Thursday, December 30, 2004

"I can't not give you the Strib."

This tickled my funny bone rather a lot today. From Shot in the Dark:
So when Comcast called the other day asking if I'd be interested in getting a very good deal on the first three months of premium cable and that yes, I could block MTV and Nick, I thought "Hmmmmm...". It was a nice price.

And then the guy on the phone said "You also get x weeks of the Minneapolis Star/Tribune thrown in on the deal". The Strib is apparently trying to gussy up their circulation numbers by giving the paper away.

MITCH: "Could I get the deal without the Strib?"

GUY: "Er, no, I can't not give you the Strib".

MITCH: "I want the deal, just not the Strib."

GUY: "You could take the deal and just throw the paper away..."

MITCH: "Nice thought, but it's wasteful, and I don't want to give them any more subscribers. I can't stand their editorial policies, or their editorial writers. You sure you can't just detach the Strib from the deal?"

GUY: "I'm sorry, no".

MITCH: "Dang. I'm going to have to decline the deal."

GUY: "Because of the Strib?"

MITCH: "I'm afraid so."

He seemed kind of confused.

The moonbat battle plan for elections: if you can't win, smear.

Captain Ed brings word of a group of 37 Democrats targetting Ohio's Chief Justice Thomas Moyer with a ludicrous and baseless conspiracy theory:

A group of voters had claimed Chief Justice Thomas Moyer "wittingly or unwittingly acquired knowledge of deliberate national and statewide election fraud" and should step aside.

Moyer called the voters' claim "wholly without foundation." He added that he has no reason to remove himself since the challenge doesn't involve his own election and he has nothing to gain by a change in the results.

These twits need to take a clue from Ana Marie Cox and MoveOn.

Grab your barf bags. Another terrorist apologist emerges from the slime.

On April 19, 1775, 700 British troops reached Concord, Massachusetts, to disarm the American colonists who were preparing to start an insurrection. When the British ordered them to disperse, the colonists fired back at the British soldiers. This "shot heard 'round the world" heralded the start of an insurrection against Britain, the greatest Western power of its time. And when it ended, victorious, in 1783, the colonists had gained their objective. They had established a sovereign but slave-holding republic, the United States of America.


On September 11, 2001, nineteen Arab hijackers too demonstrated their willingness to die - and to kill - for their dream. They died so that their people might live, free and in dignity. The manner of their death - and the destruction it wreaked - is not merely a testament to the vulnerabilities that modern technology has created to clandestine attacks. After all, skyscrapers and airplanes have co-existed peacefully for many decades. The attacks of 9-11 were in many ways a work of daring and imagination too; if one can think objectively of such horrors. They were a cataclysmic summation of the history of Western depredations in the Middle East: the history of a unity dismembered, of societies manipulated by surrogates, of development derailed and disrupted, of a people dispossessed. The explosion of 9-11 was indeed a "shot heard 'round the world."


This was written by Professor Shahid Alam of Northeastern University. Sickening, isn't it?

Wednesday, December 29, 2004

Hey, I have something nice to say about Wonkette

At least Ms. Cox can actually admit defeat:
Of course, now we have to deal with "They stole the recount!" form letters and maps showing how the counties that went to Bush were former "slave counties"....

We lost, everybody. L-O-S-T.

And I really do respect that from the bottom of my heart. Such an admission is disturbingly uncommon among Democrats and it needs to be praised and promoted.

DU = mandatory tin-foil hat area

Similar to a construction site, the Democratic Underground is a place where one absolutely must wear appropriate head gear as Wizbang points out. All I really can say is YEEEEEESH!!!

Will the U.N. call France "stingy?"

Tim Blair lists some figures for contributions to aid tsunami victims and France is making a poor showing. Actally, "a poor showing" is being far kinder to France than they deserve. $US135,400 (100,000 euros or $A177,000) is a ridiculously low contribution. In fact, it's insulting. If I were the leader of one of those countries affected by the tsunami, I'd reject France's contributions simply on principle.

UPDATE: Captain Ed has more excellent commentary on this issue.

A young woman's view of the future

American-Lady Lorraine (and she is a lady, unlike ToothHeadless Lucy and other vulgar bloggers or pseudo-bloggers) proves that she is still wise beyond her 17 years and makes some excellent points about 2005 and beyond.

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

ATTN. Wonkette fans: you are being duped

Wonkette's a phony. She's purely a creation of marketing and nothing more than a means of revenue for Gawker Media, a publishing firm. Well-researched information - including words directly from the horses' mouths - can be found here.

UPDATE: Welcome Wonkers! You're free to share your positive or negative opinions here, but I politely ask that you act like the guests you are and keep the language clean. Thank you. (I've editted the language out of a few posts already. If you don't like it, too bad. Send complaints to the appropriate authorities.)

UPDATE 2: In reading through the comments, I think a lot people are missing the point. I don't care if people make money off their blogs. I wouldn't mind making money off mine, but that's not my motivation with my blogs and my life in general. Neither should that be the motivation for real bloggers who aren't the creation of some marketing scheme. Come on. I mean the whole idea of not making Wonkette public until she, her boss, and probably her husband and others finalized the "style" and "feel" of it? It's a sham. Cox is being paid to play a role that is supposed to be appealing to her "clientele" (a term that makes her sound like a prostitute, ironically enough). Do you think she really cares a lot about what she comments on or does she care more about the bottom line?

If all blogs that make money one way or another suddenly did not make money, which ones do you think would be more likely to continue to exist? I guarantee that once Wonkette becomes unprofitable, it either will change its format or will cease to exist.

One final note: since Cox is only playing a role in order to draw "clientele," she is expendable. Someone else could learn the "style" and "feel" of the site, take her place, and no one would be the wiser.

UPDATE 3: It's interesting... All these angry, venomous, insult-filled comments by Wonkers and they have the utter gall to claim that I'm the one in need of "a stiff drink, some sedatives and a better sense of humor." Lighten up, kids. Don't burst a blood vessel over me.

BTW, Wonkers, my request that you watch the language was not made for my benefit, but for the benefit of other visitors to my blog, some of whom could be children. Contrary to your straw man ideas about "the typical conservative," I'm no prude and I have been known to swear like a sailor from time to time. I just don't do it in public, in polite company or around children. This is not your blog and you don't make the rules. I do and I have politely requested that you follow them. If you can't refrain from either swearing or trying to criticize me about my rules, then I suggest that you not comment and leave my blog. Go swear on your own blog. I have better things to do than babysit malcontents who feel that the only rules that apply to them are their own. I don't like banning people from commenting, but I will do it if I have to.

UPDATE 4: You can't say they weren't warned. I've cleaned out the vulgar, trollish comments and banned those responsible. It's nice to know how far politeness, a preemptive "thank you," and an explanation of why I expect people to respect and follow my rules here all go with some Wonkette fans. As I said in the comments, "garbage in, garbage out."

UPDATE 5: As Karl rightfully pointed out in the comments, there was an editting snafu very early this morning (sometime around 1 a.m.). Somehow I accidentally moved a block of text from "Update 2" to the initial paragraph. The error has been corrected.

FINAL UPDATE: I'm moving on from this subject as I find that it has pretty much run its course. I would like to refer people to my latest post where I actually say something nice about Ms. Cox.

NON-UPDATE: Nothing new about this issue, but I'd just like to point out this recent post where I thank Ms. Cox for increasing my visibility and hits. Also, I wish to invite guests to visit the rest of my blog. Perhaps you'll see something else you like hate. Please feel free to comment, but as always, keep it fairly clean. Thank you.

VERY BELATED UPDATE: I should try to dig up the original comments I had gotten before I switched to Haloscan so all of you Daily Pundit visitors can witness the disgusting vitriol of Ana Marie Cox's fans.

Monday, December 27, 2004

President Bush expands Pell Grants - liberals outraged

The MSM, blogs, and online forums are abuzz with word that Pell Grant eligibility is being changed and that will result in 80-90 thousand grants being dropped and 1.3 million grants being reduced. Here's a typical example of the liberal Bush-bashing reaction to this news:
The United States Department of Education announces today that is is cutting Pell grants to underprivilaged college students. Ninety-thousand students will lose all eligibility, and 1.3 million students will have their grants reduced.

This action comes at a time when Americans lag behind people in all the other industrialized nations, in every subject from from math to science to the liberal arts.

What are President Bush and his education secretary thinking? Are they content for our nation to become a second-rate society? Is education a priority in America, or isn't it?

Sadly, these sorts of people don't read much beyond the headlines. Further down the CNN article, we find this:
"Our projections show an increase in the number of students receiving Pell Grants next year and nearly half of Pell recipients are eligible for the maximum award and won't be affected." [DOE press secretary Susan Aspey]

Also, in this Washington Post correction (reg. req.), we find the following:
The headline on a Dec. 24 article about the Education Department's new formula for federal college scholarship aid incorrectly said that fewer students will be eligible for Pell Grants. Although 80,000 to 90,000 grantees at the higher-income end will be dropped from the Pell program in the 2005-2006 academic year, the department expects more students to be eligible overall because of a rising number of low-income high school graduates.

So the dropping of grants to higher-income students (who I guess won't be able to spend as much on their cars, parties, CDs, etc. anymore) and cutting a couple hundred dollars off of grants that are already a couple thousand dollars or more (max. award of $4,050) will result in an overall increase in the number of grant awards to low-income students. Isn't this a good thing?

The liberals sure are desperate to find something of substance to criticize President Bush and those in his administraion for, aren't they? Autopens...increases in the total number of Pell Grant awards... They are obviously doing a really good job if these are the best things liberals can come up with.

Sunday, December 26, 2004

Oy vey! Political correctness hits "This Little Piggy"

We're all familiar with the children's game "This Little Piggy." "This little piggy went to market... this little piggy stayed home... etc. etc." Well, my sister gave my daughter a really cute "This Little Piggy" book for Christmas. The book is small and attacked to the palm of a colorful glove with pig puppets for the fingers. It's just absolutely adorable and my daughter loves it. I did notice, however, that it is not the traditional version of "This Little Piggy." It's a, well... a liberal version, I guess:

This little piggy went to market.
This little piggy stayed home.
This little piggy had cookies.
This little piggy had fun.
And this little piggy said, "Wee, wee, wee," all the way home.

Roast beef (an evil red meat) has been replaced with the more animal-friendly cookies, and instead of the poor fourth piggy being stuck with none, he has fun in the happy-go-lucky world where nothing bad ever happens. Bleh!

Well, my daughter's only 1, so she won't know the difference if I use the traditional version where the one piggy has some nice and tasty pieces of dead cow and the other piggy has to face a cold, dark, unloving world of poverty and starvation. *winkwink* Unfortunately, my son can read and he's already been brainwashed by the book. I simply can no longer convince him that the one piggy gets roast beef and the other gets none. Congratulations, liberals! You've won yourself another convert!

[This post may or may not be a bit tongue-in-cheek. Decide for yourselves.]

Thursday, December 23, 2004

When there's something RIGHT with our nation's kids

I read this Christmas story with tears welling up in my eyes:
Melissa Varpness, one of the winners in the Montevideo Kiwanis-sponsored $100 Project, was feeling down in recent weeks.

Her award-winning idea was to be a “Secret Santa” for Montevideo nursing home residents who may not have a family to give gifts to them.

She didn’t intend to use all of her $100 for gifts, but planned to use it as prize money for the home room at her Montevideo Middle School which donated the most items for the project.

But alas. The time was getting short and her project had only a smidgen of interest among the students.

And then — as so often happens at this time of year — the element of Christmas magic cut in.

Melissa and the home room teachers began talking up the project to the students and suddenly there were not dozens or even one hundred gifts donated, but 490!

On Saturday, the family and Melissa’s friends worked for over six hours to wrap all the presents. Each gift was handed out personally Tuesday morning to residents of Luther Haven Nursing Home and Copper Glen.

Each gift was hand-picked: a Gophers’ hat for Hank, dance music for Helen, a fleece throw for Randy. There was a long list. Each resident got one big gift and two smaller ones.

The day after the students had wrapped the gifts, last Sunday, Hampton and her husband, Dan, were directing the junior high choir at their church, Trinity Lutheran. Many of the choir members were students who had brought gifts for Melissa’s project. There was a very special meaning in the words they sang that day:

Give a gift to the little ones,

Give a gift to the poor,

Spend your time with the lonely ones,

That means so much more.

When you give a gift to the least of these,

It’s a birthday gift to me.

God bless each and every one of those students, their parents and their teachers. They are all definitely doing something right.

Try as they might, the ACLU and L.A. county can't obscure God

This is just truly awesome. First, the background:
In May, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California threatened to sue unless the cross was removed. In June, the supervisors took the first of several 3-2 votes to replace the seal with a cross-less version. On the new seal, the Pomona goddess of fruits is replaced by an American Indian woman and the cross above the Hollywood Bowl is erased. The bowl is moved up a position, and the San Gabriel Mission now rests in its former spot.

And now, the outcome:
On Monday, county officials discovered that the tiny Christian cross on the two original seals in the Board of Supervisors' hearing room could be clearly seen through the new $1,800 seals glued on to cover up the cross. In fact, the cross is now directly over the rendering of the San Gabriel Mission, which is pictured on the new seal without a cross.

God's sovereignty trumps the schemes of men everytime.

(Burgled from Captain's Quarters.)

Great leaders talk about the Bible

Tallglassofmilk (the most unique blog handle I've ever seen), has compiled a list of quotes about the Bible:
George Washington...It is impossible to rightly govern the world without the Bible.

John Adams...The Bible is the best book in the world. It contains more than all the libraries I have seen.

Thomas Jefferson...The Bible makes the best people in the world.

Abraham Lincoln...But for this Book we could not know right from wrong. I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.

Ulysses S. Grant...The Bible is the anchor of our liberties.

Rutherford B Hayes...The best religion the world has ever known is the religion of the Bible. It builds up all that is good.

William McKinley...The more profoundly we study this wonderful Book.. the better citizens we will become.

Theodore Roosevelt...No educated man can afford to be ignorant of the Bible.

Herbert Hoover...The whole of the inspirations of our civilization springs from the teachings of Christ. To read the Bible is a necessity of American life.

Jesus Christ...It is written, man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Imagine if Washington, Jefferson or Lincoln had said those things in this day and age. Imagine the outcry that would no doubt come from the ACLU, Barry Lynn, FFRF, et al. Is it any wonder, then, how so many are trying to rewrite the history of this Christian nation and blot out its Christian roots? If they can't bury it, they claim that statements like those above were intended only to "pander" to Christians in order to get votes or other support - just like what they are saying about President Bush today.

Wednesday, December 22, 2004

Ann Coulter describes an autopen

An autopen is a mechanical arm that actually holds a pen and is programmed to sign letters with a particular person's precise signature. Imagine a President Al Gore, with slightly more personality, signing all official government letters – that's an autopen.


The strange things that bring people to my blog

This may be the strangest way someone found my blog. I was looking over the "By Referrals" section of my SiteMeter and I discovered that someone came to my blog via this search. I'm not really sure why someone was searching for the phrase "Bill Clinton pumps fist at Wellstone Memorial."

The faith of the religious right vs. the religious left

Why is it that whenever someone on the religious right makes some public statement regarding their faith, the left automatically questions their faith and accuses them of using it to garner support, gain votes, or what have you? I've never heard them make such statements regarding someone on the religious left. Why is that?

Tuesday, December 21, 2004

Wonkette: events that may have happened are "verifiable"

Ana Marie Cox, better known as the "profanity-laced and sex-obsessed...vain, young, trash-mouthed skank" "blogger" Wonkette, had this to say to MSNBC about the CBS Memogate scandal:
What did you think of the bloggers' role in the Dan Rather affair?
I think they did a disservice to the debate because they made the debate about the documents and not about the president of the United States. There was another half to that story that had to do with verifiable events of what Bush may have been up to.

Did you catch that? "Verifiable events of what Bush may have been up to." This is the left-wing, folks. This is the same group of people touting the "fake but accurate" line about the phony TANG memos regarding President Bush. These jokers obviously don't think about what they are doing or saying beforehand and don't realize what they have done and said afterwards. It's like there's some bizarre filter in their brains that makes all of their bull manure seem rational and intelligent to them.

Monday, December 20, 2004

New York fails to cast its 31 electoral votes for John F. Kerry

On the heels of a Minnesota electoral college vote for "John Ewards" (hat tip: Muzzy) comes word that New York state electors have failed to cast their 31 EC votes for John F. Kerry. Take a look. (A hint: you may not notice the problem initially, but a second look might help.)

A pretty cool email from an USAF officer overseas

I received an email recently from an Air Force officer stationed in the Middle East. I'm pretty excited as this is my first email from a member of the armed forces serving overseas. This is reproduced here with permission:

Thanks for your great response to that odious article about how ours is not a Christian nation. Your points were well-grounded, and well-put.

No wonder they provoked the response they did.

I’m currently fighting people who are trying to destroy us because they realize what Mr. Press does not. It does my heart good to know that there are people left at home who understand what it is we’re defending.

God bless, Merry Christmas, and keep up the good work.

Steven A. Givler Captain, USAF
Baghdad, Mosul, Ramadi, Falujah, Abu Ghraib, Balad, and currently, Qatar

PS I was directed to your site by Dawn Eden.

Thank you, Captain Givler. (And I will be reading those letters you sent, too.)

Special thanks to Dawn, too.

Friday, December 17, 2004


Sorry about the goofiness of the sidebar today. When I posted about Bill Press' response to my email, I didn't use HTML with the three links and they showed up as just text. That resulted in a longer than usual line in the entry section and forced the sidebar to the bottom of the page. Urk!

Bill Press "responds" to my email

So I emailed Bill Press about his article which I first talked about below. My email was pretty much what I wrote here, but I added a couple things and I was a bit more polite. What follows is the full text of Mr. Press' response to my rather lengthy email:
Your ignorance is showing. BP

That's it. No attempt to counter my points. No acknowledgement that he was wrong. Just "your ignorance is showing." Ridiculous. If you wish to also attempt to correct him on his blatant errors and falsehoods, his email address is [email protected]. Don't expect much more in way of a response, though. Mr. Press is obviously a liberal elitist who thinks he is never wrong and anyone with a factual opinion contrary to his own erroneous opinion is ignorant.

For completeness' sake, here's the full text of my email to Bill:
> Mr. Press,

I am thoroughly insulted by your article and disgusted by the misconceptions, half-truths and lies you have spread about American history, the "separation of church and state," and religious conservatives. I will attempt to correct you on the many things that you got wrong.

First of all, you claim that "for many religious conservatives, re-electing President Bush wasn't enough," yet you offer no evidence other than one dated example that many of them feel this way.

Next, you claim that religious conservatives want to "tear down the wall of separation between church and state, get rid of any nonbelievers, make Christianity the official state religion and declare the United States a Christian nation." Ridiculous! This is nothing more than knee-jerk reactionary rhetoric that has about as much basis in reality as Chicken Little's cries that the sky is falling. Perhaps a handful of powerless extremists want that, but the vast majority of religious conservatives do not. Additionally, the United States is already a Christian nation, as you yourself prove below, ironically enough.

You then provide a "recent" quote from Rev. Jerry Falwell: "We must never allow our children to forget that this is a Christian nation. We must take back what is rightfully ours." From what I've found online, that quote is from 1993 - 11 years ago. That's not very recent, is it? Furthermore, there is no context for the quote, so citing it really is a worthless exercise. And if this is your idea of an example of "many religious conservatives," you obviously are lacking in any knowledge about representative sampling. One person does not equal "many."

Again in your article, you make a point to declare that the U.S. is not and has never been a Christian nation and you pretty much claim that anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant of American history. Trust me - the people who claim the U.S. is a Christian nation and always has been are very likely to be far more learned on the country's history than you appear to be.

You claim that the Founding Fathers didn't want to create a Christian nation. I think what you mean is that they didn't want to create a Christian government. There's a difference. The nation is the land, its people and their society. The government is what the people use to create and enforce laws.

Now we come to the most ridiculous and baseless lie in your entire article: "the founding fathers were not Christians. Most were Deists." Whether it's your lie or someone else's that you are mindlessly repeating, I don't know and it doesn't matter. It's a lie nonetheless. Please read the following well-researched webpages and learn about the faiths of our Founding Fathers:

Were the Founding Fathers "Deists," "Freethinkers," and "Infidels?"

The Faith of Our Fathers

Evidences of Faith in the Buildings, Memorials, and Forefathers of the United States (scroll about halfway down to a list of the Founding Fathers' denominations)

Furthermore, your description of Deists not only seems to be lifted from some anti-religious source like Internet Infidels, but as we shall see, it also flies in the face of the actions and beliefs of those Founding Fathers who people claim were Deists.

Moving on to the issue of the Constitution, you are correct in that the document is "hands-off" when it comes to God, but you need to remember that the Constitution founded the government, not the nation. The Declaration of Independence, the document that founded the nation, is definitely not "hands-off" when it comes to God. As to your statement that the Constitution does not mention God, Providence, Jesus or Christianity, you are not only one-fourth incorrect (the phrase "in the year of our Lord" directly references Jesus), but also hypocritical as you treat the phrase "separation of church and state" as if it did appear in the Constitution, which it does not. You state that the Consitution establishes no national religion, which is true, but has no bearing on whether or not this is a Christian nation. And as far as public officials are concerned, where do you suppose the traditional practices of taking their oaths on a Bible and stating "so help me God" come from if we are not a Christian nation?

Next, you mention Bejamin Franklin appeal for prayer at the Constitutional Convention - an issue which you get half right. Franklin's proposed measure on prayers was rejected only because it was so late into the convention, which had already had its share of problems. Had the issue been brought up at the beginning, it very likely would have been approved. The ever-formal Founders also felt that an ordained clergy would be needed to lead the prayers. Furthermore, a sermon was presented at the convention just six days later and prayers were then read every morning after that. Of course, Franklin is one of the men who is claimed to have been a stalwart Deist "who believed in a remote Providence, or 'Watchmaker God,' who created us, wound us up and left us on our own." Why would someone who supposedly believed that promote the offering of prayers to God for his intervention?

Then you bring up Article 11 of the 1779 Treaty of Tripoli as supposedly being clear on whether this is a Christian nation or not. Unfortunately for your argument, it is not clear at all. First of all, Article 11 refers to the government, not the nation itself. Second, Article 11 did not appear anywhere in the Arabic version of the treaty. Finally, when the treaty was renegotiated 8 years or so later, the statement along with the entire article was completely dropped. To be quite frank, the "argument from Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli" is ignorant and impotent.

You do get something right in that the Founders saw what was happening with religion and government in Europe and didn't want that repeated. However, that again does not have any bearing on if this is a Christian nation or not. You follow with a baseless assertion about the supposed abuses of early settlers. I would really like to see evidence to back up both that assertion and the assertion that such abuses influenced the Founders' work.

You claim we are "at once a secular nation and a religious people." This is called talking out of both sides of your mouth. We are a religious (primarily Christian) nation and people with a secular government. The nation can exist without the government, but the government cannot exist without the nation.

Next, you claim that the U.S. has existed for over 215 years. While technically correct, that figure is about 13 years off (2004 minus 1776 equals 228).

Now we get to statistics that you yourself provide which prove that this is a Christian nation: "81 percent of Americans say that prayer is an important part of their daily life; and 87 percent say they never doubt the existence of God." The majority of those people are Christian, so that means that we are, in fact, a Christian nation.

You claim that Jerry Falwell (still your only example of "many religious conservatives") "and company" are "wrong on their facts [and] they're wrong on what's best for religion." From what I've seen, you've gotten more facts wrong than he or most other religious conservatives have, and you certainly are no judge of who is or is not capable of knowing what's best for religion.

Finally, you once again cite that ever misused phrase "separation of church and state," which appears nowhere in the Constitution, and state that only a fool would tear it down. I agree that church and state must remain separate, but that does not mean that religion and government must be hostile to each other as some (the ACLU, Barry Lynn and Americans United, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, People for the American Way, you...) want them to be. The Founders knew that religion and government could get along and their actions proved that. The things they did go well beyond anything that secularists have fought against in recent years. They didn't create a theocracy and neither will religious conservatives or President Bush.

Thursday, December 16, 2004

Mark Dayton: insane hypocrite

Captain Ed exposes more of "Brave Sir Robin's" hypocrisy and over the top theatrics:
Our own fearless Senator Mark Dayton has latched onto the meme du jour amongst the left, the rather esoteric issue of the lack of up-armored Humvees in the battle regions of Iraq. After a planted question during a military town-hall session with Donald Rumsfeld brought this issue national attention, the Democrats have suddenly transformed themselves into armor-plating experts of a sort. Dayton has amusingly tried to top all of them, calling for the resignations of ... well, everyone

Furthermore, as the good captain points out, this apparently is a sudden change-of-heart for Dayton:
Mark Dayton should be the last to complain about a lack of heavy, armored equipment in Iraq. Only this past spring he lectured Donald Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers on the danger of sending heavy vehicles to a war zone

Actually, I seriously doubt this is a true change-of-heart. More likely, it's simply another inconsistant liberal attacking President Bush and his administration over anything and everything they can get their grubby little claws into. Pathetic.

Faith of Our [Founding] Fathers

The misconceptions, half-truths and lies of secularists continue to spread. I was recently alerted to this article by Bill Press, a columnist for Tribune Media Services. The article promotes secularism at the cost of truth. Let's break it down bit by bit, lie by lie:
For many religious conservatives,

Who are these "many?" Who knows? Mr. Press (that seems like a pen name - Press... newspaper...) cites just one example below.
re-electing President Bush wasn't enough.

And to many people, had Kerry been elected, that wouldn't have been enough, either.
They have a much bigger goal in mind. They won't be happy until they tear down the wall of separation between church and state, get rid of any nonbelievers, make Christianity the official state religion

I have it on good authority that Billy-boy is related to Chicken Little. The sky wasn't falling and none of that clap-trap - which has been repeated ad nauseum by secularists since Reagan first took office 24 years ago - will ever come true, either.
and declare the United States a Christian nation.

The U.S. already is a Christian nation. No declaration needed.
And they've already started. ''We must never allow our children to forget that this is a Christian nation,'' the Rev. Jerry Falwell recently boomed from the pulpit. ''We must take back what is rightfully ours.''

This is Bill's single example of "many people." Oh, and "recently?" That statement was made in 1993 - at least 11 years ago. That's "recently?"
That sound you hear is Thomas Jefferson groaning from the grave.

Yes, he does that everytime some hyper-separationist misuses the "separation of church and state" line from his Danbury Baptists letter.
The United States is a great country - best, in my opinion, on the face of the Earth - but we are not a Christian nation. Never have been, and never will be.

I really don't know if this comment is made from ignorance or stupidity. In either case, it's just dead wrong. We've always been a Christian nation, no matter how hard the secularists deny or try to change that. We're a Christian nation, but our government - which is rightfully secular - affords freedom of religion for everyone, and that's a good thing.
Those who make such a claim should begin by learning their American history.

People who make the claims that this clown is making wouldn't know American history if it came up, bit them on the butt, and said, "Hey, I'm American history. Learn about me."
There is zero evidence that the founding fathers intended to create a Christian nation - and tons of evidence that they very carefully went out of their way not to.

I think what this guy is trying to say is that the Founding Fathers didn't want a Christian government or an official national government like the Church of England.
For starters, the founding fathers were not Christians. Most were Deists,

A complete and utter lie that I completely destroyed when a secularist with the handle "Atheist Archon" tried to make the same argument on the TheologyWeb forums via a weblink to his woefully biased and half-witted website. See the three links at the bottom of this post for the truth.
who believed in a remote Providence, or ''Watchmaker God,'' who created us, wound us up and left us on our own. From their writings, we know that few of them believed in Christ's divinity and none of them accepted Jesus as their personal savior.

This sounds like a line regurgitated from Internet Infidels or some other anti-Christian website instead of something learned from actual research.
That hands-off approach to God is reflected in the Constitution, which was ratified in 1789.

Rightfully so. The Constitution created the government, not the nation.
The words God, Providence, Jesus or Christianity are found nowhere in the document

Neither do the words "separation of church and state," hypocrite. I guess that settles the issue of whether the Founding Fathers wanted separation of church and state or not, because if it's not in the Constitution, they didn't want it, right?. (Of course, the words "in the year of our Lord" - which directly refer to Jesus - actually are found in the document.)
It establishes no national religion.

Again, rightfully so. But no national religion does not mean that this isn't a Christian nation.
It sets no religious test for holding public office. The presidential oath - the only one spelled out in the Constitution - does not end with the traditional ''so help me God.'' And there is no requirement that it be taken with one hand on the Bible.

Yeah, so where do you suppose those things came from? Obviously it came from this being a Christian nation.
Nor did members of the Constitutional Convention, unlike today's Congress, start each session with a prayer. One month into their meeting, Benjamin Franklin made such a proposal, but only three or four delegates thought it was a good idea. The rest thought invoking God's help would make them look "desperate."

Franklin's proposed measure was rejected only because it was so late into the convention, which had already had its share of problems. Had the issue been brought up at the beginning, it very likely would have been approved. Furthermore, a sermon was presented at the convention just six days later and prayers were then read every morning after that.

Nothing like getting only half the story, eh? Typical for religion-hating secularists.

Of course, Franklin is one of the men who secularists claim was a stalwart Deist "who believed in a remote Providence, or 'Watchmaker God,' who created us, wound us up and left us on our own." Why would someone who supposedly believed that promote the offering of prayers to God for his intervention?
Under George Washington, the new nation soon got the first chance to prove its religious neutrality. In peace negotiations with the Muslim region of North Africa, which had been attacking American vessels, the question was asked: ''Is the United States a Christian nation?'' The response, contained in Article 11 of the ensuing Treaty of Tripoli, endorsed by President John Adams and unanimously ratified by the U.S. Senate, begins: ''As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion...''

How much clearer could it be?

Clearer? There is nothing clear about Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli. First of all, the article is refering to the government, not the nation to which the government belongs. Second, the article did not appear anywhere in the Muslim version of the treaty and most scholars agree that the article simply did not belong in the American version. Finally, when the treaty was renegotiated just a few years later, the article was completely dropped. To be quite frank, the "argument from Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli" is an ignorant and lame defense of the secularist position.
Why did the founding fathers strive so hard to keep government from meddling with religion and, just as important, keep religion from meddling with politics? Because they knew their history. They saw what happened in Europe, where princes became little more than pawns of the pope; and, sometimes, popes but puppets of the prince.

Hey, Bill gets something right. But again, this has no bearing on the issue of if this is a Christian nation or not.
They saw similar abuses among the first settlers, who came to the New World seeking religious tolerance - but only, in practice, for themselves.

Yeah, I'd like to see that assertion backed up with evidence - both of abuses by the settlers and the Founding Fathers using these supposed abuses to shape their work.
Madison, Jefferson and others realized that a wall separating church and state was necessary for both institutions to survive. And history has proven them correct a hundred times over. We are at once a secular nation and a religious people.

No, we are a religious (primarily Christian) people/nation with a secular government. The nation can exist without the government, but the government cannot exist without the nation.
Our great republic has survived over 215 years.

How old is this article? By my count, that figure is about 13 years off.
And religious faith flourishes in America like almost nowhere else.

True enough.
According the Pew Research Center, 81 percent of Americans say that prayer is an important part of their daily life; and 87 percent say they never doubt the existence of God. Among Western nations, only the Vatican could beat those numbers.

And since most of those people are Christians, I guess that means we are a Christian nation.
So, Falwell and company are not only wrong on their facts, they're wrong on what's best for religion.

Mr. Press is wrong on facts and he's obviously no one to judge who is or is not capable of knowing what's best for religion. I would take Jerry Falwell "and company" any day over this putz.
The fact that we are at once the strongest and the most religious nation on Earth didn't just happen by accident. Nor is it because we are God's Chosen People, because He loves us more than any other people on Earth. It happened only because our founding fathers had the wisdom, the vision and the courage to make American different. We became the first county where priests did not have to answer to politicians; nor politicians, to priests.

Indeed. And again, that has no bearing on whether this is a Christian nation or not.
God bless America. The wall of separation between church and state is what makes this country great.

In part, yes, but then that phrase doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution, does it?
Only a fool would try to tear it down.

Correction: only a fool would try to portray religious conservatives as wanting to tear it down.

For anyone interested in more information on the faiths of America's Founding Fathers, I direct you to the following well-researched webpages:

Were the Founding Fathers "Deists," "Freethinkers," and "Infidels?"

Evidences of Faith in the Buildings, Memorials, and Forefathers of the United States (scroll down about halfway)

The Faith of Our Fathers

Oh, and please make sure you let Mr. Press know how you feel about his attempt to revise history. His email address can be found at the bottom of his article or go to his website.

Wednesday, December 15, 2004

Witchita mayor rejects p.c. hyper-secularist holiday clap-trap

In rejecting the grossly unfair and prejudiced practice of secularizing Christmas and only Christmas, Witchita's mayor has found himself the target of criticism:
Calling himself "not a politically correct person," Wichita Mayor Carlos Mayans said Tuesday that next year's Winterfest celebration will include the lighting of a Christmas tree.

"God is God, and a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree," he said.

Organizers had called it a "community tree," which sparked a debate over the role of government in religious holiday celebrations.

"Community tree." *rolls eyes* And December 24th and 25th probably will be renamed "Community Day Eve" and "Community Day" someday soon.

So, why is it that religious celebrations like Hanukkah and Ramadan are not forced to be secularized like Christmas is by the ACLU, Barry Lynn and AU, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Michael Newdow, and a host of other hyper-secularist groups and individuals?

Tuesday, December 14, 2004

American-Lady takes on the liberal "elites"

Lorraine takes on (with a little help from Alan Aker) the liberals who call Republicans "stupid" (or worse) and one who called her a "redneck."

Conservatives get offended, too

Michelle Malkin cites an article by Dave Oliviera, who states, "We Red Staters can get offended, too." It's a good read.

Have years of unbreakable filibusters given liberals a false sense of ownership over the courts?

Now that liberals are losing elections in a big way, I think they are starting to feel threatened that their stranglehold on the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts is coming to an end. For years, they've kept out most conservative judges through unbreakable Congressional filibusters. However, they lost seats in Congress again this year and will likely lose more in 2006. I have no doubt that they are aware of these facts. In editorials, news programs and blogs, they are dreading the ever-increasing possibility of conservative, right-wing judges being appointed to the courts. The way they talk about it, you'd think Republicans were doing something unconstitutional. To them, the only people fit for the appointments are liberal, left-wing judges. I started wondering why they erroneously feel that they own the courts and one possibility I came up with was that they have been spoiled rotten due to these unbreakable filibusters. They've gotten their way for so long that they can't accept anything else. It dumbfounds them.

Of course, the only issue that ever comes up in regards to the appointment of conservative judges is Roe v. Wade. No other issues matter. These people are so dead set on people being allowed to kill unborn children at any time (from conception to seconds before being completely out of the birth canal) for any reason (usually because someone wasn't able to keep it in their pants) that upholding the "right" becomes the only qualification they use to determine who is fit to sit on the bench. How ridiculous is that? The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves.

Monday, December 13, 2004

Michael Moore stoops ever lower

Moore's latest compares us to wife beaters:
Watch Dan Rather apologize for not getting his facts straight, humiliated before the eyes of America, voluntarily undermining his credibility and career of over thirty years. Observe Donna Brazille squirm as she is ridiculed by Bay Buchanan, and pronounced irrelevant and nearly non-existent. Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Watch them awkwardly quote the bible, trying to speak the ‘new’ language of America. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, “Why did they beat me?”

And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.

They will tell you: Every single day.

The answer is quite simple. They beat us because they are abusers. We can call it hate. We can call it fear. We can say it is unfair. But we are looped into the cycle of violence, and we need to start calling the dominating side what they are: abusive. And we need to recognize that we are the victims of verbal, mental, and even, in the case of Iraq, physical violence.

As victims we can’t stop asking ourselves what we did wrong. We can’t seem to grasp that they will keep hitting us and beating us as long as we keep sticking around and asking ourselves what we are doing to deserve the beating.

This just goes to show that Moore obviously has lost it. Before the election, his insanity was just barely contained, but now it's simply off the map.

(Courtesy David Limbaugh.)

Feminist News retracts accusation against Operation Rescue West

Well, now. Here's a news story that didn't make the MSM.

[drippingsarcasm]Gosh, I wonder why...[/drippingsarcasm]
The pro-abortion publication Feminist News has retracted its October statement that members of Operation Rescue West "have been found guilty of murdering abortion providers and clinic staff."

Troy Newman of Operation Rescue said it took the threat of a lawsuit against the Eleanor Smeal-led Feminist Majority Foundation to get the correction.

"We're certainly delighted that she's finally acknowledged that Operation Rescue has a longstanding history of being peaceful and nonviolent in our direct action against the abortion providers here in America," Newman said.

And here's the actual correction:
On October 7, 2004, the Feminist News ran a story that included an unsubstantiated statement alleging that members of Operation Rescue West "have been found guilty of murdering abortion providers and clinic staff." As soon as we became aware of this error, which we regret, we removed the story from the Feminist News Archives and we are posting this correction on the Feminist News.

Yeah. "As soon as we became aware of this error." Sure. It only took the better part of two months for them to "become aware" of it. Right.

Of course, had the shoe been on the other foot, it would have been headline news in the MSM.


It just changed over! w00t! The thousandth visitor is from the UK, is using Microsoft WinXP and Internet Explorer 6.0, and breezed in here via the TheologyWeb forums at 1:23:58 pm (7:23:58 pm their time).

(Gosh, Site Meter provides a disturbing amount of information...)

Sunday, December 12, 2004

American-Lady's Christmas lists for right-wingers

Lorraine's compiled a pretty good selection of gift ideas for various tastes. I'm partial to the "I Hate Hollywood" and "Reformed Liberal" (as I am one) gift baskets.

ACLU Homeland Holiday Advisory System

Dawn found a hilarious spoof of the ACLU for the holidays. And it's true, too. The ACLU considers nativity displays to be a greater threat to America than terrorists.

Closing in on 1000 hits

Well, technically, I'm sure I've already passed the 1000 hits mark since I didn't have a counter until October and I got a major link on Michelle Malkin's blog in September. But anyway, the counter shows only about 25 hits left to go and that could well happen overnight. Tell you what - if it happens before I log on in the morning (about 11-12 hours from now), I'll post an embarassing story about myself from my youth. It's just one of many stories that explain my moniker/nickname.

UPDATE: The results are in! And the counter didn't hit 1000 overnight. Too bad. I was really looking forward to sharing that embarassing story. (Yeah, right.)

Using the Bible against Republicans

Someone thought they'd be clever and try to bash Christians (well, only the "fundy" ones), Republicans and the Bible all at one time by bringing up Deuteronomy 24:5 in reference to the Iraq war. Here was my response:
That just goes to show what you Bible-bashing, God-hating left-wing loons and bigots lack in understanding of scripture. If you're going to point out one, why not point out all? There are 612 other Levitical laws that we "Bible-banging, God-fearing right-wing loons and fundamentalists" don't necessarily follow in the 21st Century. Why? Because we are under a new covenant in Christ. As he himself said, he didn't eliminate the old Law, but fulfilled it (Matthew 5:17), and through him we are justified (Acts 13:39).

So really, my ignorant, hateful friend, the issue isn't renouncing this one Levitical law or all Levitical laws, but using one's spirit and brain in understanding everything in the Bible instead of nitpicking it to bash someone or other. So you go right ahead and throw that verse in the faces of anyone you wish. Anyone with even a whit of understanding about Jesus' purpose on earth will easily be able to put you in your place.

For more prejudiced comments by hate-spewing liberals, check out this Kos thread. If there's one thing they hate more than war, it's fundamentalist Christians.

Friday, December 10, 2004

Pencil sharpeners banned in British school

This unbelievable story comes to us via Zero Intelligence, a blog that I really need to stop reading if I want to keep the welt on my forehead from growing after banging it against the desk in frustration so much:
PENCIL sharpeners have been banned from a primary school after a pupil dismantled one and used the blade to slash another child's neck.


The attacker was suspended for two days and is now back in school.

So what happens if one student attacks another by using a pencil as a stabbing weapon? Ban pencils (and all other writing implements)? I got into an eraser-throwing fight with friends in my younger days and accidentally hurt one of them. I guess the school officials would have had to ban erasers from the school because of that if "zero tolerance" had existed back then (about 15-20 years ago).

Thursday, December 09, 2004

More liberal hypocrisy

All we've heard from liberals over the last 20-25 years is that conservative Republicans need to "move toward the center." We're too "extremist," they claim, and that supposedly turns people off. But what about liberals themselves? Well, ask Howard Dean:
Howard Dean says Democrats must campaign on their convictions and not give in to the temptation to behave like Republicans.

Oh, okay. So it's a bad thing for Democrats to "behave like Republicans." How much do you want to bet the opposite isn't true? (Actually, I don't bet on things. That was just a figure of speech.)

Originally found at

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

Well, this explains that teeth-grinding noise I heard earlier

ACLU subjected to Christmas carols

A group of demonstrators sang Christmas carols in front of the Washington, D.C., office of the American Civil Liberties Union today to protest the organization for its attempts to take religious references out of the public square.

Over 25 volunteers with Public Advocate of the United States sang at the office to highlight "the ACLU’s continuing disregard for the rights of their many pro-family targets," the group said in a statement.

Teenager suffers stroke

TV Icon Dick Clark Suffers Mild Stroke

"American Bandstand" icon Dick Clark was hospitalized this week after suffering a mild stroke. Clark, who turned 75 on Nov. 30, suffered the stroke this week, publicist Paul Shefrin said Wednesday, declining to give any details. He would only say Clark had been hospitalized in the Los Angeles area.

In all seriousness, I send him my best. Take a look at that picture, though. 75? That can't be all plastic surgery. The technique isn't THAT good. The man's got some good genes.

Evil girl suspended for bringing evil Jello to school

Hooray for "zero tolerance!"

Gelatin gets 8-year-old suspended

The Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office took samples Tuesday of Jell-O snacks that were brought to school by an 8-year-old Terrytown girl to determine if the concoction contained alcohol.

The youngster was suspended Nov. 29 from Geraldine Boudreaux Elementary School after school officials said the snacks given to her by her mother in small, clear plastic containers resembled an alcoholic mixture commonly known as "Jell-O shots," said Jefferson Parish public schools spokesman Jeff Nowakowski.

The girl was suspended for nine days for two violations of the system's drug policy: having a "look-alike" drug on school grounds and intending to distribute it, Nowakowski said.

The incident was reported by a teacher who noticed liquid dripping from the girl's book bag while the child was waiting outside school for her afternoon bus, Nowakowski said. After inspecting the bag, teachers discovered about 30 containers of gelatin, he said.

The girl told officials that her mother, Adrian Noble, who works in a French Quarter bar, had told her to bring the containers to school and sell them three-for-$1 to raise money for Christmas gifts, Nowakowski said.

In televised reports, Noble denied there was alcohol in the Jell-O and complained about the system's punishment of her daughter. Under the drug policy, the girl can return to school Friday if she completes an assessment program, undergoes counseling and submits to a hair test to make sure she is drug-free, Nowakowski said.

What exactly is this sort of ridiculous crap teaching our kids? Nothing good, that's for sure. And when exactly are people going to sue to get rid of these idiotic "zero tolerance" policies? Hopefully soon.

Originally found at Zero Intelligence.

UPDATE: Go here for a pic of the girl's Jello treats (which I'm told looks like alcoholic Jello shots served at bars), then go here for a pic of a Jello Gelatin snack cup (the first one in the line). Obviously, the pre-packaged snack cups are also "look-alikes," so they should be banned by the school, too.

American-Lady launches the campaign against Hillary

As it is never too early to counter the Clintons, Lorraine is already compiling information about Hillary Clinton before her potential presidential run in 2008. Help out if you can.

Reuters distorts religion to justify Christian-bashing

David Limbaugh exposes some more media bias against Christians by Reuters:

Experts: Men Distort Religion to Justify 'Honour' Killings

While most cases are reported in Muslim countries, "honor" violence also occurs among Christian families, delegates said.

"After we got married, Hell started," a Christian woman from the Middle East, identified only as Maria, said in a video tape.

Beaten and raped for questioning her husband's business practices, she fled to Sweden when he threatened to sell her into prostitution.


But some experts believe any male-dominated religion, in which God and his prophets or apostles are male figures, creates conditions for the subordination and abuse of women.

Reuters goes on to cite only one person as a supposed "expert" on this issue. She says, "Catholicism does not directly support or oppose violence against women. But there are indirect links through culture which is strongly based on religion." Uh, yeah. "Indirect links." Whatever. She goes on to say, "It is a structure based on patriarchal domination of God the Father and the less important role of women can be seen for example in the letters of Saint Paul." That just goes to show she doesn't understand Paul's letters or the rest of the Bible. Women have different roles than men, but they are definitely not less important in the Bible.

Tuesday, December 07, 2004

Advocates of abandoned babies win lottery

I don't like lotteries. I believe they promote the love of money, don't live up to their promises of giving back to the states, and give a false hope to and take away money from many people who are already short on cash. Still, it's not beyond God's power to use everything for good to those who love Him:
A couple who provide funerals for dead abandoned babies and helped inspire a law to save unwanted newborns have won a $27 million jackpot in the California lottery.

Debi Faris-Cifelli and her husband, Steve, won the jackpot last Wednesday and plan to use the winnings to continue their advocacy work, possibly by starting a college scholarship fund.

Here's their website: Garden of Angels

(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin.)

A moment of silence in rememberance

To veterans lost on that tragic morning, veterans lost in our response, and all veterans present and past, thank you and God bless you.

Sunday, December 05, 2004

"Star Trek: Enterprise" abandons subtlety

The repeat of this week's episode is on right now here and the writers have completely abandoned subtlety with their so-obvious-it-slaps-you-in-the-face-like-a-halibut digs at a certain world leader. The episode started out with the Vulcan leader asking if it was logical to wait for the Andorians to use a massively destructive weapon they are thought to have. Later, the Vulcan leader talks about "insurgents" who are opposing him. Then a Vulcan who is working against the Vulcan leader talks with an Andorian who is saying that they don't have the weapon because they were unable to gather data on the original version (which belonged to another race that was attacking Earth) that was destroyed. The Vulcan responds by saying that that information was "conveniently" left out by the Vulcans. Could they be any more obvious?

Just yet another reason not to watch the show. (I unfortunately happened upon it when flipping through the channels and the initial dig against President Bush made me curious at how far they'd take it.)

Thursday, December 02, 2004

Finally, some good news about school discipline

Some schools on the East Coast have found a vastly improved alternative over the "zero tolerance/expel at all costs" approach to student discipline. As Zero Intelligence reports:
They have begun implementing a system used by parents the world over - rewarding good behavior to encourage more good behavior.


It is working at phenomenally successful levels. Cleveland County's Township Three Elementary School had 35 office referrals during the first month of school this year. Compare that to 125 referrals in the same span in 2001, before the positive behavior plan was implemented. More than 50 South Carolina schools have started using the plan in the past two years. They have experienced 20 to 60 percent drops in their numbers of office referrals. Warlick is Gaston County's alternative school and deals with children with severe behavior problems. Suspensions are down by a third and these troubled students are taking more semester credits.

Simply amazing! Let's all hope and pray that this is the beginning of the end of the ridiculous "zero tolerance" policies.

New Site Meter style

I changed the style of my Site Meter graphic on the right. Now it shows how many visits I've gotten. Closing in on 1,000.

A "Dawn Patrol" primer

Dawn got a link on Michelle Malkin's blog today. (Congrats, Dawn!) To help out new readers, Dawn put together a list of her posts about Planned Parenthood that people should check out.

Trackbacks rule!

Okay, it's still kind of early, but I'm already seeing really good results on my site meter statistics from the few trackbacks I've done so far. So if you don't have a trackback tool, scroll down to my "Haloscan" post, get it, and use it.

More on the Netherlands' culture of death

Paul at Wizbang exposes more of the sickening post-birth abortions going on in the Netherlands here:

Euthanasia debate in Europe focuses on children

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - Four times in recent months, Dutch doctors have pumped lethal doses of drugs into newborns they believe are terminally ill, setting off a new phase in a growing European debate over when, if ever, it's acceptable to hasten death for the critically ill. ...

Under the Groningen protocol, if doctors at the hospital think a child is suffering unbearably from a terminal condition, they have the authority to end the child's life. The protocol is likely to be used primarily for newborns, but it covers any child up to age 12. ...

A parent's role is limited under the protocol.
While experts and critics familiar with the policy said a parent's wishes to let a child live or die naturally most likely would be considered, they note that the decision must be professional, so rests with doctors.

And from the Weekly Standard

Dutch doctors have been surreptitiously engaging in eugenic euthanasia of disabled babies for years, although it technically is illegal, since infants can't consent to be killed. Indeed, a disturbing 1997 study published in the British medical journal, the Lancet, revealed how deeply pediatric euthanasia has already metastasized into Dutch neo natal medical practice: According to the report, doctors were killing approximately 8 percent of all infants who died each year in the Netherlands. That amounts to approximately 80-90 per year. Of these, one-third would have lived more than a month. At least 10-15 of these killings involved infants who did not require life-sustaining treatment to stay alive. The study found that a shocking 45 percent of neo-natologists and 31 percent of pediatricians who responded to questionnaires had killed infants.

It took the Dutch almost 30 years for their medical practices to fall to the point that Dutch doctors are able to engage in the kind of euthanasia activities that got some German doctors hanged after Nuremberg. For those who object to this assertion by claiming that German doctors killed disabled babies during World War II without consent of parents, so too do many Dutch doctors: Approximately 21 percent of the infant euthanasia deaths occurred without request or consent of parents.

Aren't you glad you don't live in Europe? Unfortunately, I'm guessing it won't be long before this evil comes to the U.S.

Send Denver's mayor a lump of coal for Christmas

Michelle Malkin reports on the humbugs in Denver who are refusing to allow Christians to sing "offensive" carols in this year's "Parade of Lights":

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper recently announced that next year the phrase "Merry Christmas" will be removed from the city building and replaced with "Happy Holidays."

And now a church group who wants to march in the Parade of Lights and sing Christmas carols will not be allowed to participate in the parade. Organizers say the parade is about the holidays, not Christmas


But last spring when the Faith Bible Chapel asked to be a part of the parade, offering to sponsor or build their own float and sing carols, organizers said no because it would be offensive.

Yeah, "O Little Town of Bethlehem" and "Away In A Manger" are really offensive. Uh-huh. Yep, we don't want those offensive songs about how God's love for the world is so great that He sent His only Son to be born into the world as a baby in order to bring us salvation.

In answer to this ridiculous prejudice, Ms. Malkin proposes that people send Denver's mayor lumps of coal:

I am hereby launching the Lump of Coal campaign. Later today, I will box up a lump of charcoal, mark the package "MERRY CHRISTMAS!" and send it to the Denver Mayor in protest of his idiotic policy. Please join me in doing the same (and if you take a photo of your creatively designed package, I will link/post).

Send to:

Mayor John W. Hickenlooper
Denver City and County Building
1437 Bannock Street, Suite 350
Denver, CO 80202

Sounds good to me. Now, where to find a lump of coal around here...

Clinton's buddy Marc Rich implicated in U.N. Oil For Food scandal

The pardon that Clinton issued at the end of his presidency to Marc Rich infuriated many people. Now comes word that Rich acted as a middleman in the U.N. Oil For Food scam only a month later:

Former American fugitive Marc Rich was a middleman for several of Iraq's suspect oil deals in February 2001, just one month after his pardon from President Clinton, according to oil industry shipping records obtained by ABC News.

And a U.S. criminal investigation is looking into whether Rich, as well as several other prominent oil traders, made illegal payments to Iraq in order to obtain the lucrative oil contracts.

Unbelievable! So thanks to Clinton, Rich got away with everything he did before he was pardoned and his apparent way of celebrating was to get involved in one of the biggest scams in history. It just blows my mind how much corruption follows the Clintons around and yet their supporters act as if everything is just peachy. I don't know if that's from ignorance, belligerence, or fear. Whatever the case, it reflects poorly upon them.

Captain Ed of the Captain's Quarters had this to say:

While the fortune Rich funneled to Saddam gets used to kill American servicemen and Iraqi civilians, Bill Clinton wanders around his presidential library, wrapped in the loving embrace of the American media.

One has to wonder how Bill can sleep at night. One wonders if he even cares. One finds that there is enough to conclude that he does not.

Another great blog


(This is primarily a reciprocal link, but it really is a great blog.)

Wednesday, December 01, 2004

Another good blog by a young blogger

This time, though, it's a young woman:


Scroll down a bit and look on the right where she writes:

A Quick Note

I am a 17 year old Republican.

In this world of amazing bloggers, it looks intimidating to try writing for a political blog, especially at such a young age.

But all I can do is try. If you want to e-mail me, you can do so at [email protected]

She also writes at the bottom of the page:

If you link me, thank you very much. Let me know if you would like me to link you in return- leave a comment asking me to read your blog.

Lets give her some encouragement, shall we?

UPDATE: Lorraine emailed me back and it turns out that it's a good thing I told her how I found her blog. She didn't know that David Limbaugh had linked to her blog on his! Congrats, Lorraine!


If you haven't already noticed, I've added a trackback tool to S&B.; It's from Haloscan and it's extremely simple to add, especially for Blogger/Blogspot users as it has an auto-install for us. I have to give a very pleased nod to Sgt. Mac for finding this.

(Unfortunately, adding this wiped out all the old comments. I think it's an okay sacrifice, though.)

A testament of the "never give up, never say die" attitude

Or not...

OK, enuff of this crap.....

Ah, so this is what they mean by "peace protest"

Photos of moonbat protesters in Ottawa here and here. Watch out for a few instances of the "f"-word.

"Stormin'" Norm Coleman says Kofi Annan must resign

My buddy Dan at View of the Republic reports on Senator Coleman's latest:

I have good news readers; someone is finally calling for Kofi Annan to step down from the position of Secretary-General. The corrupt leader of the United Nations has been deceiving the world with his scandals and money laundering for far too long. Senator Coleman, the man leading an investigation into the United Nations’ Oil-for-Food program in Iraq, is the man responsible for taking this necessary political leap.

That is good news indeed! In fact, it's fantastic, kick your chair back, stand up, pump your fist and yell "Boo-yah!" news! "Stormin'" Norm is my favorite Senator right now and I'm very glad that I can say I voted for him. And to think that if the Democrats hadn't screwed up the late Senator Paul Wellstone's memorial service (which they turned into the Paul Wellstone Memorial Partisan Political Rally), Walter Mondale probably would've been Senator instead of Norm, and I seriously doubt that Mondale would've had anything to do with investigating the U.N.

Keep kicking butt, Senator!

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

Another religious monument that also needs to go

For over 150 years, the government has displayed a major 250-year-old monument inscribed with a Bible verse to the public in a major city. In light of the recent rulings against Ten Commandments monuments across the country, it is obvious that this monument needs to be removed from state property immediately or removed from display and perhaps shoved into some dingey, out of the way closet like the Alabama Ten Commentments monument. Why the ACLU, Barry Lynn and Americans United, and/or People for the American Way haven't descended on this monument is beyond me. This is obviously a blatant violation of the "separation of church and state" and it needs to be rectified IMMEDIATELY!

Oh, the Bible verse is Leviticus 25:10: "Proclaim liberty throughout the Land unto all the inhabitants thereof."

And the monument in question is the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia.

Web Pages referring to this page
Link to this page and get a link back!