Thursday, March 31, 2005

Terri Schiavo 1963-2005

Blogs for Terri

Terri's Fight

This is not the end. For those of us who support life, the fight goes on. For Terri, she has passed into the other side of eternity. May God grant her the peace and life in Heaven that she was denied by the lovers of death here on earth.

The Cloud's Veil
Even though the rain hides the stars
Even though the mist swirls the hills
Even when the dark clouds veil the sky
You are by my side
Even when the sun shall fall in sleep
Even when at dawn the sky shall weep
Even in the night when storms shall rise
You are by my side
Jesus, you're by my side.

You Are Mine
I will come to you in the silence,
I will lift you from all your fear.
You will hear my voice,
I claim you as my choice,
Be still and know I am here.

Do not be afraid, I am with you.
I have called you each by name.
Come and follow me
I will bring you home;
I love you and you are mine.

I am hope for all who are hopeless,
I am eyes for all who long to see.
In the shadows of the night,
I will be your light,
Come and rest in me.

Do not be afraid, I am with you.
I have called you each by name.
Come and follow me
I will bring you home;
I love you and you are mine.

I am strength for all the despairing,
Healing for the ones who dwell in shame
All the blind will see,
The lame will run free,
And all will know my name.

Do not be afraid, I am with you.
I have called you each by name.
Come and follow me
I will bring you home;
I love you and you are mine.

I am the Word that leads all to freedom,
I am the peace the world cannot give.
I will call your name,
Embracing all your pain,
Stand up, now walk, and live!

Do not be afraid, I am with you.
I have called you each by name.
Come and follow me
I will bring you home;
I love you and you are mine.

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

EZ* doesn't know what abiogenesis is; says it's not a part of evolution

*Evolutionary zealot

Paul from Wizbang continues to find himself the target of criticism from the more-evolved-than-thou evolutionary zealots:
I've taken a ton of grief over my evolution posts. With the bulk of it coming from "The Commissar."

Today while reading one of my posts, he ran across the word "Abiogenesis." This is what he said about it to his readers:
"Abby ... what?" It got me, too. "Abiogenesis" mean "life from no life," or "there was no life, and then there was." (I suspect that those definitions are almost as bad as Paul's. Corrections welcomed.)

He had never even heard the term! This moron wants to tell the whole world how much more than me he knows about this stuff and he does not even know the meaning of abiogenesis. They he proceeds to tell me what it means. Next he will we lecture me on Nuclear Physics and then ask his readers what an electron is.

Indeed. How exactly does one learn about evolution without learning even the basic definition of abiogenesis? Skip a day in junior high biology class?

Ah, but the zealot makes the claim that "evolutionary theory makes NO CLAIM AT ALL about how life began. It's about the process." Riiiiight. That's like claiming, "Well, I don't have the slighest clue how this car was built, but boy, do I know how it works!" If you're a mechanic, shouldn't you know how cars are put together? And if you're a defender of evolution, shouldn't you know how life came into being? Evolution had a beginning, did it not? And wouldn't that beginning be abiogenesis? Why do evolutionists get a free pass when it comes to this? They're usually the ones who jump all over Christians who dare to say "I don't know." Ah, but they say "I don't know" and that's it. End of story.

Monday, March 28, 2005

The fundy evolutionists make fools of themselves

Paul (an agnostic) from Wizbang accepts neither abogenesis/evolution nor Creationism as explanations for how life on this planet came to be. (See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.) Not surprisingly, rabid evolutionists (like CC and PZ Meyers) have pretty much painted him as a Bible-thumping, anti-science, extremist, Christian fundy, which is unsurprising coming from such dogmatic evolutionists. DON'T QUESTION THEIR RELIGION SCIENCE!!!

It's pretty funny that PZ states:
Paul: Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

You're an evolution-denier. An anti-science crank. A pseudo-scientific nutjob. A guy who thinks his misunderstood 'training' in 9th grade qualifies him to dismiss the work of real scientists.

You are an idiot, a moron, a fool, a fraud, a bull**** artist. You are a lying phony.

So when I lump you in with those other, similar kooks who call themselves creationists, I'm being kind.

So, alternatively, I'm sure PZ has no problem if I lump him in with the Bible-thumping, extremist Christian fundies based upon his hateful intolerance, close-mindedness and unquestioning, unchallengable dogma.

My mom's finally online... and she's reading S&B;!


Well, it's my "fault," really. I signed her up and added a bookmark to S&B.; S'okay. I don't have anything here of which I'm ashamed. No junior high-ish vulgarities like Canadian Cynic or booze-hound sex humor like Wonkette. (I wonder if their mom's read their blogs...)

So... Hi, mom!

Saturday, March 26, 2005

Jeff Blogworthy's excellent post about the Bible and euthanasia

Just read it:
1 Sam 31:1 - 2 Sam 1:16

Now the Philistines fought against Israel; and the men of Israel fled from before the Philistines, and fell slain on Mount Gilboa.2 Then the Philistines followed hard after Saul and his sons.

4 Then Saul said to his armorbearer, "Draw your sword, and thrust me through with it, lest these uncircumcised men come and thrust me through and abuse me."

But his armorbearer would not, for he was greatly afraid. Therefore Saul took a sword and fell on it.5 And when his armorbearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell on his sword, and died with him.6 So Saul, his three sons, his armorbearer, and all his men died together that same day.

2 Samuel 1

1:1 The Report of Saul's Death

Now it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David had returned from the slaughter of the Amalekites, and David had stayed two days in Ziklag, 2 on the third day, behold, it happened that a man came from Saul's camp with his clothes torn and dust on his head. So it was, when he came to David, that he fell to the ground and prostrated himself.

3 And David said to him, "Where have you come from?"

So he said to him, "I have escaped from the camp of Israel."

4 Then David said to him,"How did the matter go? Please tell me."

And he answered, "The people have fled from the battle, many of the people are fallen and dead, and Saul and Jonathan his son are dead also."

5 So David said to the young man who told him, "How do you know that Saul and Jonathan his son are dead?"

6 Then the young man who told him said, "As I happened by chance to be on Mount Gilboa, there was Saul, leaning on his spear; and indeed the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him.7 Now when he looked behind him, he saw me and called to me. And I answered, 'Here I am.'8 And he said to me, 'Who are you?' So I answered him, 'I am an Amalekite.'9 He said to me again, 'Please stand over me and kill me, for anguish has come upon me, but my life still remains in me.'10 So I stood over him and killed him, because I was sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown that was on his head and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them here to my lord."

11 Therefore David took hold of his own clothes and tore them, and so did all the men who were with him.12 And they mourned and wept and fasted until evening for Saul and for Jonathan his son, for the people of the LORD and for the house of Israel, because they had fallen by the sword.

13 Then David said to the young man who told him, "Where are you from?"

And he answered, "I am the son of an alien, an Amalekite."

14 So David said to him, "How was it you were not afraid to put forth your hand to destroy the LORD's anointed?"15 Then David called one of the young men and said, "Go near, and execute him!" And he struck him so that he died.16 So David said to him,"Your blood is on your own head, for your own mouth has testified against you, saying, 'I have killed the LORD's anointed.'" NKJV

Facts gleaned from the account of Saul’s death:

1. Saul was mortally wounded and his death was imminent.
2. Saul wanted to die.
3. Saul attempted suicide.
4. Saul was in excruciating pain.
5. Saul asked to be killed.

The Amalekite’s arguments:

1. The Amalekite presumably thought he was doing the right thing. He did what was right in his own eyes and probably expected some reward.
2. The Amalekite excused his conduct by offering the "mercy killing" and "I was ending his suffering" arguments.
3. The Amalekite used the "he was going to die soon anyway" argument.
4. The Amalekite used the "condition was irreversible" and the "no hope for survival" arguments.
5. David rejected the Amalekite’s arguments as specious and exercised his right as king to subject the Amalekite to capital punishment for the offense of murder.

The lesson of the text is unavoidable for the Christian who recognizes the Bible as the ultimate authority. Euthanasia is immoral and it is rejected by God as a false, pragmatic, human construction.

Amen to that!

I weeeen! I weeeen!

I got a mention on Wizbang as a winner in the recent Worst Celebrity Endorsement contest:
Jinx McHue garners the "Silence Is Golden" Award for "Announcer: "And now an important message about Hooked on Phonics by Marcel Marceau.""

Even though I typed "by" instead of "from," which would have made more sense, I think, but I'll still take it. Thanks, Jay!

Thursday, March 24, 2005

When the shoe is on the other foot

"Supporters of Michael Schiavo's effort to end his wife's life have asked how conservatives, who claim to believe in the sanctity of marriage, can fail to respect his husbandly authority. The most obvious answer is that a man's authority as a husband does not supersede his wife's rights as a human being -- a principle we never thought we'd see liberals question."
--James Taranto

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Asserting your parental authority can get you arrested

14-year-olds can't drink. Can't drive. Can't own guns. Can't get tattoos. But by gosh, if you get in the way of one having an abortion without her parents' consent, you'll be arrested - even if you're her parent!
GRANITE CITY - A Sothern Illinois woman was arrested last week (March 17) after trying to intervene on behalf of her 14-year old daughter's effort to have an abortion. The girl was allegedly taken to an abortion clinic by the mother of the man allegedly to have impregnated the 14-year old.

According to the girl's mother, her 14-year old daughter was called off from school in Madison County by a woman posing as the girl's “grandmother.” The woman took the girl from her home only minutes before the girl’s mother returned home from work.

It was later determined that the woman who had posed as the "grandmother" to the school authorities was the mother of the male who had fathered the unborn child the 14-year old girl was carrying. The age of the male has not been released.

When the parents were notified their pregnant daughter was not at school, they suspected she had been taken to the Hope Abortion Clinic in Granite City. The parents and grandfather were the only persons authorized to request school absence for the fourteen year old female.

“My husband and I rushed to the abortion clinic where we saw our daughter’s name on the roster and the time she had checked in,” the mother said. She then went into the clinic and searched a room filled with young women awaiting abortions but did not see her daughter.

She took a seat near the main desk and said, “I was told I could not prove my daughter was there so I began calling her name. A medical tech at the clinic told me , ‘It’s your daughter’s rights, it’s her body. You have no rights.’”

Like hell she doesn't! Abortion is a MEDICAL PROCEDURE. A minor can't have any other medical procedure performed on her without her parents' consent (unless, of course, it's a life-or-death emergency, which this was not). Ah, but the rules change when it comes to abortion, of course. Typical liberals.

Yep. "It's her body. You have no rights." Well, what else can this girl do with her body without her parents' consent, then? Pretty much anything. And if anyone tries to stop her, they get arrested, right?

Is this the kind of world liberals really want? Apparently so...

Oh, and did you catch this?
The police in the community in which the family lives allegedly told the girl's mom that they couldn't intervene despite her making a charge that her daughter had been raped (by statute) because the charge was stale--7 weeks after the incident.

What a fat load of bull droppings! I seriously doubt (to the point of complete certainty) that the statute of limitations for rape is that short.

Another smackdown: Canadian's questions answered

Alarming News answers a few questions from a citizen of the Great White North:
9) How come it’s legal to own an assault rifle but two men or two women can’t get married?

Does that pass for intelligent thinking in Canada? In America we call that a non sequitur (look it up!). What does one thing have to do with another? It's like my asking 'How come Canada has gay marriage but no real economy?' I mean, both are legitimate questions but one has nothing to do with the other.

Read the rest at Alarming News.

HBO to lay the smackdown on Gasping for Air America*

*"Gasping for Air America" courtesy of my brother, the Most Impudent One.

The DrudgeReport reports on the upcoming HBO documentary about Air America:
HBO is set to air a behind the scenes look at the launching of liberal radio network AIR AMERICA.

The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained a director's cut of LEFT OF THE DIAL, a grossly entertaining docu-drama of life on the other side of the AIR AMERICA microphone.

The doubts. The lies. The bounced checks. The heartbreak.

The viewer is taken upclose to witness the ugly business of media ambition.

The main character, Evan Cohen, founding chairman and main investor, is depicted as a complete fraud.

The documentary shows Cohen arriving in the middle of night at AIR AMERICA offices to sign over the company and disappear again, but not before lying about how many ads have been sold and how much money is the bank [zero].

Dead Air.

It shows how AIR AMERICA executives lied and lied again about not bouncing checks to their Chicago and Los Angeles affiliate owners. [The network was quickly thrown off the stations.]

The film captures AIR AMERICA staff first learning about the Chicago and LA nightmare by reading a DRUDGE REPORT exclusive on their computers.

It shows midday host Al Franken at a staff meeting being told there is no money left, hilariously, just moments after ranting about George Bush's ethics.

Ooo! It sounds so good that I'm quivering in anticipation!

Tuesday, March 22, 2005

Hits to S&B; from CC's fans

Yep. Both of them. It's funny how everytime he links to me, there tends to be two and only two hits close together on the "By Referrals" page for my Site Meter account.

Monday, March 21, 2005

Terri Schiavo vs. death-row inmates

So let's see... Liberals oppose the state-sanctioned death penalty for those convicted in a court of law because of the chance that they might be innocent. However, they support the state-sanctioned death penalty for Terri Schiavo despite the chance that her condition might improve.


Terri's bill signed into law by President Bush

Hallelujah! Let's hear it from the man himself:
"In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life," Bush said in a statement after signing the bill.

Amen to that! You and every member of Congress who voted for this bill have done Thomas Jefferson proud today.

NYT calls death by starvation "peaceful," "gentle," "dignified"

Via Michelle Malkin:

N.Y. Times: Starvation Death Not Painful
The newspaper that was most outraged over photos of Iraqi terrorist suspects being mistreated by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison said Sunday that the two-week-long starvation-execution of Terri Schiavo will cause her "little discomfort."

"From the data that is available, it is not a horrific thing at all," Dr. Linda Emanuel, the founder of the Education for Physicians in End-of-Life Care Project at Northwestern University, told the New York Times. "In fact, declining food and water is a common way that terminally ill patients end their lives, because it is less painful than violent suicide and requires no help from doctors," the paper maintains.

The Times also cites Dr. Sean Morrison, a professor of geriatrics and palliative care at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, who insists that starvation victims "generally slip into a peaceful coma."

"It's very quiet, it's very dignified - it's very gentle," he adds.

Uh-huh. Right. Sure. I guess that means that we can no longer prosecute people who starve unwanted animals to death since it's not cruel. Yep, it's a "peaceful, "gentle," "dignified" death that causes "little discomfort" for the animals. The minute you hear the hypocritical liberals start backing that argument en masse, Hell will have frozen over. No, they will go on defending the state-sanctioned starvation-murder of Terri Schaivo and call it "peaceful," "gentle" and "dignified." Then they will turn around and call for the severest punishment under the law for anyone who starves animals. If that doesn't clearly show you the sick and twisted mindset of these people, little else will.

ADDENDUM: Oh, yes. Let's not forget about Hitler. Remember all those photos and films we've seen of the deathly gaunt starving Jews in his death camps? He wasn't such a bad guy for doing that, since it was "peaceful," "gentle" and "dignified."

Saturday, March 19, 2005

Back when common sense actually was common

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
--Thomas Jefferson

Friday, March 18, 2005

For Terri...

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears relieved;
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed.

Through many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promised good to me,
His Word my hope secures;
He will my Shield and Portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yea, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, Who called me here below,
Shall be forever mine.

When we’ve been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise
Than when we’d first begun.

D-Day for Terri

The court-ordered - no, scratch that. The oligarchy-ordered torture-murder of Terri Schiavo is scheduled to begin in a few hours. There are a few last-ditch efforts being implemented to try to save her. Updates can be found here.

Here are excerpts from some of my posts about Terri:
Terri had no will or any other written directives regarding this situation she's in. The claim is that while she was watching a movie on TV with her husband, there was a scene of someone in a coma on life-support. Terri allegedly said that she wouldn't want to live like that. Honestly, how many of us wouldn't express the same sentiment? I wouldn't want to live like that, either, but that's NOT the same as expressing that I would want to be put to death if I end up in such a state. I wouldn't want to live like that, but I also wouldn't want to be put to death if I end up in such a state. Anyway, it's ridiculous that the courts have relied upon nothing but hearsay regarding Terri's alleged wishes. If there's no written directive or any other clear indication directly from a person regarding their wishes about being on life-support (BTW, Terri is not on life-support - the only help she needs is a feeding tube), then the courts should take a conservative, life-preserving position.


Let's just be clear on what that means. Terri will no longer receive food or water. She will die of starvation/dehydration. It is a slow (it could take up to two weeks), painful, ignoble death that even animals are protected from by law. But this is a human life we're talking about. These days, human life is worth less than the lives of the pests that invade our homes.


Do you think Terri Schaivo would have wished to remain married to a man who is engaged to another woman and has had children with her already? I wonder if she ever made her wishes regarding that known. And if she had, I wonder if Michael would fight as hard to fulfill those wishes as he is to kill her.


A poster on TheologyWeb's forum has been trying to argue that Terri is dead. Her body remains alive, but, he claims, her personality is gone. She has no mind left. She's not Terri anymore. "Terri the person" is dead, he claims. "The person that was Terri is no more. Terri Shiavo no longer exists. Terri is dead, what we see laying on the bed there is all that remains."

Okay, fine. She's not there. The body is just a mindless husk. It can't think or feel anything. No joy. No sorrow. No fear. No pain.

So, then, why again is Terri being put to death?

It is claimed that Terri said she wouldn't want to live "like that" when she saw a person in a coma in a movie. (See my earlier post below about the difference between not wanting to live some way and wanting to be put to death.) Well, guess what, all you supporters of Terri's death. By your own arguments, Terri isn't living "like that." By your own arguments, Terri (the person) is dead. By your own arguments, she no longer exists. By your own arguments, she is not suffering.

So, then, why again is Terri being put to death?

Terri's death would cause much pain, sorrow and suffering to her parents and many, many other people.

So, then, why again is Terri being put to death?

Michael Schiavo has obviously gotten over any grief he might have felt regarding Terri. He's currently engaged to another woman and they have already had children together.

So, then, why again is Terri being put to death?

(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin.)

UPDATE: President Bush weighs in:
"The case of Terri Schiavo raises complex issues, yet in instances like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life. Those who live at the mercy of others deserve our special care and concern."

(Hat tip: Wizbang.)

UPDATE 2: For Terri...

Thursday, March 17, 2005

Horowitz does what Canadian Cynic cannot

And that is admit error:
Conservative firebrand David Horowitz admitted he misrepresented a complaint by a University of Northern Colorado student against her instructor.

Horowitz has been outspoken about faculty bias on college campuses around the country. He has been telling a story about a UNC student who refused to answer an essay question, which Horowitz says asked her to "explain why George Bush is a war criminal."

Horowitz claimed the student received an "F" after she wrote an essay explaining why Saddam Hussein was a war criminal.

As it turned out, the student did not fail the test, which allowed students to choose one of two essay questions -- neither of which included the phrase "explain why George Bush is a war criminal."

Criminal justice professor Robert Dunkley said it's frightening how far Horowitz has taken the incident without doing thorough research.

Uh, yeah. Cuz the left never, ever unquestioningly runs wild with unsubstantiated stories.
*cough*100,000 dead Iraqis*cough*

So anyway, one has to wonder if CC will admit error in mindlessly and completely believing this bogus account of Saddam's capture (satisfyingly debunked here) after having a massive virtual orgasm over Horowitz's admission.

Yeah, I don't think he will, either.

UPDATE: Horowitz has issued updates here and here.

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

Canadian Cynic swings both ways, baby! YEAH!

This is absolutely priceless! (It's also indicative of the far-left mentality.) Earlier today, Canadian Cynic took issue with a supposedly "unsubstantiated tale" (or so far-left vomit rag Media Matters claims) from conservative David Horowitz. Then, just a few hours later, CC turns around and treats this unsubstantiated tale from an ex-marine about Saddam's capture as absolute, unquestionable truth!

You cannot smell CC's rank hypocrisy because there's simply so much of it that you can't even breathe.

(And just in case CC tries to cover up his bungling, I've saved copies of both pages from his blog.)

UPDATE: The alleged ex-marine's claim has been thoroughly debunked by the Neoconservative. (Purloined from Michelle Malkin.)

UPDATE 2: Greetings, CC fans! (All two of you, according to my SiteMeter referrals.) Be sure to read the part that CC didn't include in his post:
Then, just a few hours later, CC turns around and treats this unsubstantiated tale from an ex-marine about Saddam's capture as absolute, unquestionable truth!

You cannot smell CC's rank hypocrisy because there's simply so much of it that you can't even breathe.

Also, be sure to read this.

Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Not since JFK was shot...

...has the left had a "magic bullet theory" like this one. The Italian Communist journalist whose car was shot at by U.S. troops claimed that 300-400 rounds hit the vehicle and that she had scooped handfuls of bullets off of the car seat. Well, let's see if she's telling the truth:

Sgrena's Car (The Real One)

Yeah. 300-400 magic bullets that passed harmlessly through the car and everyone inside, and that just stopped and dropped onto the car's seat instead of imbedding themselves in the interior.

Anyone wanna buy a bridge?

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Kirkcentric's Kartoon Kaption Kontest #2

Jon of Kirkcentric has been exposing and ridiculing the ridiculous prejudice of cartoonist David Fitzsimmons of the Arizona Daily Star. A few weeks ago, one of Fitzsimmons' cartoons depicted homeschool parents as abusers. Now he's got one out that bashes conservative Christians. Jon's had his second contest going since February 27th, but he's only had one entry so far (mine). I know a lot of you are creative and have a biting wit, so help him out.

An excellent commentary on the recent ruling against the "juvenile" death penalty

From the Federalist Patriot (which I highly recommend as required reading material for those interested in defending the rule of law instead of the rule of an oligarchy of liberal judges):
The U.S. Constitution suffered some serious setbacks this week. The future of liberty and the rule of law suffered likewise.

It's bad enough that Democrat obstructionists are once again denying President George Bush's federal-bench nominees their constitutionally prescribed up-or-down vote by the full Senate. In a fine example of why we need those nominees on the bench, Leftists on the Supreme Court are, again, "interpreting" the so-called "living Constitution" as a method of altering that venerable document by judicial diktat.

Worse yet, these Left-judiciary Supremacists -- Justice Anthony Kennedy and Court Jesters Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens -- cited "national consensus" as a factor in Tuesday's Roper v. Simmons ruling. In other words, they disregarded the Constitution's prescription for federalism and republican government in the name of unmitigated democracy. Which is to say, while riding roughshod over the Ninth and Tenth Amendments as they overturned the laws of 19 states, the Supremes blithely pushed the nation one step closer toward what everyone since Plato has described as governance in its most degenerative form.

Writing for the majority, Kennedy claimed that Americans had reached a "national consensus" against capital punishment for "children," citing as evidence that only 20 states allow a 17-year-old to be sentenced to death. Of course, Kennedy's logic is utterly at odds with decisions such as Roe v. Wade. In that 1973 decision, the Supremes serendipitously discovered a right to privacy that allowed for the aborting of children, despite the fact that all 50 states had laws at the time either prohibiting or tightly regulating abortion. So we must ask you, Justice Kennedy -- what's all this rubbish about a "national consensus?"

You recall, of course, that in a recent case, the Supremacists discovered a clause in the Constitution specifically stating that a 14-year-old is mature enough to abort the life of her child without parental consent. Now, in Roper v. Simmons, they've found a contradictory clause, which avers that a 17-year-old is not mature enough to be held accountable for capital murder.

Go figure...

UPDATE: TheologyWeb poster "Seasanctuary" (don't ask me what that means) had this to say:
Actually, if you think about it, those two are perfectly in harmony.

Sadly, there is much logic in that observation.

Thursday, March 03, 2005

I Can't Believe It's Not A Liberal!

It's pretty amusing that there's little difference between Canadian Cynic and Blame Bush.

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

The John Kerry SF-180 Clock

Thanks to PoliPundit, I've added a new clock up top. Obviously, it keeps track of the number of days that have passed since John Kerry promised on national TV to sign his SF-180 and release his military records. (Something he really should've done well before the election.) As PoliPundit states:
This should be a bipartisan effort. If you’re a Democrat who supports Kerry, his signing form SF-180 would help prove that he’s a genuine war hero, not the fraud that the Swift Vets claim he is. If you’re a Democrat or Republican who opposes Kerry, the contents of his military records would shine a bright light on his murky Vietnam War record. Either way, it’s in everyone’s best interest to get the senator to sign SF-180 and release his records.

Somehow, though, I doubt this will catch on with the Democrats. I also doubt that the clock will have to be stopped anytime soon.

(Via Michelle Malkin.)

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