Leading Left wing blog DailyKos is now censoring people they don't agree with. I find it VERY curious that the audio in this video "suddenly" cuts out while a soldier is telling the panel that the surge in Iraq is working and that progress is being made. I find it VERY curious as well that the audio "suddenly" comes back once the soldier is done speaking. The part that I'm speaking of starts at around 41:00 minutes.

The soldier wasn't making any political statements, he was merely disagreeing with the panel and showing them they were wrong. Because his point of view differs from others, they censored him.

You'll find literally hundreds of thousands of examples of liberals not getting their voices heard and them screaming about Freedom Of Speech. But when it comes to differing opinions, they're all for censorship. Hell, I've offered many times for people to come on here and give their opinion regardless of if it's in agreement with mine or not. To date, not many have taken me up on my offer.

However, the REAL story is that the leader of Daily Kos has this to say on June 2 2007:

But that's not the point. As we've seen time and time again, we see military personnel, in uniform, all the freakin' time as backdrops to Republican pro-war events -- including with Mr. 28% -- and there haven't been any prosecutions of those folks.

Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh has already been discharged. He has every right enshrined under the Constitution, including those of free speech and peaceful assembly.

And anyone that thinks otherwise, quite frankly, is legitimately and objectively un-American.

See that? Anyone who thinks that soldiers can't go to political rallies is UN AMERICAN. So which is it liberal boy? Do censor people or not? It's quite plain to see by anyone who views this tape that you DO censor people. Let's stop the hypocritical bullshit here liberals. You censor people when you don't agree with their political statements. You have NO problem screaming about Freedom of Speech when it pertains to YOUR freedoms, but you won't defend that same right for everyone else. You SAY that you defend those freedoms, as exampled above, but it's quite plain to see that when the time comes, you simply don't.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I found this neat little US geography quiz on the internet and thought I'd share it with you as well as my results. I did get them all, but my time wasn't good. I got stuck on New Jersey for about a minute. :)

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I found these two wonderful Youtube videos dipicting General George Patton on the current state of affairs in Iraq and Harry Reid. I share them with you below.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Luckily though, they are only required to give back documents that are privileged, rather than ALL documents. What that means is, the three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the search itself was constitutional but that FBI agents crossed the line when they viewed every record in the office without giving Jefferson the chance to argue that some documents involved legislative business.

The court did not rule whether, because portions of the search were illegal, prosecutors should be barred from using any of the records in their case against Jefferson. That will be decided by the federal judge in Virginia who is presiding over the criminal case.

"We're pleased with the court's decision that makes it clear that the search violated the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution," Jefferson's attorney, Robert Trout, said after a brief review of the ruling. He said he has not yet discussed the decision with Jefferson.

Fortunately though, they have much more evidence that William Jefferson is a corrupt politician without the FBI's raid on his office. That means that Jefferson is still likely to go to jail over his bribery charges.

Please note, Jefferson and his attorney's aren't denying his guilt, they are simply trying to get as much evidence thrown out as possible to weasel their way out of it. They are playing by the rules, however, with the evidence of marked $90,000 in his freezer from a $100,000 bribe is like saying Mount Everest isn't there. You have to acknowledge the money in the freezer at trial and have a REALLY good explanation for it, otherwise it's jail time. I can't wait.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Hard to believe I know, but it appears that John Edwards has a bit of hypocrisy on his hands. He chided Hillary Clinton for taking $20,000 from Rupert Murdoch's News Corp officials.

However, he made over $800,000 from a book that was publish by......dun dun DUNNNNN!!!...a company owned by News Corp. However, here's the kicker:

He says he gave that amount to charity, which would also provide tax benefits for Edwards. "We're more than happy to give even more of Murdoch's money to Habitat for Humanity and other good causes," spokesman Eric Schultz told The Post yesterday.

He declined to show proof, however, that Edwards had donated the $500,000 advance or $300,000 expense checks to charity.

Hmm...I wonder why he declined to show proof? Perhaps he's LYING? If he really had donated that money to charity, all he would have to do is get a letter from that charity stating that he indeed donated said money. Any charity in America would gladly do so.

And finally, the coup de tat, Edwards campaign said it would return less than $1,000 in donations from three Fox employees. "The time has come for Democrats to stop pretending to be friends with the very people who demonize the Democratic Party," Edwards said.

First off John, Republican's don't demonize Democrats. Republicans point out flaws in Democrats way of thinking, thus, Democrats demonize Democrats. I wouldn't have to continue to point out flaw after flaw after flaw, if you guys would simply think more about your constituents way of life rather than your own.

Increased taxes, lax security and response towards terrorism, welfare state encouragement, anti-business, anti-American rhetoric, corruption, passing the buck, failure to make tough decisions which you were elected to do without getting some kind of bureaucratic committee's permission, and so on. Do I need to continue?

So I take it that John won't be on the "let's work with Republican's" side of things?

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Let's see, shotgun and ammunition for assault rifles in a bakery run by a fanatical black Muslim group who's linked to the murder of a journalist? Has all the markings of a really bad B-movie starring Ashton Kutcher and Jennifer Lopez, but alas, it's really true.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

"It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say," Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri told AP Television News on Friday. "As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."

Even Pakistan's Foreign Minister can see that Obama is only saying these things because it will gather him support and possibly put him into power. Here's what Pakistan was referring to:

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again," Obama said. "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."

However, this is an interesting note:

The Associated Press of Pakistan reported Friday that Musharraf was asked at a dinner at Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's house on Thursday about the potential of U.S. military operations in Pakistan. Musharraf told guests that Pakistan was "fully capable" of tackling terrorists in the country and did not need foreign assistance.

Well Musharraf, if you were "fully capable", you wouldn't be making peace deals and we'd see Bin Laden's head on a platter in front of the White House, wouldn't we? I know you've "committed" lots of troops towards the fight against Al-Qaeda, but let's be honest here, you're dragging your feet when it comes to getting into those tribal areas and rooting out terrorists.

Were you really after them, they would have fled back over the border to Afghanistan and into the hands of US troops.

So if Obama is just talking out of his ass, fine. But I want ANYONE to actually do something about getting Osama's head on a platter. I don't care if Iranian President "idiot boy" hands it over, I want revenge for 9/11.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

It seems like a reasonable enough request. Keep your summer vacation at bay until a new terrorism and wiretapping law can be passed. Basically, they are trying to get an update to the 1978 FISA law that details what can and can't be wiretapped.

Unfortunately for Congress, Bush has the Constitutional authority to require Congress to return. So, it appears that this is his first "ask nicely" round, and if they don't, then it might get ugly.

I'm going to go get some popcorn for this one.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

While I applaud Representative Tom Tancredo's enthusiasm, bombing Muslim holy sites isn't going to accomplish anything. It would be the same thing if we bombed a church because Timothy McVeigh attacked America, or David Koresh, or any other religious nutjob.

Doing so only aggravates members of that particular faith who were once on your side. Besides, the Hague Conventions specifically because it asks soldiers to take "all necessary steps to spare as far as possible buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, charitable purposes, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected."

So, thanks for the enthusiasm against terrorist Rep. Tancredo, but you'll only make things worse.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Conspiracy theorists are all over the map on various topics from 9/11 to Katrina to the moon landing. However, this one is pretty far fetched, and to tell you the truth, if we had this kind of capability, I don't think Iraq or Afghanistan would still be standing.

But check this out:

Reports from Russia’s Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics located in Irkutsk are reporting today that their Siberian Solar Radio Telescope (SSRT) detected a ‘massive’ ultra low frequency (ULF) ‘blast’ emanating from Latitude: 45° 00' North Longitude: 93° 15' West at the ‘exact’ moment, and location, of a catastrophic collapse of a nearly 2,000 foot long bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

To the horrific destruction of the Interstate 35W Bridge which spanned the Mississippi River we can read as reported by the Star Tribune News Service:

"The 1,907-foot bridge fell into the Mississippi River and onto roadways below. The span was packed with rush hour traffic, and dozens of vehicles fell with the bridge leaving scores of dazed commuters scrambling for their lives.

Nine people were confirmed dead as of 4 a.m. today. Sixty were taken to hospitals and 20 people were still missing this morning. Authorities said they expected the death toll to rise."

Russian Military reports state that the total collapse of such a massive bridge, and in the absence of evidence linking its destruction to terrorist activity, could only have been accomplished by an acoustic weapon, of which the United States Military is known to possess.

So we have an acoustical weapon that can destroy a major freeway bridge without leaving evidence? We have a weapon that can destroy at the speed of sound without so much as a PEEP from anyone else in the scientific world except these guys?

To tell you the truth, if we did posses such a weapon, I'd gladly laugh at the face of those who say that the US is falling behind in the sciences. Even Nicola Tesla said that given just the right frequency, he could split the Earth in two. I remember an episode of Mythbusters where they tried this myth out. It wasn't true....at least from what Jamie and Adam tried.

Regardless, until a report is issued on the subject, I'll keep an open mind, but I'm pretty sure that the US government would have tried this weapon on something a little more remote, such as a bridge that no one goes on that's old and rickety. Why involve human lives? Why destroy something and then pay hundreds of millions of dollars to have to rebuild? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Sorry guys, I tried standing up for you earlier with my article "Standing Up For Smokers" because Congress wants to bump taxes on tobacco products 168%.

Well, it looks like you guys lost out and Congress sold you out.

Here's how it broke down:

	Yeas	Nays	PRES	NV
Democratic	220	10		1
Republican	5	194		3
Independent
TOTALS	225	204		4

Notice how Republicans stood up for your rights? Notice how Democrats didn't? President Bush has said that he will veto this legislation, and it doesn't appear that they have enough votes to override it, however the Senate has voted and they have enough votes to override the veto. So, if vetoed, they need to convince roughly 60 people to vote the other way to get it to pass.

That amount of votes needed is daunting, but it's not impossible. What I'd like to know is, why pick on tobacco users? Is it because no one feels sorry for them? Is it because most people don't smoke or chew, so therefore they don't care that tobacco is having it's tax raised 168%?

What if Congress said they were going to raise the taxes on gasoline 168%? Would you all care then? I'd bet the house that you would. Why? Because it effects them. Once it starts effecting the majority of people, then you start to see outrage. Because tobacco users are becoming more and more of a minority, politicians seem to think they can get away with this kind of crap.

Personally, I don't smoke or chew tobacco. However, if I don't stand up for them in this case, I couldn't complain when people don't stand up for me when I need help.

Democrats have a reputation for increasing taxes and this is just one of a million other examples of that philosophy. Don't bother cutting out government waste, just increase taxes. That'll get more money for your pet projects.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

One of the guys who slammed a burning Jeep into the Glasgow airport in a terrorist attack has died from the burns he received during that attack. I don't know if you know, but being burned is one of the most painful ways to die. It is slow and agonizing and for him to last this long only means that his pain was that much more intense.

Because let's face it: Some people simply deserve to die.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

There is a spirited debate on Universal Health Care in one of my posts. Very interesting read. You can find it here: http://www.rightwinglunatic.com/2007/08/socialized-medicine.html

Feel free to join in on the debate!

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I don't know what to say really. "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" really spells it out for me. For the President, Vice President, or any other elected official to be impeached, they have to have committed a "high crime or misdemeanor".

Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson doesn't seem to think so. He seems to think that the President and Vice President serve "at the pleasure of Congress". Well if that was the case, why use the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

If there were an impeachable offense committed, then Congress has the duty to impeach. There's been an effort in the Congress, but it has almost no support. Why? Well because there's either been no crime committed, Democrats have no backbone, or both. Either way, Democrats really deserve the beating they are getting in the public eye over this.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

to hate Sean Penn. Now Hugo Chavez is singing Penn's praises for his stance against the Iraq war.

Chavez said the two plan to meet Thursday. He called the actor "well- informed about what is happening in the United States and the world, in spite of being in Hollywood."

Really? You mean his constant America bashing, traveling abroad to visit terrorist nations, bringing a camera crew with him when he went to New Orleans during Katrina when he could have brought more people to help instead of making it a photo op, punching out photographers, and generally being an asshole, he's really well informed? I find that very hard to believe.

Sean, let me explain something to you, because you're an actor, that means you know a lot about acting. Because you're an actor, your opinion means no more and no less then anyone else's on the planet, so stop acting like it does. No one likes a "holier then thou" asshole, and you fit the bill to a T.

As for Hugo? Fuck him.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Take a gander at this quote:

I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,» Obama said, with a pause, «involving civilians.» Then he quickly added, «Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table.

There's been no discussion of using nuclear weapons and that's not a hypothetical that I'm going to discuss.

When asked whether his answer also applied to the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons, he said it did.

What that means is, he won't use our biggest weapon in the face of any threat. That's what keeps bad guys at bay here people. The threat of total annihilation. Rogue nations know that if you mess with the US, there's a distinct possibility that you might find yourself on the receiving end of a nuclear weapon.

With Barack Obama, they don't have to worry about that. Now they can do whatever they want and know that hell won't be coming after them. After all, take a look at Barack's track record on pursuing people who are threats to this nation. I'm not saying that I always advocate war, but the implied threat needs to be there to make sure that you don't have to wake up to CNN telling you how there was a terrorist attack with those responsible knowing that you don't have a backbone to retaliate.

Sure, Obama SAYS he'll go into Pakistan, but let's be honest, the guy doesn't have the balls to do it. He'll foot drag, do a little grandstanding, make idle threats, but at the end of the day, he won't do anything about Pakistan. He's only saying these things because he's trying to gather up support and beat Hillary. That's typical for many Democrats: Say whatever you want as long as it gets you support and gets you into power.

Pakistan has nuclear weapons and is politically unstable, raising concerns that the current military leadership could be replaced by religious fanatics who would be less cautious in using the weapons.

Exactly. What happens if Musharraf is removed from power via a coup? What happens if his government collapses and is taken over by Al-Qaeda or another terrorist organization? Then will Obama actually do something? Or will he wait until the threat has already passed and American civilians are lying dead in the streets?

Barack's claims are dangerous simply because he lacks the intestinal fortitude to follow through with those same claims. I would be shocked if Barack won the Presidency and he sent in an invasion force into Pakistan within the first 2 years of his Administration. Hell, I'd be willing to take bets on it. 10-1 odds that he actually follows through with this threat within 2 years of his Administration. Anyone want to put their money where their mouth is?

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Record amount of American's are moving to Canada. Oh no! you would think, but just take a peek at the number of Canadians moving to America: 23,913 vs. 10,942 Americans who went north.

But Canada has universal health care! Canada is a peace loving nation that don't hurt anyone! Canada is a perfect Utopia in every way! So if that's the case, why are Canadians moving to America at a ratio of 2-1 vs. us moving up there? It couldn't be that we have a nice place to live and offer freedoms that Canada doesn't could it?

You can tell how well a country is doing by the amount of people wanting to move there. I've heard that somewhere before. Well if that's the case, we seem to be doing pretty good for ourselves. Chances are that Canadians who move here don't seem to think of it as a police state like liberals would like you to think. They don't seem to think of it as a country that's going down the shitter.

So are Canadians who move here wrong or dumb? I don't think so. They come here for the same reason immigrants come from any other country on Earth: To build a better life for themselves in a country that has the freedom to let them do it.


Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I can't even believe I'm posting about this, but it's such bullshit, I just had to. New York cab drivers are threatening to strike if GPS units are placed in their cabs.

The Taxi Workers Alliance -- an advocacy group rather than a labor union -- said GPS devices would be an invasion of drivers' privacy because they could track cabs' movements.

It's their job to drive people around. So, they are in public, so they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Secondly, they are on the job. The job says you are about to get GPS. Don't like it? Get another job.

We've become too spoiled when it comes to employment, myself included. When I talk to my Grandfather, he laughs at things like this because he says "they would have been fired immediately", and he's right. People are scared to death of lawsuits and other wastes of time and money, so they pander to even the most minor complaint. Now, I'm not saying that employers should bend over backwards for employees, but this seems like a non starter issue for me.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

A senior leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq was killed today by Iraqi security forces.

This bit of news is significant for a number of reasons:

Obviously any lead of Al-Qaeda in Iraq being captured or killed is one more step towards bringing about peace and stability to Iraq. It's one more step towards people not living in fear over roaming death squads and torture. This in of itself is very important.

However, you also have that the Iraqi's found, followed, and killed the guy all by themselves. Had they could have easily let these guys get away if corruption was as widespread as previously thought. But they didn't. They followed these guys and only opened fire on them when they were fired upon first.

It's showing progress that the Iraqi's are now starting to stand on their own two feet. Keep up the good work and they'll be just fine.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Maybe it's me, but has Russia been drinking Vodka lately? Do they honestly think they'll get away with trying to lay claim to the rich natural resources of the Arctic? Well they think so enough to send a ship and two mini subs to the north pole.

Unfortunately for Russia, if they want to claim the "continental shelf" bit, I've been told that Canada can lay claim to parts of mainland Russia. (I can't seem to find any information one way or another on the subject, so if there's a geology geek out there who can help, please feel free to do so)

There's also the problem of the 200 mile radius that the UN has rules for. Basically Russia is trying to make a natural resources grab and they can't legally do it. They are seeing if they can get away with it or not.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

You know things aren't looking good when your defense attorney isn't going to call ANY witnesses on your behalf. This is the same guy who was accused of wanting to explode a dirty bomb inside the US.

However, that part isn't a part of this trial. Whether or not it's because of a lack of evidence, or a stronger case of his current crimes he's accused of, I can't say, but when you have NO defense and the prosecution has your handwriting on an Al-Qaeda job application, you're pretty much done for.

As a side note, what kind of terrorist organization has a fucking job application? Who would you call for references? Calling previous employers like Hamas and Hezbollah? That just seems asinine to me.

As a side note, it will be nice to hear Jose going to the Supermax in Colorado. That place is pretty brutal in terms of isolation and strict rules.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Hmm....France gives almost $400 million dollars to free some nurses who were accused of purposely infecting HIV into children, now Libya has purchased $130 million worth of missiles from France. What a very odd coincidence.

Maybe I'm an asshole, but any nation that supported terrorism doesn't get off that light in my book. I'd make them wait 50 years before any arms deals were made. Just to be on the safe side. Free trade on most other goods, fine, but weapons are out.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Ok, I can understand if you're falsely accused of a crime, how it would be difficult to deal with everyday life once you were cleared, but this guy is whining to the wrong people:

"I've had people shout out 'killer', 'murderer,'" Karr said. "I've had people shout out obscenities at me."Karr has been back in metro Atlanta for almost a year fighting the stigma associated with his name.

Ok genius, you admit to raping and murdering a 6 year old child. What the hell do you expect the general public to think? Yes, you were cleared of that case, but you were in the midst of your own molestation case in Thailand when you were extradited to the US. So you can't exactly expect people to feel sorry for you. Child rapists and murderers are societies lowest of the low scum. People would rather you be a dog fucker or something rather than pick out a victim that can't defend herself. Even though you were not guilty of that crime, you're still a creepy guy and when you're treated like a creepy guy, you can't complain.

You want to be treated better? Don't molest children, don't falsely confess to murdering a child, and don't be creepy. Simple math here people.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

You mean to tell me that an intelligence gathering program is larger then was publicly admitted? You don't say! You mean to tell me that in the world of intelligence gathering that there might be secrets?? Crack reporting CNN!

With any intelligence gathering, secrecy is key. If someone knows they are being tapped, they aren't going to use that phone/fax/email again. The same was true for when Bin Laden found out we were listening in on his satellite phone conversations. He stopped using it the minute he found out. HOW he found out, I'd be very interested in.

Regardless, you shouldn't be all that surprised to find out that something the government admits to was much larger then originally planned, otherwise, what would be the point?

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I disagree with Rudy Giuliani on a lot of issues, but he nails it on the head when he calls Democratic plans for universal health care "socialized medicine".

"We've got to do it the American way," Giuliani said during a town hall forum in Rochester, New Hampshire. "The American way is not single-payer, government-controlled anything. That's a European way of doing something; that's frankly a socialist way of doing something."

"That's why when you hear Democrats in particular talk about single-mandated health care, universal health care, what they're talking about is socialized medicine."

Giuliani's health care plan, unveiled at the forum, includes giving taxpayers tax credits to purchase private health insurance. The highlight of Giuliani's plan: a $15,000 tax deduction for each family to buy private health insurance.

There's where you find Rudy doing one thing that Kerry didn't during the 2004 election: Come up with, and explain your game plan. Americans want a lot of things for "free", but many of them don't understand that nothing is free, it's paid for out of their pockets in terms of taxes.

I don't want to pay more taxes because some idiot with a head cold decides that an emergency room visit is a better idea then taking some NyQuil and going to bed. I don't want to pay more in taxes because some irresponsible woman decides that she doesn't want to have any contraceptives and then she pops out her 5th child.

Giuliani came to the table with an idea, which is one of the things that Kerry didn't do. Kerry took out the old "vote for me and I'll make things better" route, and people aren't comfortable in dealing with unknowns. With Giuliani's plan, you at least have a general idea.

Now of course I'm going to get hate mail from people who say "well I pay taxes too and I want socialized medicine". Well that's fine, then you can pay my portion of the taxes as well.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

You know for all his tough talk on how the war in Iraq is going, Barack Obama sure does look like a hypocrite for wanting to invade a sovereign nation.

"Let me make this clear," Obama said. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."

So what he's really saying is: We won't act until Musharraf does. He's saying that even with actionable intelligence, he won't send in special forces or any kind of military strike without Musharraf's permission.

Is that the kind of guy you really want for President? Personally, if I have actionable intelligence that Osama is sitting in a cafe in Hong Kong, after I get visual confirmation, that cafe's going to be a smoking crater within minutes. I don't care what country he's in or where he's at. Once I have actionable intelligence, I'm acting, and I don't give two shits about permission from anyone about it.

Besides, you'll notice that Democrats will think this is a good idea because when Democrats advocate war, it's ok, but when Republicans do it, there's calls for impeachment.

You can bet your sweet ass that there won't be liberals talking about how we made a mistake invading a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us.

Do you honestly think Obama has the backbone to order an attack if there's actionable intelligence? Do you think he's going to order covert action if the intelligence says where Bin Laden is over the course of minutes or do you think he'll take the pussy way out and ask for permission from Musharraf or worse, the UN?

Obama is only talking like this to separate himself from Hillary and gain points with those on the right. Sadly, just about everyone is seeing through his line of bullshit.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Let me explain something to automakers, foreign and domestic. People love new technology, but there's one thing that is above all else that people look for in a car: reliability. Domestic car makers have a reputation for making uninspired, shitty cars.

When you have Japanese and German cars pushing the boundaries for reliability and "neat" features, it's only natural that the market shifts from domestic cars to foreign ones.

Take a look at what's wrong with today's cars and fix it. For example: People are sick and tired of rising gas prices. Solution? Hybrids or even electric cars. Chevy and Toyota are leading the pack with various versions of electric cars that they've announced, but find out what your customer wants and needs, and if you fill that gap, your sales will skyrocket. It's not brain surgery people.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

I always get email from people who claim I'm wrong on this issue or that, so I offer you the soapbox: Send me an article on whatever political topic you'd like and I'll gladly post it. Now's your chance to put up or shut up. Any takers? Email me your article at the link below.

As a side note, sorry about the posts yesterday, I had a hardware failure in a work email server. People around here curl up in the fetal position if email isn't working, so I had to stay until 10pm fixing it. I should have everything back to normal here either tomorrow or Thursday.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Hmm...let's see if I can do some math here. The "surge" started in Februrary, however the guys didn't get there until months later. The death toll is at it's lowest point in 8 months, you'd swear that we were making progress in Iraq or something.

Sounds like it's "going to be a big problem" for Democrats if things continue this way.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

With the recent search/raid conducted on Senator Steven's home, I found this interesting list of lawmakers who are actively being investigated. If the allegations are true, every one of these people need to be removed from office. Running our country is too important for corruption.

Wait, wait, wait. I thought that Guantanamo Bay was where we were torturing people, making them feel like they were drowning, burning them, treating them like animals, and this guy is actually SUING to be able to stay there instead of go home? Well either one of a couple things are happening.

1: His home country is really shitty and they will torture him.

2: His home country is really shitty and he just doesn't want to live there.

3: He's not being tortured in Guantanamo like everyone thinks happens there.

Regardless, if he's not a threat, he doesn't belong in Guantanamo. We also don't have the obligation to keep him if he's afraid of going home.

As a side note, I remember watching a show on the History Channel called "The Dark Art Of Interrogation" and in it, a US Army interrogator said that when inmates at Guantanamo were first arriving, they weren't talking, when it appeared that we were shipping them back to their home country, they were deathly afraid and were spilling their guts to talk their way out of having to go home.

This is probably a similar situation. However, I say whatever intelligence we can gather from them, go for it.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Sure, it all looks good on paper, but what do you want to bet that there's ways of getting around it. Senator DeMint seems to think so:

“This bill is nothing more than the status quo, allowing every chairman to decide whether to disclose earmarks or not. Senator Byrd has already ‘certified’ that he is complying with disclosure now, but an independent group, Taxpayers for Common Sense, already showed that $7.5 billion in earmarks have been undisclosed. The favor factory is still open and ready for business.”

So while everyone is busy patting themselves on the back and giving the American public a smoke and mirror show, not a lot has really changed.

The only real thing that looks good is this:

Deny retirement benefits to members of Congress convicted of bribery, perjury or similar crimes.

Well that certainly looks good, I want to see them lose retirement benefits for being convicted of ANY crime (only felony) while committed when they were in office. Misdemeanors don't really count. I don't care if a member of Congress jaywalks and gets a minor conviction for it.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Don't believe me? Take a look at this quote: Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

To be that brutally honest is something that you'd never expect from a Democrat, especially, the House Majority Whip. He's just confirming what I've been telling you all along: Democrats don't want victory in Iraq.

He doesn't even care what's right and wrong, he cares "what could be a big problem for US".

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Brit Hume nailed it on the head. Democrats simply think terrorism is something they can just "live with" and that it's all a scare tactic by the Bush administration. Even with flagrant evidence like the 9/11 attacks, they simply still don't get it.

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman on Monday criticized a U.S. plan to sell state-of-the-art weapons to Saudi Arabia, saying it would undermine security in the Middle East, the state broadcasting company reported.

Mohammad Ali Hosseini's comments followed reports last week that the U.S. planned to sell Saudi Arabia an estimated $20 billion of sophisticated weaponry, including advanced air systems that would greatly enhance the striking ability of Saudi warplanes.

Yeah, let's talk about "undermining security in the Middle East" for a minute. How about your nuclear facilities? How about your plans to buy jets from Russia? How about your leaders who call for the destruction of a neighboring country? How about your meddling in the insurgency in Iraq?

Until you deal with those issues, you can kindly go fuck yourself on the "undermining security" point you've made.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Well if they take a vacation, then it's only fair that our military takes a vacation right? They won't mind the guys who've been sweltering in 100+ degree heat with 60+ pounds of gear on who protect their sorry asses from taking a vacation. Hell, they earned it more then the politicians did.

I think it's HIGHLY coincidental that they are coming back to work right before the report on how things are going in September.

Am I a paranoid guy in thinking they did this to hopefully get some "bad news" to the White House and provoke us leaving? Maybe I am, but it's not without possibility.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

IN North Waziristan, the wild border land that America hopes will be Osama Bin Laden’s graveyard, the normally busy roads are almost deserted and the fear is pervasive. Army helicopters sweep the valleys at night hunting for Al-Qaeda militants as troops and gunmen exchange artillery and rocket fire.

America and Britain regard this usually autonomous tribal area - where Bin Laden is long believed to have been hiding - as the logistics centre of Islamic terrorist attacks around the world.

President Pervez Musharraf sees it as the centre of a campaign to “Talibanise” Pakistan. Spurred on by Washington, he has abandoned a truce with Waziristan’s Islamist guerrillas and ordered his army to root them out.

So, is this a legitimate push to get rid of Al-Qaeda and move against Osama? Or is this a token advance because Musharraf is feeling the heat from us? One thing is certain, time's running out for Musharraf. If we get actionable intelligence that Osama is going to be at a place and time, you can bet your bottom dollar as long as a Republican is President, there'll be a strike called in.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com

Wow, if you can't stifle what people say, go after the advertisers who support the show.

Let me explain a few things wrong with this:

Liberals love to spew off America hating, Bush bashing, liberal bullshit as loud and as often as possible. If you call them on it, they cry "Freedom of Speech!", to which they'd be correct.

However, they certainly don't like it when Fox News reports on things and takes a conservative viewpoint. They want to silence Fox News because it doesn't agree with them.

MoveOn.org is campaigning against Fox because it says the network characterizes itself as a fair news network when it consistently favors a conservative point of view, said Adam Green, the organization's spokesman.

"We're not trying to silence anybody," Green said. "Rush Limbaugh has a right to be on the air—he admits his point of view. Fox doesn't."

Yes, Fox does have the right to speak their opinion. ALL news organizations have opinion pieces like O'Reilly's show.

Do you honestly expect moveon.org to go after MSNBC or CNN for their obvious liberal slant? Oh please, that would be being fair and honest, qualities you'd never get from those people.

A little side note guys, you're going after Home Depot. Let's take a look at Home Depot's customers. Typically skilled, blue collar workers: Electricians, Plumbers, Carpenters, etc. I've been to Home Depot MANY times: I even went there this weekend to pick up parts to help a friend with some minor house stuff because he's selling his place. It's practically Republican central. Home Depot customers are people who don't mind getting their hands dirty to make things happen, qualities you won't find in any liberal.

You think Home Depot is going to stop advertising to it's core demographics? It would be like me trying to go after moveon.org's major donors. It simply isn't going to happen successfully.


Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com