Wednesday, November 30, 2005 caught both lying (or being stupid) and trying to cover it up

Bloggers and blog readers caught it and Michelle's all over it. A whole-hearted round of applause goes to everyone who exposed this latest stupid liberal trick. I almost want to support MoveOn's campaign to get that ad on TV. It will help show more people just how pathetic they really are.

UPDATE: MoveOn's realized they're stuck with a worthless ad now:
The liberal political group has yanked a video ad from its website after being criticized for using images of British soldiers to represent Americans in Iraq.

Friday, November 25, 2005

Michael Moore's "freedom fighters"

Here's the kind of things the "insurgents" think of:

Iraq seizes booby-trapped toys
The Iraqi army said on Thursday it had seized a number of booby-trapped children's dolls, accusing insurgents of using the explosive-filled toys to target children.

The dolls were found in a car, each one containing a grenade or other explosive, said an army statement.

The government said that two men driving the car had been arrested in the western Baghdad district of Abu Ghraib.

"This is the same type of doll as that handed out on several occasions by US soldiers to children," said government spokesperson Leith Kubba.

It was not immediately clear when the find was made or the suspects arrested.

One has to wonder what Michael Moore and other supporters of these monsters would say about this after they got all up in arms about all the children the U.S. soldiers supposedly are killing (sometimes, they claim, deliberately).

[Via Power Line.]

Ward Churchill gets his clock cleaned

Churchill to Journalist: Consider Yourself Warned

Ouchies! That's gonna leave a mark.

Supporting MDE

Click here for more info.

Click here for updates.

Thanks to Republican Minnesota for the graphic. (Finally got the right attribution there. Bleh.)

Special note to liberal readers and bloggers: You are more than welcome to join the MOB in helping MDE. Some liberal bloggers have already joined in, as you can see on MDE. This is an issue that knows no politics or party lines.


Enter His gates with thanksgiving,
and His courts with praise.
Give thanks to Him and praise His name.
For the LORD is good and His love endures forever;
His faithfulness continues through all generations.
(Psalm 100:4-5)

"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of
Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits,
and humbly to implore his protection and favors."
-- George Washington (Thanksgiving Proclamation, 3 October 1789)

I am thankful to God for many things.

First and foremost, I am thankful to Him for loving us so much that He sent His Son into the world to bear the burden of sin for us and offer us salvation. It is the greatest, most precious gift we have ever and will ever receive. Through Jesus, we need not fear our own death or the deaths of our loved ones.

Second, I am thankful for my family. From my loving wife and precious children to my mother and siblings to my nephews, niece, uncles and aunts, and cousins to my in-laws to the family members who are no longer with us, they, all of them, are God's second greatest gift to me.

Third, I am thankful for my church. Our pastor is a wise and much-learned man who speaks the Word with authority and love, and the members are a close-knit family of God.

Fourth, I am thankful for my country. I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. Here, our God-given rights are protected by a document written by wise and God-fearing men 200 years ago.

Fifth and finally, I am thankful for our military personnel worldwide. Their courage, dedication, honor and selfless sacrifices are unbounded and unmatched.

These are the five most important things. I am thankful for many more things, but they would take forever to list.

So what are you thankful for?

[Note: this post is postdated to remain on top through Thanksgiving day.]

Thursday, November 24, 2005

More tolerance from the Witchvox/Wren's Nest website

Someone recently posted this article from the far-left Mother Jones website about the allegedly powerful and supposedly wide-ranging "Christian Reconstruction movement." As is typical of Mother Jones articles, it lacked any sort of journalistic quality and credibility. I decided to comment on it since Witchvox/Wren's Nest (WV/WN) is open to all. Here's what I posted: "Consider The Source - Mother Jones is a left-wing gossip rag. It's got as much credibility as the Weekly World News. This 'Reconstructionist movement' claptrap is a load of steaming paranoia and rumormongering." And that is absolutely true. Nothing from the article was verifiable through anything other than far-left sources.

In any case, that little comment did not sit well with someone. Not long after it appeared, someone from the Dallas suburb of Richardson, TX, with the IP 12.37.59.# decided to start spamming my comments with the message, "Thanks for trolling the Witches' Voice!" I banned that person's IP address, but they decided to make a return appearance with an alternate IP: Check it out (click image to enlarge):

22 comments this person made in all.

Shades of the other WV/WN member who decided to use my email address to sign up for a bunch of porn emails after I posted there once before.

Isn't the "tolerance" of the left great?

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Help out Minnesota Democrats Exposed

MOB member MDE's anonymity is being threatened by these clowns for the simple reason that they don't like what he's doing (i.e. exposing them). They initially threatened to sue him for copyright infringement over a photo of their's he used (fairly used). He removed that photo from his blog, but the jerks at IMP are continuing to push forward with their lawsuit in order to acquire his identity (which they will probably publish) from his domain provider. MDE is asking for three things:
1. Tomorrow I will try and establish an anonymous legal defense fund. If I can establish a defense fund, I would ask that you provide a contribution link on your website.

2. If I can't establish a legal defense fund without revealing my identity, then I may ask for pro bono help from a lawyer.

3. Blog on this subject. Blog to protect my right to remain anonymous. Blog to protect the rights of all of the other bloggers who blog anonymously.

Help any way you can. You can donate using the button at the top of his blog pages, offer your services, offer advice, or - like me - just get the word out. I've posted this story on the Conservative Underground, too.

I made a logo

Let me know what you think.

ACLU fishing for plaintiffs in suit against school

This is very telling:

ACLU Looking to File Suit Over JHS Graduation "Altar Call"
In May of this year, a Jonesboro student gave a prayer during a high school graduation ceremony at the Arkansas State University Convocation Center. During the prayer, which lasted four minutes, she gave an “altar call” to the community, asking those in the audience to come forward to accept Jesus Christ.

“In the closing moments of this service, if you would like to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, here's your chance,” said senior Jessica Reed in a May 20, 2005 taped video of JHS graduation ceremonies.

“We were contacted sometime after that by the American Civil Liberties Union that they felt like there had been a violation of the First Amendment, separation of church and state with regard to a prayer,” said Jonesboro Public Schools Attorney Donn Mixon.

And now the ACLU is looking for a plaintiff in a case against Jonesboro High School. In a letter written by the Arkansas ACLU executive director Rita Sklar, the event is described as a “blatant display of contempt for the First Amendment.”

Jonesboro school district faces school-prayer dilemma
Two Christian prayers were offered at the May ceremony, including one that asked the audience to "accept Jesus Christ." The following month, the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union sent a complaint letter to the district. Since then, school officials have reviewed their policies, but the A.C.L.U. sent letters this month to parents of students at the school, asking them to sue the Jonesboro School District.

So the ACLU is out trolling the waters to find someone - anyone - to play the offended plaintiff in their case. How asinine and laughable is that? So what will the ACLU do if no one comes forward because no one was offended?

[Via Stop the ACLU.]

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Happy Birthday, Risawn!

...and many more!

The Blogswarm Strikes Back

I've been getting a lot of hits today to one of my posts about someone at CNN's website posting a picture of President Bush with a vulgar filename after the 2004 election. In her coverage of the suspicious "X" that appeared on CNN during a recent Cheney speech, Michelle Malkin linked to one of her past posts where she linked to S&B;, so people have been clicking that link like crazy today.

Infinitely Prolonged gone for now

Cyndee sent me a note to tell me that she shut down her blog due to personal reasons. She left the possibility open of starting up again in the future. I hope so. She has a good heart and a good head on her shoulders.

PETA to kids: your daddies are going to kill your puppies and kitties!!!

Another wonderful "comic book" from the idiots at PETA.

Nice, isn't it? How about this:

The yellow text at the bottom reads:
Until your daddy learns that it's not "fun" to kill
keep your doggies and kitties away from him.
He's so hooked on defenseless animals
that they could be next!

Isn't that a wonderful message to send kids?

[Special thanks to Conservative Underground's "melissa" and "Mrs. Smith" for the tip and to "Zafod Beeblebrox" for the images.]

Murtha madness and the left's shifting goalposts

Pennsylvania Representative John Murtha's name has been tossed around a lot lately after the House Republicans put his "immediate redeployment/withdrawl" idea to the test. The interesting thing is, though, that this is not the first time Murtha has endorsed an idiotic idea. Back when the House had a vote on Rep. Rangel's draft idea, Murtha was one of the two people who voted for it. Murtha also was one of the people who convinced Bill Clinton to pull the troops out of Somalia in 1993 - a move that is said to have emboldened Osama Bin Laden.

And now that the "immediate pullout" idea has been put to a vote, the left is trying to spin it as a victory for the Democrats. "It blew up in the Republicans' faces," they claim in various ways. Hardly. The idea has now been squashed flat. The "Bring the troops home NOW!" rhetoric spewed out by many on the left has been quickly and effectively put down. (That probably won't stop various individuals and groups from continuing to try to spread the idea, however.)

Also, the left has changed their tune since the vote. Initially, it was "Bring the troops home NOW!" Now it's, "That's not what we said! We never said 'immediately!' We said come up with an exit plan for bringing the troops home safely!" In a world without the internet, they could probably get away with that. Thankfully, their true words are archived for posterity.

Monday, November 21, 2005

BDS reaches a fevered pitch on DU

BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome

Michelle Malkin (who has a new book out called "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild", appropriately enough) and the Conservative Underground take a look at a bizarre, hate-filled, violence-promoting rant on the Democratic Underground. It's kind of long, but if you dare read it, you actually don't have to read too much of it to get the gist of it.

Two nice giveaways

The first is for an MP3 CD of Pastor John Piper's lecture series on Christian biographies. You only pay $5.00 for shipping and materials. There is an order limit of one per visitor.

The second is a contest (open until Nov. 24th) for an Outdoor Bible and one of a selection of books. Click on the following banner, enter your name and email address (again, one per visitor), and include my referral number: 111884.

[Thanks to Chris of Because I Said So for finding these.]

Say "hey dere" to the newest MOBster

Because I said so.

No. I'm not being snotty. That's the name of the blog.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

"Exit strategies" in history

Wizbang's Jay Tea puts the current liberal rhetoric of an Iraq "exit strategy" in stark perspective:
World War I:
Exit Strategy: Yes, come home as soon as it's over and start 20+ years of isolationism.
Consequence: World War II

World War II:
Exit Strategy: None.
Return date of troops: Still pending, 60+ years later
Consequence: Germany and Japan become staunch allies.

Exit Strategy: None.
Return date of troops: Still pending, 50+ years later
Consequence: No resumption of war.

Viet Nam:
Exit strategy: Pull out after treaty signed.
Return date of troops: within a few years of signing.
Consequence: North reneges on treaty, conquers South, still Communist 30 years later.

Gulf War I:
Exit Strategy: ground troops out, enforcement of terms of surrender from air only.
Return date of troops: nearly all within a year or so of surrender.
Consequences: 12 years of "cheat and retreat," "Oil For Food" scandal, re-invasion 12 years later.

Exit Strategy: Too many to count, never fulfilled.
Return date of troops: "By Christmas," but still present.
Consequences: semi-permanent presence of US forces 10 years later.

The lesson is clear:

Exit strategies are for wars that you don't plan to win, and to win decisively.

Hey, all you multitudes of Canadian Cynic fans who supposedly make up most of my readership

CC needs your help. He currently ranks at #3575 on the TTLB Ecosystem and can be nominated for Best of the Top 3501 - 5000 Blogs, but he criticized me for nominating myself (which is not only allowed, but encouraged), so obviously he's not going to nominate himself. Give his bloated yet fragile ego a boost and nominate him. I'm actually surprised that none of you have done so yet.

Friday, November 18, 2005

Nominations for the 2005 Weblog Awards are open until Nov. 26th

From Wizbang:
Nominations for The 2005 Weblog Awards are now opened earlier this week. Nominations close November 26, 2005 (next Saturday), but don't put off nominating your favorite blogs - DO IT NOW!!!

I self-nominated (it's allowed) S&B; for Best of the Top 1751 - 2500 Blogs (on the TTLB Ecosystem - I'm #1899 as of 11/14/05). Go nominate yourself or your favorite blog. There's plenty of categories.

Sometimes being a parent takes guts

Especially when it comes to straightening your kid out and rejecting the "coddling" mentality of today's child development "experts." Case in point:
Tasha Henderson got tired of her 14-year-old daughter's poor grades, her chronic lateness to class and her talking back to her teachers, so she decided to teach the girl a lesson.

She made Coretha stand at a busy Oklahoma City intersection Nov. 4 with a cardboard sign that read: "I don't do my homework and I act up in school, so my parents are preparing me for my future. Will work for food."

"This may not work. I'm not a professional," said Henderson, a 34-year-old mother of three. "But I felt I owed it to my child to at least try."

In fact, Henderson has seen a turnaround in her daughter's behavior in the past week and a half.

Of course, such a tactic was met with some criticism:
"The parents of that girl need more education than she does if they can't see that the worst scenario in this case is to kill their daughter psychologically," Suzanne Ball said in a letter to The Oklahoman.

The fact of the matter is, though, that it's working:
Tasha Henderson said her daughter's attendance has been perfect and her behavior has been better since the incident.

An "expert" chimes in:
Donald Wertlieb, a professor of child development at the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development at Tufts University, warned that such punishment could do extreme emotional damage. He said rewarding positive behavior is more effective.

"The trick is to catch them being good," he said. "It sounds like this mother has not had a chance to catch her child being good or is so upset over seeing her be bad, that's where the focus is."

"Catch them being good." Ugh! I think I'm going to barf. This "expert" apparently wants parents to ignore the bad behavior completely. That is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Yes, praise and reward your kids for being exceptionally good (doing so for every little good thing they do would not only be tedious, but damaging, too), but punish them when they are being bad, too. Children need boundries. They need to know that bad behavior results in punishment. That is, after all, the way the world works. For example, bad behavior at work results in disciplinary action (like getting fired). Employers aren't in the business of "catching employees being good." From the moment a person is hired, their employers expect nothing but good behavior from them. If someone grows up expecting praise and rewards for every little good thing they do, they will be unprepared for the world, where basic good behavior is expected without having to be praised or rewarded for it.

[Tip o' th' chapeau to Muzzy.]

Thursday, November 17, 2005

They really do think of stuff like this, folks

Here's the denizens of the Democratic Underground showing us once again that the Constitution is toilet paper to them:
I think we need to annul this pResidency

Install Al Gore as President, John Kerry as Vice-President. Howard Dean as Secretary of State and John Edwards as Attorney General. Through in some more of the good Democrats and get this country back on the right track. Damn I'm tired of being scared and worried to death all the time.

Sadly, these ideas are shared on a daily basis on the DUmp.

Not helping, pal

Texas Man Guilty of Driving Van Into Planned Parenthood Abortion Center
by Steven Ertelt Editor
November 3, 2005

Houston, TX ( -- A Texas man has been convicted of driving his fan into a downtown Houston Planned Parenthood abortion center. Frank L. Bird, 64, drove his van into the facility in January 2003 and was convicted under a federal law meant to limit attacks against abortion businesses.

U.S. District Judge David Hittner on Tuesday ruled that Bird violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which prohibits the use of threats, force or intimidation against those who perform abortions or want to obtain one.

Another federal judge threw out the case against Bird and found the FACE law unconstitutional but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling in March and sent the case back to the federal district court.

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt dismissed the charge in August 2003 because he said Congress didn't have the authority to regulate local "non-economic criminal conduct." He said state laws were sufficient.

Court documents say Bird told police he rammed into the clinic because "they are killing babies in there."

"The defendant committed this act because the Planned Parenthood facility provides abortions," according to the documents.

"After crashing through the doors of Planned Parenthood, the defendant made a statement to a deputy constable that he made sure there was no one walking in or around the doors before he drove into the building and that if he had seen someone at the doors, he would have driven around the block and come back," they said of Bird.

Bird previous served a year in prison for throwing a bottle at an abortion practitioner in 1995, according to an AP report. This new crime will cost him a $250,000 fine and net him three years in jail.

"We are glad that he was found guilty,'' Peter Durkin, chief executive for Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, told AP. "It was clearly a case of domestic terrorism.''

Pro-life groups say Bird was never involved in their organizations and they condemn his use of violence as a means of ending the travesty of abortion.

UPDATE: Canadian Cynic thinks I have to tell all of you that you must be outraged and appalled, and told that this man's actions were wrong. I guess he thinks you can't figure all of that out for yourselves.

UPDATE 2: CC has changed his mind since the last update. On his blog, he tried to take me to task for not commenting on this story other than the entry title. I responded there by saying
Thankfully, the rest of my readership is smart enough to not have the shock and outrage at an inherently wrong act spoonfed to them.

To which CC responded:
Dude, most of your readership consists of people I send over there to see what kind of doofus you are so at least there, we're in agreement.

Other the fact that he is grossly over-playing his influence on S&B;, it's interesting to see him flip-flop.

The two John F. Kerrys

John Kerry during the 2004 campaign: "I can't take what is an article of faith for
me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that."

John Kerry now: "There is not anywhere in the three-year ministry of Jesus Christ, anything that remotely suggests---not one miracle, not one parable, not one utterance---that says you ought to cut children's health care or take money from the poorest people in our nation to give it to the wealthiest people in our nation."

How could so many people be so dumb as to vote for this two-faced liar?

Pro-life Christian winner of Showtime's "American Candidate" to run for Congress

by Steven Ertelt Editor
November 9, 2005

Camden, SC ( -- Candidates made famous by television sometimes run for elected office in the real world and Park Gillespie hopes to be the next success story. Gillespie, who won a national election on the Showtime reality television program "American Candidate" last year is planning a run for Congress in South Carolina.

"This is a conservative district, and we need conservative leadership," Gillespie told a crowd at the Kershaw County Courthouse during a campaign swing through South Carolina's 5th Congressional district.

In his stump speech, Gillespie said he opposed abortion -- a position he strongly advocated during his 15 minutes of fame on television. And it's attracting voters.

Robin Ruff of Camden tells the Morning News she is solidly behind Gillespie in part because "he is pro-life. I like what he stands for."

Gillespie, a 38 year-old Christian school teacher overcame long odds and defeated two pro-abortion candidates in the final rounds of the program to take home a $200,000 price and a chance to give a 10-minute long acceptance speech on national television.

"It's a privilege to speak on behalf of life and the values we believe in," Gillespie told at the time.

Gillespie made his pro-life views loud and clear both during the campaign and in his acceptance speech. During the speech, Gillespie decried the "oligarchy" of the courts that has made abortion legal.

"For the last 30 years – from the legalization of abortion to the push to redefine marriage – government has too often worked against families," Gillespie said. "The chief offender? The courts."

In one of the final debates, a moderator asked Gillespie the old cliche question meant to trip up pro-life candidates -- whether he would allow one of his daughters to have an abortion if she were raped.

The pro-life "presidential candidate" hit a home run with his answer.

"I do not believe that two wrongs make a right. So, a child created in that situation, as tragic as that is, I'm not going to compound it by having two tragedies. I would counsel my daughter: Let this baby come to term," Gillespie explained.

In his bid for the Republican nomination for the seat, Gillespie faces state Rep. Ralph Norman, who made his bid official last month. The winner of the primary would go on to face pro-abortion Rep. John Spratt, a Democrat, in the November 2006 elections.

Spratt has held the seat since 1982 and rarely faced a close election.

More of that non-existent media bias

"When a multiple indictment was handed down against Clinton's Agriculture Secretary, Mike Espy (he was later acquitted on all 30 charges), most of the broadcast networks relayed the news in a sentence or two. It was the same with HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, who was indicted on multiple counts for misleading the FBI about payoffs he made to a mistress. Cisneros later plea bargained to a single misdemeanor charge of lying to the FBI. The Media Research Center noted at the time that the Cisneros indictment generated 18 seconds on ABC's 'World News Tonight,' while the CBS 'Evening News' didn't get around to it until the following day, then allocated just nine seconds to the story, choosing to focus, instead, on a two-minute report about how El Nino was impacting butterflies. Only NBC bothered with a full report the day of the indictment... By contrast, the Libby indictment story was treated as 'Breaking News' and a 'News Alert,' the same designations given to terrorist threats." ---Cal Thomas (via the Federalist Patriot No. 05-45 Brief email)

I agree! Impeach them! Throw them out of office! Jail them! They lied about Iraq!

Bill Clinton: "If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Advisor and Classified Document Thief: "[Saddam will] use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983."

Harry Reid: "The problem is not nuclear testing; it is nuclear weapons. ... The number of Third World countries with nuclear capabilities seems to grow daily. Saddam Hussein's near success with developing a nuclear weapon should be an eye-opener for us all."

Dick Durbin: "One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that...Iraq...may acquire or develop nuclear weapons."

John Kerry: "If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me."

John Edwards: "Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."

Nancy Pelosi: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process."

Sens. Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry in a letter to Bill Clinton: "We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Ted Kennedy: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

John Kerry: "I will be voting to give the president of the U.S. the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. ... Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein."

Hillary Clinton: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile-delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qa'ida members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Carl Levin: "We begin with a common belief that Saddam building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Al Gore: "We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Bob Graham: "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

New! Wider columns! Refreshing mint taste!

Playing around with the blog settings a little. I like the wider columns. On my screen, there was a lot of blank space on either side. (Your columnage may vary. Let me know if my blog scrolls off the left side of your screen.)

My only problem is that I don't know how to change the boxes so that they don't have curved corners on the left and square on the right. If someone knows how to change that, let me know. Please and thank you.

Monday, November 14, 2005

Psst! The MOB's finally getting together. Pass it on.

The MOB's got an aggregator now. Find it here. Very cool.

Newdow's back and still making a fool of himself

Sacramento Atheist Files Currency Lawsuit
The Sacramento area atheist who's spent years trying to ban the pledge of allegiance in public schools is filing a new lawsuit this week.

Michael Newdow says he'll ask a federal court to remove the national motto "In God We Trust" from money.

He says it violates the religious rights of atheists who belong to his First Amendment Church of True Science.

Newdow says it wouldn't be right to take up a collection when the money says "In God We Trust."

So go start your own country somewhere and print up your own currency, Newdow.

And I do so love the irony of the phrase "Sacramento atheist." (If you don't get it, click here.)

UPDATE: Here's a great question I saw online for Newdow and his supporters: who's going to pay for the printing and minting of new money? If you guys want new money without the phrase on it, why don't YOU pay for it? You all complain about how bad the economy and the federal deficit are, yet you obviously have no problem with hurting them even more with your ridiculous agenda against any mention of God in public.

UPDATE 2: Just did some quick searching on the U.S. Mint website. They state "[i]n 2004, the United States Mint produced approximately 13.6 billion coins for general circulation."

Saturday, November 12, 2005

DU mad at Bill O'Reilly... Can't say I blame them

Hrm... Shades of Pat Robertson:

Okay, no more Mr & Mrs. Nice Guy (Democratic Underground forum thread)
As of Monday, Doug and I will be pursuing EVERY LEGAL AVENUE to get Bill O'Reilly off the air.

He just invited the "terrorists" to attack San Francisco.

Not being someone who follows what O'Reilly says (he's too moderate for me) and not trusting the statements of people on DU very much, I asked what this was about at the Conservative Underground forums. I was directed to this article:
O'Reilly reacted to San Franciscans' approval of Proposition I, which discourages military recruiters on public high school and college campuses.

He advised President George W. Bush to react by withdrawing any military protection for the city. "...If al-Qaida comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead," O'Reilly said.

Now, while San Francisco's Proposition I (and Proposition H, which effectively violates people's constitutional right to bear arms) is stupid, O'Reilly's comment was equally stupid. Should he be fired for it as DU and people in SF want? I don't know and it's not for me to decide. At the very, very least, an apology is in order. O'Reilly probably would do well to make a donation to the city's fire fighters (if they take donations for charities or memorials) as Coit Tower is a monument to them.

[Added to Stop the ACLU's Trackback Party.]

Friday, November 11, 2005

Liberal Advisory

"Liberal Advisory" graphic on the right (naturally!) lifted from Stop the ACLU.

New Jersey DEMOCRAT accused of vote tampering

Councilman charged with vote tampering
Marty L. Small, 31, has been charged with 10 counts of tampering with public records and one count of hindering or preventing voting. An arraignment is expected in the coming weeks in state Superior Court in Atlantic County.


Small is accused of filing absentee ballot applications for 10 people. He represented himself as their "authorized messenger," when he had no such designation from the voters.

I'm stressing that this guy is a DEMOCRAT because the MSM never will. They only point out the political party of politicians accused of wrongdoing when they are Republicans.

The real me

You might notice that I've made a few tweaks on my profile. The "Jinx McHue" handle is no more. I've decided to go with my real first name: Jason. The "Jinx" name was fun for a while, but like the song says, "I gotta be me!" The email will remain the same as I still wish to protect my anonymity from unscrupulous critics like one I dealt with on an online forum once. (He posted my full name, address, phone number, and family information in a manner that I felt was threatening.)

Three great posts from Cyndee

A few days ago, I specifically mentioned Infinitely Prolonged as a new, stand-out blog. Well, here's three examples from yesterday that attest to that:

Open Mouth…

I wish the world would stop holding Pat Robertson up as the voice of Christianity. For that matter, I wish he’d stop putting himself forward as the voice of Christianity. I’m sure God is generally displeased with America, in part because of our seeking after “naturalistic” ways to explain Him away. Somehow, I doubt that His displeasure will translate into death and destruction in such a specific way. When God’s laws and truths are violated, the nation that violates them will come to an end through their own doing. We don’t need no stinkin’ hurricanes or earthquakes; we’ll do ourselves in without their help, thank you very much.

New Early Test For Down Syndrome

I used to be habilitiation technician—that’s fancy-talk for life-skills teacher and general care-giver—to MR and DD adults, many of whom had Down Syndrome. I know up close and personal both how difficult and how rewarding interaction with people who have MR can be, from the most severely impaired to the least. One thing I know for sure is that having Down Syndrome doesn’t make them either more or less human. They have different needs, more demanding needs, but they’re people. PEOPLE. Just like the rest of us. How callous are we?


Couldn't really pick out one section of this last one to highlight. It's all good and it all goes together. Read it all - it's worth it.

UPDATE: Cyndee took down her blog (see here) so I had to remove the links, unfortunately.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

Some liberals both for and against the will of the people

This week in Dover, PA, some school board officials were voted out of office because of - as some claim - their support of teaching Intelligent Design in school (despite the fact that the people elected still support teaching ID in school). Many liberals have cheered this election result - narrow as it was - as a "clear message from the people" that they don't want ID taught in schools.

Change the subject to Texas residents' overwhelming support of a constitutional ban on gay marriage and all that "clear message from the people" talk vanishes. Suddenly the will of the people doesn't matter anymore. Go figure...

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Democrats, liberals, leftists, and moonbats, oh my!

Some people here and elsewhere have questioned my choice of terms for describing non-conservatives. Here's a run down of my typical usage, though don't consider it set in stone:

Democrat - a member of the Democratic Party; a registered Democrat; someone who votes for Democratic candidates; an "ashamed Republican"

Liberal - a self-styled "progressive" (though the question of what they're progressing towards remains - one can progress in a downward spiral); someone who has left-leaning politics, as opposed to moderates and right-leaning conservatives

Leftist - pretty much the same as "liberal"

Moonbat - the looniest of the liberals; tend to vomit up bizarre conspiracy theories about conservative Republicans; like to hold protests and rallies where anything - and I mean ANYTHING - goes; the Democratic Underground

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Liberal protesters storm FRC's D.C. offices

AIDS Protesters Wearing Body Condoms Invade FRC
WASHINGTON -- A dozen AIDS activists have been arrested after invading a Christian organization's Washington headquarters and chaining themselves to objects in the lobby.

A witness said the protesters wore "body condoms" and protested the Family Research Council's support for abstinence education, which FRC president Tony Perkins said is "based on indisputable science and on timeless Judeo-Christian teaching."

On the FRC's Web site, Perkins asks, "Will your church or para-church organization be invaded next?"

Of course, the left would be outraged if Christians did that to one of their organization's buildings.

And to think that in the comments for my post about the ACLU's hypocrisy, a poster alleged that the right threatens leftist organizations' properties. Can't recall the last time I heard of conservatives storming into buildings to protest. I've heard of the liberals doing it plenty of times, though. Even got a video of some masked liberals "bravely" interupting a private meeting of Canada's Christian Coalition a couple years back with yelling, chants, and one protester even saying, "F*** your praying," when the Christians peacefully were praying in response to the protesters.


Texas voters overwhelmingly approve constitutional gay marriage ban

ABC News:
The contest in Texas was decided quickly the ban was receiving more than 74 percent of the votes in early returns.

Expect the typical froth-at-the-mouth insults from the far left about all the "homophobic fundies" in Texas. They don't have a landslide vote for a constitutional amendment, so that's all they have left. It's like standing on a tidal flat and yelling at the water as it comes rushing in.

Democrat-backed Ohio ballot initiatives stink of burning offal


Issue 2: 63.72% - No
Issue 3: 67.42% - No
Issue 4: 70.34% - No
Issue 5: 70.56% - No

Democrat-backed Ohio ballot initiatives stink of corruption

Which is really unsurprising considering they're being funded by George Soros.

Battling the Ohio Ballot Initiatives
One ballot initiative, Issue 2, is intended to establish “no excuse” absentee voting and lacks needed fraud protection. Another, Issue 3, is intended to cap campaign contributions by individuals and political parties while allowing special interest groups to contribute much larger amounts. If you would like government dominated by special interests this is your ballot initiative. Issue 4 would require electoral districts to be drawn based upon mathematical formulae. Issue 5 would be most troubling because it is intended to transfer power to administer elections from the Ohio Secretary of State, as chief election officer, to a nine-member election board of political appointees.

Here's a hilarious piece on the initiatives:
Issue 2 is one of four (2-5) peddled by Reform Ohio Now, a confederation of unions, Democrats and do-gooders at Common Cause, with help from billionaire George Soros, the checkbook behind and other purple Kool-Aid fanatics.

It gives absentee voters a "do-over" provisional ballot, so they can vote twice. Democrats assure us they will straighten it out later - the way they "straightened out" those dimpled chads in Florida.

Issue 3 is a union monopoly on politics, disguised as "campaign finance reform." It pinches the money hose down to a trickle - as if it won't spring a leak somewhere else. And while it chokes donations from corporations and the rest of us, it gives unions a free pass, without disclosure of donors.

Issue 4 would take redistricting away from elected officials and give it to five appointed board members who are accountable to nobody, with unlimited spending power and no review by the courts. We don't need district surgery by a bunch of unelected political hacks with box-cutters.

Issue 5 is pure payback - sour grapes from sore losers. The Tinfoil Hat wing of the Democratic Party still thinks they wuz robbed and Kerry won. According to their "stuck on stupid" theory, it was all the fault of Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. Issue 5 would take control of Ohio elections away from the secretary of state and give it to an appointed board to be named later - no accountability, no local control, no spending limits.

Here's late-breaking news: It was a fair election and Kerry lost. So should all of these issues that rig the rules for a union-Democrat takeover of Ohio (Issues 2-5) or spend Ohio into deeper Republican debt (Taft Issue 1).

I intend to vote against all of them. Twice if they let me.

Despite the jokes, the author really does hit the nail on the head. These initiatives are designed to help the Democrats steal elections (like they allege - but never prove - Republicans do). Let's hope and pray the citizens of Ohio have been well-informed on these issues or at the very least are able to see through the far left's bull.

Sunday, November 06, 2005

SiteMeter breaks 25,000

Took a little less time than I thought, thanks to trackbacks I submitted to Michelle Malkin, Wizbang and Stop the ACLU.

ACLU caught in blatant hypocrisy - PRICELESS!!!

Jay at Stop the ACLU found this extremely amusing (and telling) story:
Hypocrisy is on show in a Manhattan courtroom today. The New York Civil Liberties Union will argue for the second day before Judge Richard Berman that the city's subway bag search policy is an "unjustifiable erosion of the privacy rights of the American public." Yet take a walk into the NYCLU's Manhattan headquarters - which it shares with other organizations - and you'll find a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search. One of the city's lawyers, Jay Kranis, pointed this out yesterday in court while cross-examining a witness. Either the NYCLU believes its headquarters are at greater risk of a terrorist threat than the city's subway system, or it believes ordinary New Yorkers don't deserve the same safety precautions that they do.


(Sorry, was that over the top? I can never tell.)

UPDATE: Well, in attempting to make a case for the ACLU's hypocrisy, the liberals have defended the case for security checks in public places. From the comments:
Of course, the real irony is that such levels of security at institutions like the ACLU are only necessary because of the wingnuts like you who think nothing of fomenting hatred for, and indirectly encourage violence towards, such institutions. I work in a building with a Planned Parenthood office that has been forced to install both security devices and patient escort services solely because of constant harrassment, bomb threats, etc. from right-wingers and wingnut groups.

Now, ignoring the fact that this person lives in some bizarre fantasyland where conservatives are nothing more than violent sociopaths, he fails to acknowledge that the world is currently under constant assaults by terrorists. Public transportation - airplanes, buses, subways - has been a favorite target of terrorists for many, many years. Terrorists have attacked them with bombs hidden in backpacks or even used the vehicles themselves as bombs. One terrorist, Richard Reed, even tried to blow up an airplane with explosives hidden in his shoe! So then why is it okay for the ACLU to enact security checks and "violate people's privacy" in their own buildings when these buildings have never, ever been attacked, yet it's wrong to do security checks in and around public transportation which terrorists have and will continue to target?

Finally updated my personal blogroll

My much-neglected "My Favorites" blogroll just got updated today. I removed some defunct links and added some new ones. Look for it directly below the MOB blogroll in the right-hand column.

A couple of new (to me, at least) stand-outs I want to mention specifically: Stop the ACLU and Infinitely Prolonged.

UPDATE: Cyndee took down her blog (see here) so I had to remove the link, unfortunately.

Some DUers can't let go of lying ex-marine

Is Jimmy Massey telling the truth about Iraq?
In scores of newspaper, magazine and broadcast stories, at a Canadian immigration hearing and in numerous speeches across the country, Massey has told how he and other Marines recklessly, sometimes intentionally, killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians.

Among his claims:

Marines fired on and killed peaceful Iraqi protesters.

Americans shot a 4-year-old Iraqi girl in the head.

A tractor-trailer was filled with the bodies of civilian men, women and children killed by American artillery.


Each of his claims is either demonstrably false or exaggerated - according to his fellow Marines, Massey's own admissions, and the five journalists who were embedded with Massey's unit, including a reporter and photographer from the Post-Dispatch and reporters from The Associated Press and The Wall Street Journal.


The details of Massey's stories changed repeatedly.

For example, he almost always told his audiences and interviewers of an event he said he'd never forget: Marines in his unit shooting four civilian Iraqis in red Kia automobile.

In some accounts, Massey said Marines fired at the vehicle after it failed to stop at a checkpoint. In another version, he said the Marines stormed the car.

Sometimes he said three of the men were killed immediately while the fourth was wounded and covered in blood; sometimes he said the fourth man was "miraculously unscathed."

Sometimes he said the Marines left the three men on the side of the road to die without medical treatment while the fourth man exclaimed: "Why did you shoot my brother?" In other versions, he said the man made the statement as medical personnel were attempting to treat the three other men, or as the survivor sat near the car, or to Massey personally.


In another story that Massey often tells, he and other Marines in his platoon fired upon a group of innocent demonstrators shortly after they arrived in Baghdad. Massey said that the demonstrators were protesting the Marines' presence, holding signs in English and Arabic.

The Marines heard a shot, Massey said, and in panic began firing into the demonstrators.

In some versions, the demonstrators were near a checkpoint. In other versions, they were outside a prison on a road about 200 meters away, or anywhere from 5 to 15 miles from Baghdad International Airport.

Massey told a version of the story before an immigration hearing in December in support of an American soldier trying to flee to Canada. Then, Massey said he and the Marines killed four of the demonstrators. In other interviews, he said the Marines shot at 10 demonstrators and killed all of them but one, whom he let crawl away.

Changing, unverifiable stories that are contradicted by many others. You'd think that'd be enough for everyone to condemn him as a liar.

Don't count on it.

Check out some responses to the story by members of the Democratic Underground forum:
Sun Nov-06-05 06:29 PM
1. Surprise! Surprise! "Fellow Marines" disavow his comments!!

Sun Nov-06-05 06:31 PM
2. This line gave me a good laugh.
"The Marine Corps investigated Massey's claims and said they were "unsubstantiated"

Sun Nov-06-05 06:42 PM
3. It is good that he is out of the country
I am sure that he would be suicided here in the states.

Sun Nov-06-05 06:53 PM
6. Blame the truth tellers. Continue the delusion and lies so people
can continue believing the delusion and lies, and continue to live in their superior, racist hallucination that all is well, that we are 'bringing Democracy' to other nations.

Sun Nov-06-05 07:09 PM
11. Bush and his troop are the real liars when it comes to Iraq
We know that. They waged aggressive war on a country based on lies. Everything else is distraction.

There are a few voices of reason, but they might be "moles" from the Conservative Underground forums.

Boy, howdy! We Christians sure are a sneaky bunch

We're establishing a national religion by putting crosses on city seals and fighting via the ballot box to keep them there. Thank goodness the ACLU employs at least one person who "tracks crosses on seals" and threatens yet another lawsuit so we don't get away with it!

Angry in the Great White North has more major targets for the lawsuit-happy ACLU to go after.

Infinitely Prolonged's author Cyndee hits the nail on the head:
The ACLU is interested only in one thing—eliminating all public reference to Christ, even when democratically approved. If they cared about the Constitution, they’d read the thing.

[Via Michelle Malkin.] only Ann Coulter can describe it

On Friday, Fitzgerald was supposed to indict Karl Rove. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were going to be named unindicted co-conspirators. Maybe Condoleezza Rice too. Who knew — maybe even Clarence Thomas. There was even talk of a posthumous indictment for Nixon.

It was going to be Fitzmas Day! (Which is much like Christmas except instead of having her baby in a manger, the woman has a late-term abortion.) Oh, it was hard to fall asleep on Fitzmas Eve!

But Friday came, and only Irve Lewis Libby was accused of committing any crimes. They were all crimes like perjury and obstruction of justice, personal to Libby, unrelated to the administration.

Fitzmas sucked. Instead of GI Joe and Mr. Machine, all Democrats got was a lousy cardigan sweater.

Saturday, November 05, 2005

More photos from those somber anti-war/anti-Bush protests

Coming to you from...

...New York...


...and the pièce de résistance...

San! Fran! CISCO!!!!

I tell ya, they don't get much moonbattier than the moonbat capitol of the U.S. Heck, even the Queen Moonbat herself, Cindy Sheehan, was there telling people that "the people that are being killed in Iraq are not terrorists." (Quicktime movie - long download on dialup.) She knows her base pretty well and went to the right place to display her kookiness. Bark, moonbats, bark!

Freedom of speech for Christian students has to be defended again

ADF Intervenes, School Gives Wearer of Pro-Life Sweatshirts 'Green Light'
Senior Brian Ramirez was recently forced to serve an in-school suspension for wearing sweatshirts with messages such as "Abortion is homicide" and "She is a child, not a choice." The student also was penalized with a zero grade for each day's lab missed while in suspension, and informed that for each day he continued to wear clothing bearing a pro-life message he would remain on suspension.

But after the Alliance Defense Fund intervened on his behalf and threatened to file a federal lawsuit against the school, Ramirez was allowed to wear the shirts without detention. His ADF attorney, David Cortman, says officials at Maxwell High School of Technology in Lawrenceville acknowledged their error -- promptly.

"It's always interesting to see how schools respond when they're called on the carpet on these things," Cortman says, "but the good part about the response [is that] it was very quick in coming -- it was pretty much immediately after we sent our letter."

According to the attorney, the school basically said while it has established policies that require no material to be obscene or offensive, Ramirez's sweatshirts did not violate any of those policies. Cortman adds that the school stated, in so many words -- "We were mistaken. We'll erase everything from your record." The lawyer believes the school was right to admit its mistake -- and to avoid possible allegations of maintaining a double standard.

This kind of thing happens so often, you have to wonder either if it's due to ignorance or if it's deliberate.

And notice you don't see the ACLU jumping on board cases like this.

9th Circuit says parents have no right over kids' sex ed

Don't look for reports on this from the MSM. There's barely a mention of it from the major outlets. (See here and here.)

9th Circuit: Parents Have No 'Fundamental Rights' in Their Children's Sex Ed
The case involves the Palmdale School District in California, which notified parents of its intentions to conduct an assessment of children ages seven to ten in order to "establish a community baseline measure of children's exposure to early trauma (for example, violence)." What the letter to parents did not convey was that ten of the 79 questions on the survey would ask the children about the frequency of "touching my private parts," "thinking about having sex," "having sex feelings in my body," and "can't stop thinking about sex."

Six parents sued the school district after they discovered the contents of the survey, alleging the district had interfered with their constitutional rights by authorizing the survey be administered without disclosing to parents the sexual nature of portions of the survey. Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously sided with the school district.

Judge Steven Reinhardt, writing for the panel, stated: "We hold there is no free-standing fundamental right of parents 'to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs ....'" Continuing, he wrote: "We conclude only that the parents are possess [sic] of no constitutional right to prevent the public schools from providing information on [sex education] to their students in any forum or manner they select."

This is a frightening ruling. One that I hope and pray will be overturned soon.

Now, imagine if this had been a ruling about religious teachings in schools and the parents had been atheists who didn't want their kids learning about Christian teachings. Do you think the 9th Circuit would have concluded that the parents didn't have any right to control what their kids are taught about that? Do you think the left would be so silence about such a ruling if the court had ruled that way?

Friday, November 04, 2005

Guardian aims cheap shot at President Bush's faith

Check out the ridiculous title of this article:

Bush feels hand of God as poll ratings slump

In reading the article, one has to wonder what exactly the "hand of God" phrase means. The author writes about the latest [skewed] polls, protests during his visit to Latin America, the wimpy indictment against Libby, WMDs, Karl Rove, some idiot football (soccer) star and barking moonbat who equates President Bush with Hitler using a swastika and calls him "human trash," and more protests (with protesters calling President Bush a "terrorist"). So all these negative things are supposedly supposed to be the "hand of God" coming down to squish President Bush, right? Riiiiiiight.

Meanwhile, had President Bush himself said anything about the "hand of God," he'd be condemned as a "theocratic religious right whacko" (or words to that effect). The left is rather amusing with their double-standards.

UPDATE: Ah, some background information comes to light in the comments thanks to a hostile source. The "hand of God" refers to one of the moonbat soccer star's goals. Now, considering its origin, it seems a strange phrase to use in reference to President Bush, unless, of course, it is meant as a direct reference to his faith in God. The soccer guy barely got any mention in the article.

And, again, it's perfectly alright for someone on the left to use a phrase like "the hand of God" with impunity when refering to something they did, but if President Bush were to do that... Well, we all know what would happen.

Thought for the week

If you have to constantly remind people that you are a member of the "reality-based community," you ain't.

SeeBS: skewed polls "fake, but accurate?"

Someone needs to tell the Bush-bashers at SeeBS that if they're going to skew a poll against President Bush, they need to do a better job hiding it.

Bill Clinton's lies revisited

Well, I wasn't going to say anything more about this issue, but lo and behold, leave it to Captain Happy Pants and the MSM to reopen the issue. Look what "Arnold" from the forums found (emphasis mine):

US bids farewell to civil rights icon Rosa Parks
DETROIT (Reuters) - Thousands of mourners, some of whom waited for hours in the cold, paid a final tribute on Wednesday to Rosa Parks, who galvanised the U.S. civil rights movement by refusing to give up her seat on a bus to a white man in the segregated South a half a century ago.

Former President Bill Clinton said her simple act of civil disobedience in 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama "ignited the most significant social movement in American history."

The casket carrying Parks, who died on October 24 at age 92, was placed in a horse-drawn hearse for a procession to a Detroit cemetery after a seven-hour church service. Entombment in a mausoleum well after sunset was private.

Clinton recounted how he remembered Parks' historic act when he was a nine-year-old boy riding a segregated bus to school every day in Arkansas.

The next day, he said, he and two friends decided to pay tribute to Parks by sitting in the back of their bus.

His statement from my previous entry on this issue may have been from 6 years ago, but this one obviously wasn't. And now we know some more details. He was talking about the school buses he rode, not public transportation. And the story is still completely unbelievable.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

U of MN employee sends hate mail to AFA; apologizes

Source (with vulgar language editted a bit more by me)
The following email from Greg Perrizo was received on our AFA mail server on October 25, 2005 in response to an article by AFA Special Projects Director Randy Sharp which appeared on Agape Press. Click here to see the article.

Mr. Perrizo wrote:

What a F------ A------!!! The stupidity and disgustingly ignorant comments of Randy Sharp and the AFA are appalling to say the least. You people are so obsessed with gay sex you can't think about anything else. And you call gays, the irony!

A response sent by AFA resulted in this:
There is no apology due to Randy Sharp. People that write such heinous, hateful, disturbing things deserve to be called on it. I know that your organization feeds on the sensationalism of distorting the truth. I am tired of the filthy lies being spread by people such as Randy Sharp and supported by organizations like the AFA. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. I will continue to speak out against ignorance and hate whenever I encounter it.

After an email campaign by AFA members, the university president responded and Perrizo apologized. From an update email:
Yesterday (November 2), we received the following response from President Bruininks:

"Thank you for your email voicing concern regarding a University employee's use of offensive language to describe his views in an email using his University account.

"The University promotes a culture of tolerance and mutual respect and does not condone this kind of language. Our Code of Conduct policy establishes the expectation that all University employees adhere to the highest ethical standards of professional conduct and integrity. We are addressing this matter internally, and I am sure you understand state law prohibits discussing personnel matters publicly.

"Our understanding is that the employee has apologized for the manner in which he articulated his opinion. We appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns and your interest in the University of Minnesota."

In addition, we received the following apology from the state employee:

"After serious reflection, I would like to apologize to Mr. Sharp for the comments I posted on your website on 25 October, 2005. I acted in anger and now in retrospect I regret the way in which I communicated and worded my comments. Please accept my apology and relay this message to Mr. Sharp. Thank you for your time."

Just how stupid does Anheuser-Busch think we are?

Pretty stupid, it seems.

Budwiser pulls the plug on drinking game "Bud Pong"
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- This Bud's not for you. Anheuser-Busch is pulling the plug on its drinking game called "Bud Pong."

The brewer claims the game is supposed to be played with water -- not beer.

Bud Pong is played by bouncing ping pong balls into cups, with players taking a drink if they lose a point.

Beer wholesalers distributed the game to bars in 18 states.

Anheuser-Busch says it's ending the promotion after The New York Times reported the cups were being filled with beer instead of water.

Um... DUH???

Your chuckle for the day: Sheehan for prez

Okay, when reporters start borrowing their story ideas from places like the Democratic Underground, you know things are going into the toilet fast.

Cindy Sheehan for President (Village Voice, so if you click it, watch out for inappropriate ads)

How about Cindy Sheehan for president PR campaign (DU)

"Cindy Sheehan for President!" (DU)

Cindy Sheehan for President (DU)

Amazingly, the denizens of the DUmp didn't hop on board with the idea very much. Of all people, you'd think they'd be the ones behind it. Sheehan was their darling for a long time. Of course, just like the wind, the DUmp changes constantly. Once they latched on to "Fitzmas," Cindy Sheehan became almost persona non grata. Of course, now that "Fitzmas" turned out to be "Fizzlemas," they'll move on to something else. It's always been like that with the DUmp. They just never learn.

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Oopsies! DNC caught red-handed in smear job against Alito

If you haven't heard about the smear-filled document, click here first and read it.

Once you're done reading (and throwing up, if need be), find out about the truth behind the document here, and/or read the following summation. It turns out that the bunglers at the DNC forgot to - or were ignorant of how to - keep their electronic "fingerprints" off the document. The "not for attribution" (meaning it was supposed to be an anonymous smear piece distributed by Democrats and the MSM) document was created through the efforts of at least three DNC staffers. Whoops. Guess what, guys. You've just been "pwn3d!" (For those who don't read Internet Geek, that stands for "owned," which means - roughly and in more traditional terms - that someone's just had the rug pulled out from under them, usually via their own mistakes/ignorance.)

UPDATE: I found more of Chris Matthews' comments about the hit piece at Radio Blogger, and I have to say that he's dead on:
And in their complaint sheet against Judge Alito's nomination, the first thing they nail about this Italian-American is that he failed to win a mob conviction in a trial twenty years ago, or way back in 1988. In other words, they nail him on not putting some Italian mobsters in jail, the Lucchese Family. Why would they bring up this ethnically charged issue as the first item they raise against Judge Alito? This is either a very bad coincidence, or very bad politics. And either way, it's going to hurt them. This document, not abortion rights, not civil rights, the fact he failed to nail some mobsters back in 1988. And this is at the top of their list of what they've got against this guy. Amazingly bad politics.

Indeed. The title of the document is "Judge 'Scalito' Has Long History of States Rights, Anti-Civil Rights, And Anti-Immigrant Rulings," yet they don't start out by citing anything about states' rights, civil rights or immigrants. They don't even start out with the left's most important issue: abortion. The start out with citing a trial involving the mob. Very slick.

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