Friday, September 28, 2007
Hillary Has Sunk To A New Low
"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so that when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college or maybe they will be able to make that down payment on their first home," she said.
The New York senator did not offer any estimate of the total cost of such a program or how she would pay for it. Approximately 4 million babies are born each year in the United States.
Who's going to pay for the extra $20 billion a year Hillary? Couple that with her proposed $110 billion a year universal health care plan, that's $130 billion a year in ADDED costs. This country is already $9 trillion in debt, and Hillary wants to push it higher. Yet, you never hear a reporter call her on her blatantly lying campaign promise.
We all know she's not going to go through with this bullshit idea. There would be too much of an outcry. For example: What about those of us who didn't get the $5k when we were born? Why should we have to pay for someone else to go to college? Why do newborns get to get a leg up on the down payment on a new home when the rest of us lived in a shitty apartment and saved up? Why do newborns get to have less financial pressure about college when I worked a full time job, rode the city bus, and went to college full time? How is that fair to me?
What are your plans for this money when they turn 18? What if they decide to spend the money on weed and the latest Apple laptop instead of college tuition? Something like this is ripe for abuse and Hillary is simply trying to buy dumb people's votes. Everyone on CNN's forums, even Democrats, are talking about "who's going to pay for this".
Oh and I'll bet you diamonds to doughnuts that she'd included illegal immigrants as well.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Media Matters - Limbaugh: Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are "phony soldiers"
Pretty explosive headline right? I mean, if Rush said something like that, then there'd be a firestorm right? Well there is and there isn't.
Here's what was said:
CALLER 2: No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.
LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.
CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their country.
Nowhere does Rush say "service members who support the withdrawal are "phony soldier"s.
Hell, even our favorite Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz, can't even be bothered to READ WHAT HE SAID.
As Media Matters reported today, Rush Limbaugh, on his show said that those troops who come home and want to get America out of the middle of the religious civil war in Iraq are "phony soldiers." I'd love for you, Rush, to have me on your show and tell that to me to my face.
I'm sure Rush would gladly have you on his show. How about you offer it to him through normal media channels instead of Huffington Post? I'm sure that Rush will reply to you a lot quicker then a post on a liberal blog.
Where to begin?
Well you could start off with actually reading what he said. It seems you can't be bothered to read past a headline.
First, in what universe is a guy who never served even close to being qualified to judge those who have worn the uniform?
This is one of Jon's favorite quotes to try to discredit people who have opposing viewpoints. Take a look around any time Jon gets into a debate with someone. When he's cornered about a particular issue or point, he never admits, "yes, you are right." or "I didn't think of it that way." or even "well I am wrong". Even I admit when I'm wrong from time to time. But Jon is going off on a tangent, so to paraphrase Napoleon, "Never interrupt someone while they are making a mistake".
Does Rush believe, then, that the majority of the US Armed Forces are "phony?"
Does Rush believe that highly decorated Major Generals are "phony soldiers?"
Finally, as Media Matters notes, just recently, members of the 82nd Airborne in Iraq wrote a New York Times op-ed, very critical of the course in Iraq, and suggesting it was time to figure out the exit strategy. Two of them just died. Will Rush call up their grieving parents and tell them that they should stop crying, because they were just "phony soldiers?"
Get the point here, Rush?
He never said any of those things and never even HINTED at those things. Even better, there's a poster on Huffington Post that points all this out:
aaa123
First of all, thank you for your service. Second of all, it appears you did not listen to the entire conversation. If you had, you would have known he was speaking specifically of a "soldier" booted out after 40 days and making false allegations against you and your fellow soldiers, and those like him. He actually praised those who joined with the intent of going to Iraq. To those who actually took the time to check out the facts and context of the story, your blog entry makes you look pretty ignorant.
He's speaking about Jesse Macbeth.
On September 21, 2007 Macbeth admitted in federal court that he had faked his war record. U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan declared that Macbeth had been in the Army for just 40 days and had been kicked out as unfit.
But the reply to aaa123's post is even funnier:
ts
Actually, I both listened to it and read the transcript. First, he uses "soldiers" which, unless someone has changed our language would indicate a plural, which is generally understood as more than one. Secondly, and I assume you are referring to Jesse MacBeth here, if that's who he was speaking of, why not use his name?
The phrase "a "soldier" booted out after 40 days and making false allegations against you and your fellow soldiers, and those like him." is wholly yours and neither appears or is implied in the transcript.
Can't you guys be truthful about anything? The whole, "we're being persecuted" line is getting really old, either deal with the actual issue or shut the hell up.
The guy admitted he lied in a court of law. Doesn't get much more confirmed then that.
Now, Democrats are peeing themselves trying to paint this for something it isn't.
Fortunately, there are members of the military and people who know what Rush was referring to as shown below:
Are you kidding me? The Dems are trying to make something out of this. I am ex-military, and I know exactly what Rush meant. It is taken out of context and that is how the drive-bys and the Dems like to make their attacks. They have nothing else to go on, so they try so hard to discredit Republicans. Get back to what is important. Everyone knows that Rush is a military lover.
Posted By Bryan, Tampa, FL : September 28, 2007 11:18 am
You morons are taking his comment out of context as you always do. He was talking about a "soldier" that claimed that he witnessed killing in mosques and such in Iraq. It turns out that the soldier never served in combat and was washed out of basic training. Get it right. You are always performing journalist mal-practice by not understanding what led to this comment!
Posted By Dave Atlanta GA : September 28, 2007 11:19 am
Sounds like Dave in Atlanta nailed it on the head. Rush was speaking about someone who made claims and went to the media about it. Well his claims were found to be false. So when Rush refers to that, Democrats are trying to use it to deflect from their "betray us" ad hornet's nest that they've stirred up. Nice try fellas, but unfortunately, you've got nothing.
Travis
U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
The hate crime bill that was going through Congress today was passed 60-39. It would allow for a wider prosecution of hate crimes, including gay hate crimes.
But look who voted it down:
I must admit I snickered a little bit when I saw that.
I guess the only gay people that need "protecting" are US Senators.
Travis
Hypocrisy By The GOP
Sensing that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) will win the Democratic presidential nomination, Republican Party operatives are stepping up their political attacks on the former first lady but are wary of going too far with their criticisms because she is a woman.
“You can’t go after a woman candidate the way you can go after a guy,” said Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation and an influential conservative leader. “It’s very, very difficult to campaign against a woman candidate.”
Weyrich said that fact, combined with what he described as Clinton’s willingness to “stop at nothing to win,” makes her the favorite to win the White House.
“That’s why I think she will be elected president,” he said.
Bullshit. You want to be President, you'd better be ready to roll with the punches like any other candidate has to, and if you lighten up on Hillary, you're just giving her breathing room.
What kind of attacks do you think she'll get from other world leaders? Do you think they'll ease up simply because she's a woman? (I assume she's a woman, I haven't done a plumbing check). Of course not, so if they won't, why should the Republican party?
Travis
Rep. Pelosi criticizes border fence - USATODAY.com
"I have been against the fence, I thought it's a bad idea even when it was just a matter of discussion," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "These are communities where you have a border going through them, they are not communities where you have a fence splitting them."
She loves to talk about border security, but doesn't want a fence? What kind of fucking idiotic way of thinking is that? The border is wide open, and if someone gets an inkling of trying to get across, there's not a lot to stop them.
Oh wait, it gets better:
Pelosi also touted legislation known as the DREAM Act that would make it easier for some illegal immigrants to receive higher education benefits. She spoke at a conference that drew more than 5,000 students for activities designed to inspire careers in science and technology.
The DREAM Act would eliminate a federal provision that discourages states from providing illegal immigrants with lower in-state tuition rates. It also would allow permanent residency for illegal immigrants who entered the country as children and have been admitted to an institution of higher education.
"It just isn't fair," Pelosi said. "Those young people who came to America one way or another ... their opportunities are curtailed because of the situation. And it's not only harmful to them — it's harmful to the country."
"It just isn't fair"?!?!!? These people come here ILLEGALLY! They are entitled to NOTHING except deportation. This is the only country on the planet where a person can come illegally and actually have morons in power who will listen to you whine about how you're not getting benefits that US citizens paid for.
The only thing harmful to the country is them trying to bleed us dry with free benefits and try to have children here as "anchor" babies.
But it's not only me that's pissed at Nancy Pelosi. Even members of the Democratic party are calling for her impeachment.
She deserves to be publicly humiliated on the front pages of every newspaper in America for such idiotic thoughts. She loves to talk about the deficit, but then wants to GIVE away yours and my hard earned tax dollars to people who aren't even here legally.
Travis
Officials eye ban on smoky dwellings - The Boston Globe
You know it's getting pretty bad for smokers when people are trying to ban them from smoking in their own homes. Apartments I can sort of understand as you are renting from someone. However, a Condo that you've bought and paid for, no one, not even those loathed home owners associations, can tell me what I can and can't do in my home.
If they want to tell me what I can and can't do in my home, then they can pay my mortgage payment. I had the same problem when I was living in my old condo. My homeowners association tried to tell me I had to bring my garbage cans up the same day that the garbage was picked up.
Unfortunately for them, I am the worst person to play the "waiting game" with. My homeowner's association rep came to my house and tried to tell me about the "garbage can problem". I told her if she didn't like the cans at the side of the street past the day of pickup, she was more than welcome to bring them up to my garage door.
She then tried to play the "let's leave a note on the door every day" bit. That only gives me something to look forward to at the end of the day.
After a while, she simply accepted that I work for a living and that I'll get my garbage cans when I'm God damned good and ready.
The same should apply to smokers who paid for their condos. Unless you plan on making their mortgage payment, you have zero right to ask them to curb whatever behavior they are doing. It's not illegal, so leave them alone.
Travis
Spineless
You just can't make this stuff up folks. Even Democrat's own constituency knows they are spineless:
I disagree with the "evil" part, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion.
Travis
Thursday, September 27, 2007
High Risk Sex Offenders And Knee Jerk Reactions.
Washington state Governor Chris Gregoire is caught red handed being a "knee jerk" responder to a problem.
A handful of the state's most dangerous sex offenders soon could wear tracking devices as part of a new effort announced Wednesday by Gov. Chris Gregoire.
The devices -- global positioning systems in ankle bracelets -- cannot prevent violent crimes but can help police know if a sex offender was at the scene of a crime, officials said.
The move comes after the July kidnapping and slaying of 12-year-old Zina Linnik of Tacoma. Police arrested a sex offender, Terapon Adhahn, in connection with the case. Adhahn now faces aggravated first-degree murder, first-degree kidnapping and first-degree rape charges in Pierce County.
Unfortunately for Gregoire, even if this program were in place at the time, it would not have stopped Terapon Adhahn from killing of the 12 year old child. Why? Because Terapon was a level 1 sex offender at the time, the lowest level there is. So, even by this plan, he wouldn't have been monitored, and all it is, is a knee jerk, feel good, additional cost that the tax payers of Washington state are going to have to endure.
Plus, you won't know where a child is in relation to the offender who's being monitored until after something tragic has happened.
Christine Gregoire also has a big problem on her hands with her bit of hypocrisy. She wants to look like she's being tough on crime, but has now required probation and parole officers to get permission to search an offenders home while they are on state supervision. Before, this permission was not needed and was a requirement for the offender to sign off on as a condition of their parole.
Now, offenders can literally have a child handcuffed in a back room, and without a warrant, police cannot do anything to check in on the offender, regardless of how dangerous that person is.
Governor Gregoire also has been a bit tight with the purse strings when it comes to the Department of Corrections and will not give out much needed raises and bumps in budgets to combat dangerous felons when they are on supervision.
This is a disaster waiting to happen. There have already been a few Seattle police officers murdered by people on state supervision, yet the Governor doesn't push for more funds for more parole/probation officers. Instead, she ties their hands on what they can and cannot do with an offender, even if he/she is suspected of returning back to old ways.
When a parole/probation officer tries to put these people in jail for their offenses, Gregoire had rules in place that let's these people out of jail early and on rare occasions, these people kill innocent people, including three Seattle police officers.
Now she's back pedaling and Gregoire wants harsher punishments for these offenders and won't give funding to follow through with these new, tougher rules. For example, if more people are in jail or there are stricter rules for parole/probation, then there are additional staff that need to be hired or trained.
What's worse is that Gregoire is only focusing on one group of criminals: Level III Sex Offenders. Currently, the only way that one can be classified as a Level III Sex Offender in Washington state is to commit multiple sex crimes. It's the Level I and Level II sex offenders that my sources say need to be monitored more closely, such as Adhahn.
Unfortunately, three Seattle police officers had to die before she decides that crime is bad. They are Police officers and people Gregoire, not photo opportunities to make yourself look good to voters.
Travis
Bill Clinton Pissed About Hypocrisy
Yes Bill, let's talk about hypocrisy and lying for a minute shall we?
When you did your interview with Christopher Wallace, you claim that you did everything you could to get Bin Laden. However, Michael Scheuer of the CIA's Bin Laden group flatly contradicts and even blames you for the US failing to get Bin Laden before 9/11.
So who are we to believe? Clinton, who has every reason in the world to deny that he didn't do everything, or Scheuer, the guy who was in charge of getting Bin Laden and needed Clinton's permission to order a strike.
But that's all besides the point. Clinton is pissed that his buddies over at MoveOn is getting their feet held to the fire and saying that Republicans aren't truly pissed about the "General Betray Us" ad.
Well why wouldn't we get pissed Bill? You and your Democratic colleagues said you would listen to the commanders on the ground about what's going on in Iraq, and when it's clear that you won't be hearing what you WANT to hear, you try to sully Petraeus' good name.
That's called acting like a child Bill. Perhaps if you did less of it, people might respect you more.
Travis
John Kerry: President Bush Plays Chicken with Children's Health - Politics on The Huffington Post
Oh how I enjoy reading John Kerry's writings. It gives you an inside look at how much of an idiot this guy is. Case in point:
After promising he'd work on "expanding health care for children," the President has now unilaterally declared war on a successful, wildly popular program that gives health care to millions of low-income kids.
Democrats see a successful program, S-CHIP, and they see 11 million kids still uninsured in the richest country in the world, and they want to build on what works and expand it. Makes sense, right? But this White House is so hell-bent on denying the Democratic Congress a victory, the President's threatening to veto health care for kids.
This is the same guy who never met a Republican spending bill he couldn't sign. Not one. $300 million bridge to nowhere? Pass the pork. Half-trillion dollars on the road to quagmire in Iraq? Bring it on. But a few billion a year for health care for millions of kids? Forget it. Not this President. Not the "compassionate conservative."
Oh John, I don't think you even read the bill that the President is vetoing. "A few billion dollars a year" increase has already been approved by the President. He wants a $5 billion dollar a year increase, which is more than "a few", in case you don't know.
Democrats, including John Kerry, want a $60 billion dollar a year increase. That's WAY more than "a few".
Don't try to paint this as the President trying to deny children health insurance John, everyone with half a brain and a little research can find out the truth. But Democrats such as you want to twist it into something it isn't.
You even had released a "plan to eliminate the deficit". Well you can't do that if you're trying to ADD an additional $60 billion a year John. Even a third grade student can tell you that.
But yet, here's one of John Kerry's quotes: "And it's the president's fiscal policies that have driven up the biggest deficits in American history. He's added more debt to the debt of the United States in four years than all the way from George Washington to Ronald Reagan put together. Go figure."
So not only are you an idiot who can't add, but you're also a hypocrite. You want to add $60 billion a year towards children's insurance, then you better cut $60 billion a year in spending. Otherwise, you're nothing more then a bandwagon hopping hypocrite.
Travis
Russia's Lavrov rejects sanctions on Iran for now | International | Reuters
In other words, Russia is hoping for a glimmering shred of evidence that Iran isn't going for a nuclear weapon and they want the IAEA to find that shred.
The problem is that it isn't going to happen.
Russia is desperate to keep it's economic ties intact with Iran and if there's overwhelming evidence that they are trying for a nuclear weapon, they will be backed into a corner on voting for additional sanctions. Iran is a major customer of Russian weapons as well, and they certainly don't want to jeopardize their chances to get back onto the world stage and become a superpower again.
Iranian sanctions will put that hope into the gutter pretty deeply if they do happen.
"That cannot be used as a shield to protect Iran from its lack of implementation of the demands of the Security Council in regard to the enrichment of uranium that Iran has been asked to suspend twice," he told reporters.
Exactly. They have been told twice now to stop enrichment and they have not only not stopped, but they've accelerated it. Not exactly the kind of behavior you'd want from an ally is it?
Asked about U.S. and French calls for sanctions outside the Security Council, Miliband said: "It's already the case that European Union countries have taken greater action than was required by the Security Council. That is healthy and good."
He said companies and banks were making their own decisions about investment based on the political risk.
"The figures on the fall in European investment in Iran in the first 6 months of this year are spectacular," he said, citing a 40 percent decrease. "There is evidence of sanctions having an effect."
There isn't a country on the planet that can deal with a 40% decrease in financial deals with a continent, let alone Iran. Take a look around, Iran is going to have a tough time weaseling it's way out of this.
Travis
Ideas For Expansion
Hello everyone,
I have been kicking around a few ideas on how to expand the site and make it more inclusive for everyone who comes here, (regardless of political viewpoint). One of them would be the addition of forums that would be free of charge to everyone of course, but I've been thinking of other ways of building up our community and weighing the pros and cons of each idea.
The forums will probably come online in the coming weeks/months. It will add significant amounts of bandwidth to my hosted server, so I may have to upgrade to get that to happen.
That being said, if you do have any ideas on things you would like to see here, please feel free to email them to me and I will gladly take a look at them.
Travis
Come Join Us And Talk About Border Security
Bin Laden may have just escaped U.S. forces - Nightly News with Brian Williams - MSNBC.com
A little more than a month ago, with the anniversary of Sept. 11 approaching and fears of a new al Qaeda attack rising, some U.S. intelligence and military analysts thought they had found one of the world’s two most wanted men just where they last saw them six years ago.
For three days and nights — between Aug. 14 and 16 — U.S. and Afghanistan forces pounded the mountain caves in Tora Bora, the same caves where Osama Bin Laden had hidden out and then fled in late 2001 after U.S. forces drove al Qaeda out of Afghanistan cities. Ultimately, however, U.S. forces failed to find Bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al Zawahiri, even though their attacks left dozens of al Qaeda and Taliban dead.
Fuck! Well if he was there, better luck next time fellas. If not, well then this is a non story. But it does remind people that we are still after Bin Laden.
Personally, I would love to see Bin Laden captured or killed before President Bush gets out of office. It would be a nice highlight to a Presidency racked with problem after problem. But that's just "it would be nice" type of thing for me. I personally don't care if it takes us until Bin Laden is on his death bed to get him, as long as we get him.
Travis
Clinton supports Israeli 'strike' on Syria - Israel News, Ynetnews
This is exactly why Hillary shouldn't be President. I know what you're thinking: "but YOU supported the Israeli strike on Syria, why is wrong for her to as well?"
Well I'll tell you why:
The senator said the United States believed Syria has been receiving technological aid from North Korea in an attempt to build a nuclear facility and that Israel has eliminated that facility.
During the debate which was held in New Hampshire, Meet the Press' Tim Russert pressured the candidates into clarifying whether they would support an Israeli attack on Iran.
In an attempt to avoid the question, Clinton said, "This is a hypothetical question." Russert defended his question and said it was a realistic one; in return the senator said, "What Israel did in Syria is realistic."
In other words, she has no problem with others doing our dirty work, but she won't get her hands dirty and make tough decisions if no one else wants to step up to the plate.
You can't have those character flaws when you're the President. Being President means making decisions that could mean the ending of someone's life or protecting American's lives, and if she can't or won't do that, then she doesn't deserve to be President.
Travis
Bush thought Saddam was prepared to flee: report - washingtonpost.com
Here's some explosive information about the then, upcoming Iraq war:
Saddam Hussein was prepared to take $1 billion and go into exile before the Iraq war, according to a transcript of talks between U.S. President George W. Bush and an ally, Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Wednesday.
"The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction," Bush was quoted as saying at the meeting one month before the U.S.-led invasion.
Asked by Aznar whether Saddam could really leave, Bush replied: "Yes, that possibility exists. Or he might even be assassinated."
Take that in for a minute. Saddam was willing to take a bribe of $1 billion dollars and leave the country.
However, there's a LOT of problems with that.
First off, what do you suppose he would do with that $1 billion dollars? He could have easily funded more Palestinian suicide bombers and wreaked all sorts of havoc on the region.
Can you see how the American public would have reacted? "Bush gives $1 billion to get rid of Saddam". He would have used that as a major propaganda item as well. "The American's had to buy their way out, they know they can't take me!"
But, there's a second problem here. Something no one noticed. "All the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction".
Is that an admission from Saddam that he indeed had WMD's? Or was it a ruse to keep up the appearance that he had WMD's? Or was it to play a giant game of poker and he was bluffing?
With Saddam dead, we'll never know, but now that we've spend almost 600x as much as the bribe Saddam wanted, it can appear to be an attractive offer to some, but it could very well have been disastrous to do so.
Travis
Report: Security on U.S.-Canada border fails terror test - CNN.com
Funny, didn't I talk about a border fence on BOTH borders? Didn't I mention the Millennium Bomb plot that was caught in Washington state by an alert border guard as the guy was coming in from Canada?
Government investigators were able to cross from Canada into the United States carrying a duffle bag with contents that looked like radioactive material and never encountered a law enforcement official, according to a report released Thursday by investigators from the Government Accountability Office.
Border security doesn't mean just "security from brown people" as some might think. Border security means all borders. If they can't understand that, then perhaps they need to find a different job, because protecting our borders needs to be done by competent people.
Travis
Will China Intervene? - TIME
As Burmese security forces crack down hard on the monk-led protests in Rangoon over the past week, the world's best hopes of pressuring the country's military rulers to avoid further bloodshed rest with Beijing. But there is little sign, thus far, that China plans to use its position as Burma's biggest trading partner to put any pressure on the junta — or that the generals would heed Beijing's wishes even if it did demand restraint.
Of course China isn't going to intervene. They are too busy trying to crack into US military networks and undermine every economy on the planet to actually give a shit about anyone else but themselves.
Given that China won't do a lot of the things that in the eyes of the rest of the world would be considered "the right thing to do", I'm surprised that Time magazine would even bother to write up an article.
Travis
Judge rejects portion of Patriot Act - OregonLive.com
An Oregon judge Wednesday struck down a key portion of the USA Patriot Act, ruling that it violated the U.S. Constitution's ban on unreasonable search and seizure.
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Patriot Act gives federal agents too much unchecked power in conducting criminal investigations of U.S. citizens.
"The (government) here is asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. This court declines to do so," Aiken wrote.
And you know what? She's right. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights spell out what is and is not acceptable in terms of a US citizen's right to privacy and searches.
In oral arguments before Aiken earlier this month, Justice Department lawyers said the law adequately protected citizens. They also said that Mayfield had no right to pursue his case after he reached a settlement.
In a 44-page ruling, Aiken disagreed. She wrote that Mayfield could pursue his case because the government continued to keep information about him.
And that's the crux of everything. They KEPT the information. They could have said "Sorry, we made a mistake. We'll purge our information about you.", but they didn't. They thought they could keep the information for future use and violated this man's rights.
No matter what, you can't take away a US citizen's rights. Otherwise what would be the point of living in our great nation?
Travis
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Democrats Admit Iraq Troops May Not Come Home
The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.
"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.
"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
That's the core of the left's main argument right now. "Elect a Democrat, and troops come home tomorrow". Well that's been shattered, and now they face folks who are their core constituency who may end up voting for a Republican in the Presidential election.
I guess Democrats really do say only what they think the people want to hear. Now when it looks unlikely that they can keep their promise, they backtrack.Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
FOXNews.com - Wife of Kidnapped Israeli Soldier Confronts Ahmadinejad - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News
Need evidence that Iran supports terrorist organization Hezbollah? Look no further:
The wife of an Israeli soldier kidnapped by Hezbollah confronted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a news conference at the United Nations, urging him to use his influence over the guerrilla group to allow aid workers to see her husband.
In an exchange broadcast on Israeli radio stations Wednesday, Karnit Goldwasser accused the Iranian leader of responsibility for her husband's capture.
"My name is Karnit and I'm the wife of Goldwasser that was kidnapped by Hezbollah to Lebanon more than a year ago and you're responsible for this by your support. I'm asking how come you're not allowing the Red Cross to go to visit them," Goldwasser said at the Tuesday news conference.
Ahmadinejad ignored her, saying "next question.
Coward. You simply can't stand up and say "I don't care about your husband. I don't like Jews. I want to exterminate them all". At least then, we could half way respect that you stand up for your beliefs publicly. Instead, you cower to a woman who asks you a pointed and legitimate question.
Travis
FOXNews.com - Lawyer Sentenced for Terror Support to Teach at N.Y. University Conference - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News
I don't even need to comment on this. This is too disgusting for words.
A disbarred lawyer convicted of helping her client communicate with terrorists was scheduled to teach at a Long Island, N.Y., law school ETHICS conference.
Lynne Stewart, who was convicted in 2005 of providing material support to terrorists and received a 28-month sentence, was to speak at Hofstra Law School’s LEGAL ETHICS conference.
Travis
Iraqi Leader Says Flow of Arms Must Stop - washingtonpost.com
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday that terrorism is threatening to erase any gains made in reducing sectarian killings and establishing democratic principles in his country.
He also warned that Iraq's neighbors must stop the continued flow into his country of weapons, suicide bombers and funding for terrorism, saying there would be "disastrous consequences" for the region and the world if they failed.
Well if Maliki were any kind of leader, he'd come out and say "Iran is putting weapons and explosives into the hands of insurgents". But Maliki is a Shiite, so he wouldn't dare do such a thing. What do you want to bet would be the outcome if a Sunni were in charge?
Travis
Nancy Pelosi Has A Bad Interview.
Wolf Blitzer pissed off Nancy Pelosi in this nice little interview. At around the 3 minute remaining mark it gets interesting.
Wolf asks her about her angry base and how there's nothing to be done and she replies with: "I didn't say that at all. how could you have ever gotten that impression?" then makes a snippy comment of "for those who pay attention..." Well Nancy, we get that impression by your words you've been using throughout the interview. "Republican's have taken ownership of this war." Well that sounds like you're giving up to me. Isn't it your JOB to do what you said you would do during your campaign promises?
You certainly use the word "redeploy" an awful lot. I even notice in some points she wants to use the word "retreat", but she catches herself and says "redeploy".
She also wants to "hold the President accountable for this war." Wolf jumps on it and asks "what does mean? besides complaining...."
You can tell she's pretty pissed by this point as she starts stammering a little bit over her answers.
Then she tries to say that retired Generals say that stability can only happen when our troops are out of Iraq. However, Generals IN Iraq are saying that when we leave an area that's not ready to stand on it's feet, it's overrun by Al-Qaeda. How's that stability Nancy? She talks about a 10 year war in Iraq, but she's taking a quote from Petraeus WAY out of context and trying to spin it for her own views. What he said was "It takes, HISTORICALLY, 8-10 years for a counterinsurgency. He didn't say "we'll be here for 8-10 years".
"We hoped to have bipartisanship", which is a bullshit lie. It was "our way or no way". There was no compromise with Nancy, Harry Reid, or any other prominent Democrat. They love nothing more than to throw our military under the bus, as shown with John Murtha's refusal to apologize for accusing Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians, when it was clear that the charges will be dropped. For those of you who don't know, charges are dropped when there's a lack of evidence, or THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG.
You want "bipartisanship"? Then come up with a plan where everyone wins, not just you for brownie points for the drooling idiots over at DailyKos and MoveOn.
Travis
Iranian firms feel the heat as sanctions bite | International | Reuters
Western punitive measures imposed on the Islamic Republic over its disputed nuclear activities are making it increasingly difficult to conduct business in the world's fourth largest oil producer.
Yeah, that's basically what the fuck we wanted to do to you. You consistently don't listen to reason, supply and attack our soldiers in Iraq, support Hezbollah, hold massive "Death to America" rallies, and are basically acting like an all around dick.
So, you want to start with proxy wars against the US? Fine, then you get to deal with our financial and covert proxy wars against you.
But let me warn you, it won't be pretty. You have FAR more to lose then we do. We have offered you several "outs" when it comes to saving face in the eyes of the international community in regards to your nuclear program. You chose to spit in our faces and call us names. Well now it is our turn, and we're not happy with the choices you've made.
"The Pakistanis have been taking lots of freight away from Iran because the minute our name is mentioned, especially with Americans paying for the jobs, we lose a contract," she said.
Welcome to the consequences of your government's actions. I know it's a new concept, but try to learn it quickly. Otherwise, you'll be out of business.
Travis
Utah: No More Gun Permits for Foreigners
"Utah had become the state of choice for people who did not live in the United States but wanted to carry a gun in the country," said Richard Wyss, attorney at the Utah Bureau of Criminal Investigation. State authorities "became alarmed," he told lawmakers Tuesday.
About 1,000 citizens of other countries have permits that allow them to carry a concealed gun in Utah and 30 states that have an agreement with Utah. Most are Canadians; others are from countries including Japan, Switzerland, Aruba, Mongolia, Mexico and the Republic of Congo.
WHAT?? Utah is issuing gun permits to non US citizens? What the hell is that about? Are they out of their minds? Non US citizens have NO rights under the Constitution, let alone the right to bear arms. If they were in the middle of becoming US citizens or were naturalized citizens, I could understand, but it's even worse then you could imagine:
Background checks on foreigners were weak because Utah was denied access to records in other countries, but permits were issued if applicants met other requirements, authorities said. Utah now won't renew or issue the permits unless it can do a thorough background check.
So they were allowing potentially criminal, non US citizens to come into their gun stores and walk away with a firearm? Whoever thought this was a good idea should be fired immediately and taken away to a mental hospital so they can't endanger anyone else anymore.
Besides, isn't Utah a state that bans alcohol? I haven't been there in years, so I don't know for sure, but I remember someone saying that. If that's true, why ban alcohol, but not ban foreigners from getting weapons?
Travis
Hillary Clinton 'could cost Democrats dear' - Telegraph
The private memo, leaked to The Washington Post, painted what researchers described as a "sobering picture" for Democrats who believe that President George W Bush's disastrous favourability numbers almost guarantee they will capture the White House next year.
If they think they're guaranteed a win with Hillary, Democrats are severely detached from reality. There are many people who have openly said "If Hillary is running, I'm voting for anyone but her".
They all have their own reasons, but one of the main ones is that she's a two faced, ruthless bitch of a woman who'll say or do whatever it takes to win. She has wild ideas that will cost this country severely financially. She supported the Iraq war, something her constituents could never forgive. She is married to Bill, and we all know how his policies have failed in spectacular ways. And she's unapproachable and unfriendly.
But wait, it gets worse:
All party preference polls show that Democrats are much more popular than Republicans. But when the names of individual candidates are used, the gap narrows considerably.
The leaked poll found that Mr Giuliani, a centrist Republican with liberal stances on issues such as abortion and gay rights, leads Mrs Clinton by 49 per cent to 39 per cent in the swing districts.
In other words, if you say "who would you vote for", people will say "Democrat" or "Republican". However, if you put "Who would you vote for, Hillary or Rudy", then it gets worse for Democrats.
Frank Luntz, a leading Republican pollster, said: "This poll reveals what grassroots Democrats have been concerned about. Hillary is their choice ideologically but not necessarily politically and they're afraid she could lose.
"Democrats want to win more than anything else and they will compromise on policy to achieve electability." Mrs Clinton, he said, prompted a series of perceptions that could damage her.
Haven't I been saying that all along? They will say or do whatever it takes to win, not to put someone into office that most commonly shares their core beliefs.
There's the core difference between Democrats and Republicans. Which is why I don't think Rudy is going to get the nomination. I may be wrong, but his stance on gun control and abortion and gay rights isn't going to go over well with some right wing fundamentalists.
Travis
TheHill.com - House overwhelmingly condemns MoveOn ad
The vote was 341-79. However, not all are happy with that vote:
Lane Hudson of Huffington Post didn't appreciate it
House Dems Sell-Out MoveOn, Condemnation of Free Speech Gets More Votes than Children
The United States House of Representatives just voted to condemn Moveon.org for an ad, which ran in last Monday's New York Times.
Yesterday, the House passed legislation that will increase health care coverage to an additional 3.5 million children. That vote was 265-159.
But what Lane is doing is the same thing I've been telling everyone about this vote on the extended children's health insurance bit. "Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!"
Many Democrats were disgusted with the moveon ad and are showing it with this vote. However, many of those same Democrats are saying "look, we need to start being fiscally responsible" and are voting accordingly.
Besides, it's not like Bush is asking for the program to be cut, he's just saying he wants a less of an increase then they do.
That's the crux of what's going on. Democrats are trying to play it up like big, mean, old Bush is trying to deny little children their health insurance, when in reality, Democrats are trying to push for a huge increase that will push this country further into debt.
Stop being hypocrites Democrats, either you complain about the deficit of you complain about the amount of money we spend on hand holding the American public isn't enough. You can't have it both ways.
Travis
The Raw Story | Israeli air strike did not hit nuclear facility, intelligence officials say
An update on the Israeli strike on Syria. Now there's talk of it wasn't a nuclear convoy that was hit, it was a chemical weapons missile convoy.
With all the rumors that are being spread by this, it's difficult to tell what really is the truth. However, if Syria was transporting ordinary items, you can bet your ass that Syria would be screaming at the top of their lungs to the UN and the world public.
Their lack of such declarations leads one to believe that they had something they wanted to hide and that they want this whole thing to blow over.
Unfortunately for them, I plan on keeping tabs on this story until the truth comes out.
Travis
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Bali bombers will be executed
We all remember the Bali bombings in Indonesia. It killed over 200 people and put Jemmaah Islamiyah on the map as a terrorist organization that could do real damage.
Well now 3 of the bombers are going to be executed by firing squad because of it.
Indonesia's Supreme Court has rejected the final appeals of two Muslim militants sentenced to death for a bombing that killed 202 people in and around two Bali nightclubs nearly five years ago.
This is pretty significant as Indonesia is the world's most populated Muslim country and they are also known to commute sentences of some of the worst of the worst, so here's crossing our collective fingers and hoping for the best.
Travis
Political Cartoons
I love a good political cartoon, and these are all spot on. I found them via a reader, so enjoy!
My Way News - Iran Leader Says Nuclear Issue Closed
Oh good, Ahmadinejad says that the nuclear issue is "closed". Well I guess we'd all better pack up and go home then.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced Tuesday that "the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed," and indicated that Tehran will disregard U.N. Security Council resolutions imposed by "arrogant powers" and demanding suspension of its uranium enrichment.
If this guy didn't have the history that he does, I'd ask "is this guy for real"?
Now he's placing his closest allies in Russia and China with the now unenviable task of trying to defend Iran's actions. They are openly stating they won't adhere to the UN's resolutions (similar to what Saddam did over the course of 12+ years), so what are we to do?
Well, we impose sanctions, CRIPPLING sanctions. Iran needs to be slapped back into reality. They need to see their populace rioting in the streets because they don't have the normal day to day goods and services that they are used to.
This could actually be a really good thing for us. Put forth additional sanctions, watch the Iranian people get very upset, and then vote their leaders out of office.
Iran is already cracking down on young adults who don't like the theoretical ways of "old Iran", so it's completely within reason that sanctions would work best in this situation. But I'm not talking about simple "no more Ferrari's for you!" type of sanctions.
I'm talking about blockades of imports and exports to the country. I'm talking about halting oil shipments to and from the country. Yes, it will raise the price of gas and oil significantly, but that will also hurt Russia and China and that's something they cannot afford. They'll have back door meetings to get the Iranians to come to their senses.
We've been dealt an Ace people, let's play it right.
Travis
Examiner Exclusive: Bush quietly advising Hillary Clinton, top Democrats - Examiner.com
President Bush is quietly providing back-channel advice to Hillary Rodham Clinton, urging her to modulate her rhetoric so she can effectively prosecute the war in Iraq if elected president.
In an interview for the new book “The Evangelical President,” White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten said Bush has “been urging candidates: ‘Don’t get yourself too locked in where you stand right now. If you end up sitting where I sit, things could change dramatically.’ ”
Now only if he'll give her advice on how not to be a sneaky, underhanded opportunist, then maybe things might be a bit better for the country.
But alas, Hillary will still be squashing negative stories about her, spend untold billions and pull a "think of the children" moment, and even insure illegal aliens until the day we all die.
It could be worse though. We could have Dennis Kucinich as President.
Travis
With 300,000 names on list, terrorist center always on alert - CNN.com
About a hundred times a day, from anywhere in the world, a phone call comes in that sounds something like this: I think I've got a terrorist suspect here, can you check it out?
Sixty-five percent of the names are confirmed matches, Boyle said.
That's a pretty impressive amount of hits against the database. However:
A recent Justice Department inspector general's report said of 105 watch list records examined in an audit, 38 percent contained errors or inconsistencies; the center operated two versions of its database, but some information was not found in both; and the names of 20 known or suspected terrorists were not made available to all of the nation's frontline screening agents.
Officials defended their record and said the problems are being fixed.
"It is not as though 20 records simply went missing and people could have entered the country," Boyle said. "There are backup and redundant systems that would have allowed many of those persons to have been identified if they did in fact try to get into the country. We now do a daily reconciliation to make sure that every record that comes into the screening center each day is properly listed and exported that same day."
Let me explain something here. No database, especially one that large and complex, is going to be perfect. 38% of mistakes is unacceptable by any stretch, but if it's being corrected, where's the problem? Even databases that run massive websites such as CNN, Ebay, and Amazon have incorrect information in them from time to time.
"We have a dedicated staff who do nothing but work to redress matters," he said.
However, he cautioned, "It is a time consuming and thorough process" that must be followed to make sure wrong names are not removed.
Exactly. You remove the wrong name, or if a sneaky type manages to have his/her name removed, now they can freely get into the country. If that happens watch as everyone jumps down these guys' throats about "why didn't they do more".
Well we ARE doing more and errors are being corrected. So if you have something constructive to add, go for it. If not, let those who know how to correct the errors do their job.
Travis
Keith Olbermann's Actually Agrees With Me
Granted it's on the whole "leave Britney alone" bit, but you can always find common ground with your political adversary.
Travis
Sarkozy says letting Iran go nuclear could cause war - Yahoo! News UK
Allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons could destabilize the world and lead to war, French President Nicolas Sarkozy told the United Nations on Tuesday.
In his maiden speech to the U.N. General Assembly, Sarkozy said: "There will be no peace in the world if the international community falters in the face of nuclear arms proliferation."
Iran was entitled to nuclear power for civilian purposes, he said, "but if we allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, we would incur an unacceptable risk to stability in the region and in the world".
In a broader warning against the dangers of appeasement, the new French leader said: "Weakness and renunciation do not lead to peace. They lead to war."
The leader of France warning of the dangers of appeasement....wow. I want you all to soak that in for a minute. France, with their earned reputation of cowardice and appeasement, appear to have finally had enough and are pushing for what's right, instead of what's popular or economically sound.
I applaud the words of Nicolas Sarkozy, but I'd really prefer he back those words up with action if and when the time comes.
Iran is treading on dangerous waters right now. Even Germany, who was very hesitant to want more sanctions is now coming to the side of the US. China and Russia appear to be alone in their views of "more time".
So, what happens to my views if Sarkozy actually backs his words up? I can't say for sure, I've seen so many acts of appeasement from France, it's difficult to tell, but I can guarantee you that Sarkozy will have a new American friend in me if he does.
What I'd like to know is, how come no one has offered Iran technical and financial help in building a solar furnace or solar power plant? Iran certainly has no lack of sunshine and it would take away the whole "we need clean power because of pollution" argument.
I certainly would have no problems if a former enemy came to us and said "look, we've said some bad things to one another and I'm willing to bury the hatchet. Can you help us build some infrastructure to get more electrical power to our people? We'd appreciate it and would reciprocate with like amounts of help in areas we are experts in".
But alas, I sincerely doubt that will ever happen in my lifetime with regards to Iran. Pity, they used to have such nice architecture too.
Travis
Gator co-eds go topless for Playboy - News - GainesvilleSun.com
This is exactly what's wrong with the way of thinking lately with today's youth. I don't care if a person wants to pose for Playboy, that's not my business, but look at this:
Six UF students are featured in this month's issue of Playboy, the "Wild Southern College Girls" edition. In one picture, taken near a lake front, five scantily clad UF co-eds are seen arm-in-arm. Anita Mae Rose, Jessica Macbeth, Allison Creamer, Monique Omura and Natasha Combs all struck the pose, and only Macbeth kept her breasts covered with a blue bikini. Macbeth wants to be a surgeon, according to the magazine. "If posing for Playboy doesn't get her into a top med school, what good will studying do?" Playboy's writers queried.
Well perhaps if she had a tighter ass or bigger tits then she would have been accepted to Harvard Medical School right?
Simply speaking, we're putting more and more emphasis on looks and style then smarts and substance. I'd certainly rather have a top surgeon who's a bit homely looking working on me rather then some hot looking young thing who's going to butcher me trying to look good for her boss.
Is it too much to ask that people start paying attention in school and they get rewarded with a good paying, low back breaking job? It's worked for hundreds of years, why not now?
Travis
Nuclear Plant Guards Asleep At The Switch
Holy crap on a stick! These guys are supposed to be patrolling and guarding a nuclear power plant and yet, they are fast asleep.
The video was shot by another guard and shown to a local TV station. These guys not only need to be fired, they should be brought up on negligence charges.
Our men and women out on the front lines trying to protect our nation from terrorists and lunatics are being let down by a last line of defense that these guys were supposed to be.
Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence does it?
Travis
Court to decide lethal injection, voter ID cases - CNN.com
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to consider the constitutionality of lethal injections in a case that could affect the way inmates are executed around the country.
All 37 states that perform lethal injections use the same three-drug cocktail. The three drugs consist of an anesthetic, a muscle paralyzer, and a substance to stop the heart. Death penalty foes have argued that if the condemned is not given enough anesthetic, he can suffer excruciating pain without being able to cry out.
While there is a revenge motive in not caring about whether these inmates can feel pain before they die, the Constitution does strictly prohibit "Cruel and Unusual punishment".
So if that's the case, why can't we simply shoot these people with a high caliber rifle round through the back of the head? A .50 caliber weapon should do nicely. Death would be instantaneous and the condemned would feel no pain.
It's all about solutions people. You can either complain about something, or offer up a solution to a current problem. I'm just here to help. :)
Travis
Calls for student editor to resign after 'F**k Bush' column - CNN.com
Welcome to the real world idiots. There is no "freedom of speech" or "freedom of the press" when you work for someone else's newspaper.
It's the same thing as if I went throughout my office building screaming about how one political party was full of Nazi's over the other one. I'd be summarily fired.
Now, I CAN do the same thing on the street corner, but just because you have the freedom to say and print what you want, doesn't give you the right to an audience (Rosie, take note).
Travis
Monday, September 24, 2007
U.S. Aims To Lure Insurgents With 'Bait' - washingtonpost.com
The classified program was described in investigative documents related to recently filed murder charges against three snipers who are accused of planting evidence on Iraqis they killed.
"Baiting is putting an object out there that we know they will use, with the intention of destroying the enemy," Capt. Matthew P. Didier, the leader of an elite sniper scout platoon attached to the 1st Battalion of the 501st Infantry Regiment, said in a sworn statement. "Basically, we would put an item out there and watch it. If someone found the item, picked it up and attempted to leave with the item, we would engage the individual as I saw this as a sign they would use the item against U.S. Forces."
I really can't fault these guys for baiting insurgents. Falsely planting weapons and explosives on the guys to show that they were indeed insurgents is dishonorable and a crime, but if they are baiting the insurgents, good for them.
Insurgents in Iraq love to hide behind women and children, dress as civilians, dress in burqa's, and do all sorts of other cowardly things to avoid detection.
Soldiers said that about a dozen platoon members were aware of the program, and that numerous others knew about the "drop items" but did not know their purpose. Two soldiers who had not been officially informed about the program came forward with allegations of wrongdoing after they learned they were going to be punished for falling asleep on a sniper mission, according to the documents.
So are these soldiers coming forward because they want to save their own skins for falling asleep? Or are they coming forward with legit concerns?
Personally, dropping items on a dead guy to further justify the killing is just asking for trouble. If they were justified, then let the facts come out and that's that. Don't get caught doing something stupid and then end up facing murder charges when/if you were justified in shooting the person to begin with.
Travis