNOX) is talking about how those of US (me included) under 35 don't really watch the national evening news broadcasts anymore. He claimed that, through observation, he knows we watch the local news, but we no longer watch the national evening news.

I'd have to agree. Since I've started getting an AP feed through the Washington Times, I really find there to be no great difference between the AP feed and the Commentary/Editorial page of the Washington Times. Sure, the approach is different, but there is no less opinion, spin, or interpretation in the AP items. When I realized that I get no less opinion from an 'independent' source, I just decided not to rely on the AP anymore. Nightly news broadcasts solely rely on the AP, so that leaves them out as well.

Reading a story about the police academy bombings in Baghdad, I see how the AP writer tried to tie the bombing and the capture of the blond American together, with a little dash of 'deadliest day since blah' doom and gloom.

I've tried to explain to others how skewed the AP is, but I often fail when I explain that the slant is more observable when viewed over time. In order to view the skew, one must read what is written, observe the context the writer tries to impose, and read other sources to see what the AP writer didn't say.

References:

Iraq is Vietnam

Watching the coverage and listening to the DNC empty shirts, I've decided that we are in a Vietnam-style situation in Iraq.

Just like Vietnam, the lefties are determined to claim defeat, regardless of the military reality. The lefties are determined to undermine us from within so that our enemies, who have no chance to defeat us alone, will be able to win on the battle field. Just as the North Vietnamese general said about his army, the terrorists don't have to beat us on the battle field. They just have to defeat the spirit of the weak-willed among us. The weak-willed, as you may already know, includes any more left of Lieberman. I think he is waffling on the line, tending to lean more to the side of victory.

If we don't want a Vietnam style, we-defeated-ourselves situation in Iraq and the War on Terror, tell the Demos to shut up. They are trying their best to undermine us from within, much like they did in Vietnam.

Monday, December 05, 2005

Shoddy reporting

Okay, so the AP comes out with a story saying that the judge in Delay's case has thrown out the conspiracy charge, but 'refused to throw out the far more serious allegations of money-laundering, dashing the congressman's hopes for now of reclaiming his post as House majority leader.'

What the article doesn't say is that the judge has decided to hear arguments and evidence about the second charge. From Delay's office, it is still possible for the second charge to be thrown out:


Fast Facts About Today's Ruling:

First indictment was quashed.

The judge notes in his letter that a motion to dismiss based on prosecutorial misconduct is still pending for the second indictment (also known as the "Do-Over Indictment") and will require the hearing of evidence. The bulk of the arguments made in that motion concerned the manner in which Ronnie Earle went about getting this second indictment. Thus, the pending indictment can still yet be dismissed after additional hearings.

From today's ruling:

[1] At least one motion to dismiss upon the basis of alleged prosecutorial misconduct was filed by Defendant DeLay and is presumed by the Court to have been adopted by defendants Colyandro and Ellis. This motion may require the hearing of evidence (a matter not yet resolved), and it is not included within the ambit of the present rulings.


HT: Michelle Malkin

Go Navy! Beat Army!

My favorite:

Q: What do a Navy Midshipman and a West Point Cadet have in common?

A: They both got accepted to West Point.


More here

Friday, December 02, 2005

Political power through defeat

The best way for one political party to gain power from another political party is to point out some failure. During the Clinton years, it was easy for the Republicans: failure of morals, failure of foreign policy, failure of domestic policy, and failure of interns.

The Dems realize that they will ONLY gain power back if they can point to some failure of the Bush administration, and imply they could do better. They have only a few limited choices:

1. Bad economy
2. Major terrorist attack on U.S. soil
3. Defeat in Iraq
4. Failure on the part of the Republicans to comply with legal restrictions.

As you can tell, the Dems are attempting a multi-pronged attack. The Dem shills in the MSM will not accurately report the fantastic state of the economy. The Dem shills in the MSM will not report the full picture in Iraq. The Dem shills in some state administrations are trying hard to tar-n-feather Republican leadership. The Dems in all areas are trying to hamper intelligence and defense efforts.

The MSM, state department liberals, and corrupt state politicians, however, will not be able to win this battle for the Dems alone. The Dems will have to have terrorist help to win. For the Dems to win, we will have to fail in Iraq and lose a lot of U.S. troops, or we will have to lose a lot of citizens on U.S. soil.

As you can see, the Dems, in order to win, have to be the White Flag Party or the Defeat Party. Continued success in Iraq, and continued safety at home will not put the Dems back in power. Continued economic growth looks good for Bush, and these baseless accusations against some Republicans are not having the effect the Dems want.

Bush and America have to fail to benefit the Dems. Americans have to lose jobs, starve, and die for the Dems to gain power. The Dems are hoping that Bush and America are defeated. They can gain power no other way.

The Dems are not just sitting around passively praying for bad things to happen. They are trying to hamper economic growth by attacking oil companies and trying to raise taxes. They are trying to demoralize the troops by ignoring the good they do in Iraq. They are trying to prevent terrorists from being interogated and killed by attempting to pass 'anti-torture' legislation. They are making up detailed falsehoods to corrupt the legal system for political gain.

They truly are hateful, miserable people unable to conceive of U.S. success under any circumstances. They make me sad.

WHAT?! Bush didn't do it on purpose?

So, a new report has come out with some information that doesn't make Bush look like a racist, hate-mongering redneck. Do you think anyone will apologize to him for saying he was trying to wipe out the black community? I don't think so, either.

If only it were that simple

If only fixing Democrites were this easy...

Foxnews is picking up the theme

Foxnews has a long piece on the DNC multiple message problem. Kerry can't go through a single speech without changing course. Pelosi changed her tune within the space of a week. The piece even plays a clip of Kerry saying the Dems are united, then refutes it by detailing the contradictory positions of various high-profile Dems.

The Dems need to look in their collective hearts for a position they all believe. This is a common Dem problem, as we all know.

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Live blogging O'Reilly

Ann Coulter is on O'Reilly. What a babe!!

Bill just voiced a comparison between the Sheehan opportunist and Ann. The comparison was valid, and I know what he meant, but it's still creepy. Ann is moral and courageous, while the Sheehan is a lying, opportunist troll only out to make herself famous at the expense of her dead son. Both are leaders in her respective movement, and both have significant following. That's about as far as the comparison goes.

Glutton for punishment

Okay, I've gone to the Dark Side. I'm now playing with a PocketPC running Windows Mobile 5.0, and I'm trying to learn VB.NET. I guess I'll just merge the two together and try to learn to program VB.NET on the PocketPC.

My first goal will be to create an RSS reader for this device. Since most of the available ones cost about $30 to license, I'll create one and license it for $10. I'll provide it shareware so those too cheap to buy it won't be left out. I'll just nag people to death if they don't pay for it.

Oh, and the default RSS feed will be the feed for this site. What can I say? I'm scum.

UPDATE:

Well, my currently installed version of Visual Studio does not support mobile application development. I'll have to downgrade from a real version to the latest Express version. This isn't nice. Perhaps when I'm done I can actually create a VB project for a mobile device...

Forget the White Flag Democrats, we need the Twain Democrats

So, Kerry comes out, claims no one is demanding an artificial timeline for withdrawal. Nancy Pelosi comes out shortly there after and demands a six-month time-table. They are definitely earning the title of White Flag Democrats.

They need to remember what Mark Twain said about telling the truth:


Always tell the truth. That way, you don't have to remember what you said.


If the Democrats would actually come together and decide what they REALLY believe, rather than what they believe will put them back in power, they'd have no confusing cross-talk.

Of course, their tactic could be to say so many things that they can come out later with "We were for <insert political issue here> before we were against it."

They're like a bunch of cockroaches...

New Best Site Ever!

Stick this in your 'Culture of Corruption' blow-hole, Nancy.