Wednesday, September 30, 2009
They apparently fed their hamsters, and their site is no longer broken on IE.
So.... what happened to Clarkblog.org? And why does the local stain on journalism's site become "epic fail" on IE?
Clarkblog.org, best known for outing Brian Baird as a lying scumbag over fake death threats... as well as showing up our local waste of wood pulp as a democrat front group bent on rehabbing our Cowardman's image, is off line.
Hopefully, this situation can be resolved and the site moved to another provider... perhaps one with a set of testicles.
Meanwhile, the total incompetents over the Columbian's zoo have screwed up their script somehow, and the end result is that their Goebbelian effort doesn't seem to come up on Internet Explorer, although it seems to work fine in Firefox... which, come to think of it, is an increasingly frequent occurrence across the spectrum of websites.
Click on the Columbian link in IE now, and you get "ERROR: Couldn't find template for class = and category = FORSIDE."
HHhmmmm...... seems that their website efforts are as incompetent as their inability to understand or engage in journalism.
Bob, get your site moved. Keep fighting these scum, and holding them accountable for the injury they're doing to our community as they've long since abandoned any pretense of fairness or balance in their rag.
Is there no lie teachers won't tell when they see their pay possibly threatened? "Teachers oppose capping revenue."
We've seen the true colors of teachers in the midst of this horrific recession.
They whine and they snivel, pissed off because THEY might have to sacrifice like the REST of us already have.
As the despicable rag that is our local paper has already begun their anti-I 1033 campaign, we can expect a continuing series of these types of articles as they again try and ram their agenda down our throats.
I don't believe it's gonna work this time, however. This time, we're gonna FORCE teachers to feel OUR pain.
Like the lying bureaucrats the local swindle sheet quoted before, the teachers sniveling in this story ALWAYS leave out the fact that if they, or any other of the government leeches infesting us can come out and JUSTIFY their demand list, we would naturally go along with their program.
Of course, their typically greedy, gimme-my-money demands have to be run through the, even-though-the-value-of-my-property-has-dropped-like-a-rock,-my-taxes-have-still-gone-up filter... like I run my decisions to vote for or against bonds and levies through the filter of the 183 day, part-time work, full time pay schedule teachers have.
Not ONE of the teachers quoted in this stain on journalism's propaganda admitted, or even alluded to, that fact. In fact, the teacher's fall back position is to blame us parents.
Linda Peterson, an art teacher at Chief Umtuch Middle School in Battle Ground, agreed. Budget cuts this year cost teachers their start-up day at the beginning of the school year and their education improvement day.
"Our parents expect us to walk into the classroom and prepare their students for the 21st century," she said. "Students are not getting the attention they deserve because there just isn’t time."
As always, I have a suggestion for our whiny, snively, bitching government workers in EVERY position, from President on down to school janitor... including our prima-donna teachers:
You don't like it?
WE don't like the fact that WE have LOST OUR JOBS.
WE don't like the fact that MONEY does NOT equate to educational success, no matter how much teachers bitch about it.
There are REASONS that we have sustained a 30% or so drop out rate for decades now. And how much of that results from funding?
Weren't the guaranteed pay raises and classroom sizes SUPPOSED to have fixed all of that?
So, to teachers: stop whining, bitching, moaning and complaining. We've already seen what motivates your ilk, as illustrated by teaching scum in Kent, who held an entire district of students, parents and support staff hostage to their greed... all, of course, in the name of the children.
If you teachers band together to oppose this badly needed tax cut, then, perhaps, it's time for us to ban together to vote "no" on all bonds and levies... particularly those that result in more of OUR money in YOUR pockets.
Mike Blowers, former Mariner 3rd Base and now radio broadcaster, makes a pre-game prediction last Sunday before the Mariners game started with Toronto.
Put up with the first half or so of Maddow's blather until she starts talking about Mike Blowers.
The rest is, as they say, history.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Brian Baird: Coward (XXVII) So.... haven't heard much about those non-existent death threats, have you?
You remember, don't you? Our local Cowardman used these fake death threats as an excuse to avoid facing the wrath of his constituents for his hypocrisy in voting on bills he hadn't read while whining about the lack of a phantom 72 hour rule... as well as his obvious support of the messiah's effort to socialize medicine in the United States.
He was so SCARED that, why, he wasn't even going to hold town hall meetings.
When the heat grew from that bit of cowardice, our Cowardman fabricated some bogus death threats as an excuse.
Of course, when the fine folks over at Clarkblog.org called "bullshit" by taking the simple and expedient step of actually calling the Capitol Police to find out if our Cowardman had actually filed any report on this fictional death threats, unlike the local democrat newsletter who couldn't be bothered to do the same; well, we came to find out that Baird had made the whole thing up.
This makes the Cowardman a lying scumbag in addition to his slimy hypocrisy.
HOW COME NO ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED FOR THREATENING THE LIFE OF A UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN?
Simple. Because no such threat ever took place.
Baird should resign. And he should do it now.
Leftists always think they know better. Afghanistan, the so-called (by the messiah) "good war" is spooling up in a very big, very bad way.
Most observers with any knowledge of the military (Which, of course, leaves out the moron voted in as ACORN in Chief) have suspected that more boots on the ground in Afghanistan are just as appropriate there as they were in Iraq.
Of course, the leftist scumbag leaders in the House and the Senate repeatedly told us all what a bad idea the Surge was; who can forget the moron running the Senate, one Harry"The War Is Lost" Reid, fringe-left Senate Majority Leader who did everything he could to aid the insurgent effort by lying to the American people... something his leader is famous for.
Stanley McChrystal is a four star general. Named to command US Forces Afghanistan, and NAMED TO THAT COMMAND BY THE IDIOT RUNNING THE SHOW, Gen. McChrystal, having examined the situation upon ascension to his command, indicates that he needs 40,000 additional troops.
That number may, in fact, be even larger. Each troop in the field requires logistical support... so, ultimately, that number may even become twice that much.
But there can be no question that many more boots are needed on the ground, both tactically and strategically, to achieve success of the mission.
Failure on the part of our pro-terrorist leadership to immediately provide the needed troops, while not surprising, would be an affront to every serving member of the Armed Forces of the United States; their families.... to anyone who has ever served... or shed their blood.... or made the ultimate sacrifice, particularly in Afghanistan.
President Obama is, of course, so concerned that he's discussed this situation with GEN McChrystal precisely ONCE in the past 70 odd days.
Can you believe it?
THE most important Area of Operations on the planet, and the empty suit has found time in his busy schedule of regular golf, Wednesday parties and flying to Denmark to shill for his masters in Chicago so they can suck hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars out of our wallets to get the 2016 Olympics.
But no time to see McChrystal?
GEN Stanley McChrystal is obviously one of the bravest soldiers in the military today. While not publicly stated, can there be any doubt why the General felt compelled to go on 60 Minutes to take his case to the public while Emperor Obama fiddled?
This is a no-brainer. When it comes to military operations, fringe-left and all other politics must be put aside for the sake of the troops in the field.
The empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot running this country is now causing the unnecessary spilling of American blood because he's an indecisive clown, learning on the job at the expense of the finest men and women this country can produce.
Leftist resistance and support of terrorists; neglect and indecision are the biggest obstacles to whatever "victory" is supposed to look like over there.
Yeah, yeah... I know he's talking to Gates. And other generals talk to Gates before he talks to Obama, as well as the Intel types and so on and so on.
But in the end, the ONLY way the president knows he's getting the real, unfiltered deal; the ONLY way he can be sure he isn't being "handled" is to GET HIS INFORMATION FROM THE SOURCE.
If the president didn't want to talk to the man, then why the hell did he give him the job in the first place?
And we are dying because of it.
Brian Baird: Coward (XXVI) More lies to support our congressional scumbag from the democrat newsletter, the Columbian.
We've established that Brian Baird is a coward. We've also established that the editorial leadership of the Columbian are a group of leftist, hypocritical, scumbags; who wouldn't hold a democrat politician THEY have endorsed accountable if he or she knocked over a 7-11 on the way to an interview.
Put those slime together and you get today's revisionist lies from the effluent that are the anonymous writer(s) of today's editorial lies about Baird.
Baird and Tim "The Liar" Leavitt have at least one thing in common: They both CLAIM to have a position, only to ignore that position when crunch time rolls around.
With Tim "The Liar," it's his totally bogus and manipulative campaign to get people to think he actually, truly and REALLY opposes tolls on that massive, unneeded and unwanted crap pile this rag is attempting to ram down our throats known as the I-5 Bridge.
When tolls on a project you have repeatedly supported are inevitable and the project will NOT be built without tolls in place; and you suddenly come out opposed to tolls... only to refuse to oppose the project if tolls are implemented.... well, that makes you a lying, scummy little worm.
With Brian "The Coward" Baird, best known for referring to me as a "Nazi" and a "Brown Shirt" because I'm wise enough to oppose his messiah's socialized medicine efforts, the issue is his mythical demand for a 72 hour period to review bills before they voted on in Congress.
Baird's been whining about this for years. On the surface, at least, the idea is great. In fact, I support it 100%.
The PROBLEM is Baird's lack of guts in living by the rule he wants enforced.
Oh... he'll tell you that he voted AGAINST a GOP Prescription Bill in 2008, when Bush was president, because of that very thing... a lack of time available to read the bill... and I have no problem with that at all.
That was his issue; there wasn't enough time available... so vote "no" on the bill.
After all, shouldn't Congress live by the rule that says "First, do no harm?"
So, like I say.... on the surface, at least, that's all good.
Which brings us to THIS year: Baird admits that it was impossible to read the Porkulus Bill and impossible to read the Cap and rip off tax that will cost us tens of billions over time.
So, take a quick guess as to what our Cowardman did.
Do you think he actually would vote "no" under these circumstances?
After all, our scumbag Cowardman has taken a stand! He's drawn a line in the sand! According to his public information office (AKA "The Columbian,") Baird is really, really, gonna do something about it THIS time.
HE VOTED YES ON BILLS HE HADN'T READ. The scummy Columbian has engaged in nothing BUT damage control for this scumbag, and do you think they mentioned Baird's utterly unconscionable hypocrisy by voting "yes" on two of the biggest bills in this nation's history WITHOUT READING THE DAMNED THINGS FIRST??????
If Baird had an "R" after his name, our local disgrace to journalism would be joining with me in charging our Cowardman with the rank, reeking hypocrisy he is so convicted off.
INSTEAD, THESE FRINGE LEFT DEMOCRATS MASQUERADING AS A NEWSPAPER DON'T EVEN MENTION IT!!!!!!
This despicable rag CANNOT go out of business fast enough.
Their continuing and sickening efforts to rehab this clown go beyond any pretense of fairness or journalistic integrity, as foreign a term at this cat litter box liner as "Common Sense."
Monday, September 28, 2009
So, the planners want to hear from us on light rail stations, etc... and presumably, they can continue to ignore us... but placate us with how "public" the process has been.
The utter nonsense of it all.... the irony, if you will, is that we, the people, don't want any of it.
It's not unlike the condemned man getting the privilege of picking out the rope that will be used to hang him.
The end result is the same: how he gets dead doesn't really matter.
The powers that be, ignoring the needs and want of the people they dominate and ignore, want us to believe we've actually had a say. Using another analogy, it's much like polling the passengers on the Titanic after everyone felt that little "bump" in the ice field as to what pattern of china goes best with the silverware.
It astounds me that we seem to have abrogated our ability to just say "no" to this massive, unneeded waste of billions of our hard-earned dollars. The monumental arrogance of our public servants, those who, allegedly, work for US seem to have become confused as to their station in life.
Are they, in facts, servants of the public? Or has the worm turned, so to speak, so we find ourselves working for, and paying for, those self-same servants? So far, we're a $100 million plus buried into this unbelievable heap of steaming crap, wasted on studies and consultants as they busily vacuum up the taxpayer's dollar.
We have a multi-billion dollar project that we have to pay for being rammed down our throats. Tim "The Liar" Leavitt tries to make political hay out of this situation by lying about his position on tolls... the unions stand to get paid off and we stand to see a $100,000,000 hole blown in our local economy for the next several decades as a result.
Man... I bet these scum are proud.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The local rag continues to cement their reputation as having a death wish when it comes to surviving in our struggling economy.
The rag, which portrays itself as some sort of even-keeled purveyor of news, has had at least 2 consecutive fringe-left whack jobs as their last editorial page editors: Michael Heywood, who, after leaving the Columbian became the editor of the newsletter for the Clark County democrat party, and their current Marxist, John Laird.
Laird is a lying scumbag. The irony that this despicable stain on journalism would allow such a moron to have a platform that enables him to lie, to attack, to insult and belittle, cannot be lost on this blogger.
Was it just a few days ago that Lightening Lou Brancaccio, the inmate in charge of that particular asylum, did a column where he was so hypocritically whining and sniveling about the message delivery?
At what point, many wonder, does the way in which we deliver the message become the message? And when the delivery becomes the message, can anyone hear the real message?
Does calling the president a liar or a Marxist move the health care discussion forward?
Can we disagree with someone without being disagreeable?
We all should think about how we treat others. How our message is delivered.
So.... how come the standard that Lou so hypocritically would apply to us is so ignored within the confines of the morass that HE runs?
Why doesn't he apply that standard to the people that work for him?
Why doesn't he reign in that lying scumbag?
Does calling Governor Palin a liar move any discussion forward? Is it OK for leftists to call Bush every conceivable name, but then have you climb up on the platform of civility?
Does Laird HAVE to be such a lying asshole with every column?
Why is it that YOU don't give a damn about how YOU, or YOUR people, "treat others?"
Laird is a total leftist. He appears to be genetically incapable of being any of those things you sniveled about when it comes to everyone else.
He lies like the scumbag he is in the very first paragraph of his weekly, fringe left, moveon.org propaganda.
Where in the world did Sarah Palin come up with that ghastly "death panels" term, you ask? Well, she made it up. And this from a woman who on July 26 admonished the media: "Stop making things up!"
You know, I do apologise for constantly referring to Laird as scum. "Scum," as a word, is quite inadequate to describe the rank hypocrisy of this stain on our community. To use the term "scum" is to do a disservice to the word.
It is a shame that, in fact, the embarrassment that is our local paper could, in fact, be a force for good.
They could be a voice for the people. They could hold politicians accountable, regardless of party. They could put the will of the people ahead of their own agenda.
Unfortunately for us, they are none of those things. This rag is a cancer in our community, and it is sincerely hoped that they will disappear like the used toilet paper they really, really are.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
This is the speech of a leader.
Unlike the cowering slime unfortunately leading the United States today, Mr. Netanyahu is extremely well qualified and experienced to lead the nation of Israel against all enemies, including the current occupant of the White House today.
Would that we as a nation could be led by someone with the vision, the strength, the knowledge... the understanding of the dark reality that surrounds us... a reality furthered by the cowardice of our Nation's leadership today.
I fear for our country. I fear for my neighbors. I fear for my children, because we are led by the arrogant, short-sighted, ignorant cowards who ignore lesson after lesson of history as if the old saw that tells us, accurately, that we MUST learn from that history or become doomed to repeat it, didn't exist.
In that respect, I envy the people of Israel. And in that same respect, I am ashamed that democracy could be so successfully perverted as it was here in the United States November last.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Netanyahu's UN Speech (full text)
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.
The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth.
Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?
A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler's deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?
This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?
Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency? A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations!
Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong. History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others. This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries.
In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.
Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization.
It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.
The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially.
It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.
What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.
I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.
But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction.
The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?
Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?
Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?
The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.
For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing - absolutely nothing - from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one.
In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent.
Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians, Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.
That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas.
We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way.
Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.
By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.
Delegates of the United Nations,
Will you accept this farce?
Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.
If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Here's why.
When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy? What self-defense?
The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us - my people, my country - of war crimes. And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty!
Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?
We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
All of Israel wants peace.
Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We madeeace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it.
We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel. This is the land of our forefathers.
Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem.
We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland. As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity.
But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel.
That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza, another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.
We want peace. I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.
Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.
Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong."
I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.
"Hashem Oz LeAmo Yiten, Hashem Yivarech et Amo Bashalom."
May G-d give strength to his people, may G-d bless his people with peace.
No media bias here: Thousands show up to see Glenn Beck and who does the Seattle Times write about? 30 protesters.
Yup.... thousands of people went to Safeco Field to see Glenn Beck... and who did the Seattle Times write about?
Thirty or so fringe left haters.
The obvious issue here is for the whacked out left to bring in their own mouth piece.
Of course, they don't HAVE one that could fill a stadium... or fill a phone booth, for that matter, but they could at least go through the motions.
Now, I can take Beck or leave him. He drives leftists even more insane then they already are, since being a leftist requires questionable sanity to begin with.... which certainly means he can't be all bad. He comes on strong. But doesn't he need to, given the lies, incompetence, and blood the ACORN in Chief is going to spill?
Anything that drives those lemmings over the edge has to have some redeeming value. Check out leftist scum writer Joel Connelly's hissy fit on Beck for just one example.
People have problems, apparently, with Beck referring to the messiah as a racist. I don't have a problem with it, myself, since the empty suit IS a racist and sat in a black Klan style church for years to prove it.
One wonders, though: those with the problem they may have about Beck (or me, for that matter, since I've referred to Obama as that empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot for months) need to be asked:
Did you people have a problem with all the names your ilk called President Bush?
Of course you didn't.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if it were some leftist like Bill Clinton at the stadium, this paper would have worshipped at his feet and ignored anyone disagreeing with him.
I get that self-delusion is the key-element of becoming and continuing on as a leftist. After all, it has genuinely required an astounding ability to lie both outwardly and inwardly, to believe the moveon.org pap getting spewed today.
We're all already aware of the ACORN-in-Chief's massive and multiple lies... everything from There Won't Be ANY Place For Lobbyists In My Administration to Passing The Stimulus Will Put An 8 Percent Unemployment Celling In Place.
Now, democrat and other leftist scum lost their collective minds when Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) rightfully and accurately called out that the Empty Suit was lying about providing illegal aliens free medical care.
Oh, the howling for blood... the screams of outrage.
Yet, many of these same scum had called Bush a liar... in many cases, repeatedly.... and that was OK?
What's that, you say? None of them ever did that while Bush was speaking in the House?
Besides the obvious response; mainly, that WHERE you publicly call the president a liar is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand, democrats REPEATEDLY, PUBLICLY AND LOUDLY called President Bush a liar in an effort to undermine his Administration.
NOW we get leftists with selective memories and a bent for revisionist history who claim that democrats have NOT called Bush a liar.
To point out even a few of the times where such a claim is, well, an outright lie is the political equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel.... but here's a few:
June 2, 2005 interview with Rolling Stone – Harry Reid – Q: “You’ve called Bush a loser.” Reid: “And a liar.” Q: “You’ve apologized for the loser comment.” Reid: “But never for the liar, have I.”Besides the obvious irony of a COMPLETE scumbag like Edwards calling ANYONE a liar about ANYTHING, that leftist scum would deny doing the same... and much, much worse to Bush NOW brings up the obvious question:
November 18, 2005: Sen. Edward M. Kennedy: Bush and Cheney “have begun a new
campaign of distortion and manipulation.” The two men could not find weapons of mass destruction and “they can’t find the truth either.”
Al Gore: “A systematic effort to manipulate the facts.”
Sen. John Edwards: “myths perpetrated by the Bush administration” and “certainly the integrity and character of the President of the United States is at issue, no question.”
Rep. Dennis Kucinich: “war based on falsehood” and “White House deception”
Former Pres. Jimmy Carter speaking at the DNC Convention: “we cannot lead if our leaders mislead.”
Al Sharpton: “He lied in Florida. He’s lied several times. I believe he lied in Iraq.”
Sen. Joe Biden: “By misrepresenting the facts, misunderstanding Iraq and misleading on this war…”
Rep. John Conyers: “cook the intelligence”
Rep. Maxine Waters: “The President is a liar. Dick Cheney, the chief architect of the Big Lie, is not only a liar, he is a thief.”
Rep. Edward Markey: “We know that the Bush administration deliberately misled the American public about nuclear weapons in Iraq, about Al Qaeda in Iraq…”
There is so much more especially if you count the comments made by Liberal political pundits and official DNC spokesmen.
Are their collective panties in a bunch because of what he said, which was completely accurate; or where he said it?
Well, it CAN'T be the "where" of it.
Where is THIS scumbag giving his speech accusing President Bush of lying?
Could it be... the SAME floor of the SAME House?
Of course it could.
No... the issue is the rank, reeking hypocrisy of the left.
Wilson has garnered both nation-wide attention AND support. Finding a plain spoken, courageous congressman is a rare commodity.... particularly when compared to the cowardly slimeball representing US.
Word has reached us of the passing of Ryan Job of Issaquah, WA.
Ryan enlisted in the Navy to be the finest. He wanted to be, and ultimately became, a SEAL.
During a tour in Iraq in 2006... serving his country... a sniper's bullet hit and shattered his rifle. Pieces of the rifle tore into his face, destroying one eye and the retinal nerves of the other, blinding Mr. Job forever.
Mr. Job became a spokesman for the Sentinels of Freedom Scholarship Foundation, an organization dedicated to assisting the severely wounded Veteran injured on or after September 11.
Watada remembered September 11 as well. It allegedly motivated him to enlist and subsequently become commissioned via Officer's Candidate School in 2003.
He served a tour in Korea and was assigned to Ft. Lewis. He then found out his unit was subject to deployment to Iraq, and at that point began to look for ways to dump his responsibilities to his men, his unit, the Army and his country.
Infected by fringe-leftist cowardice, the scumbag refused to deploy in 2006. While he should have been court-martialled and shot for cowardice, instead, somehow, the court martial was screwed up, and this pimple on the Army's ass will be, at least temporarily, kicked to the curb for his cowardice with an "other than honorable" discharge.
That this "man" could have become an officer in the United States Army goes to show that no system is perfect. His bogus, whiny, sniveling little piggy way to avoid getting shot at SHOULD have been his primary consideration BEFORE he swore the oath.
Watada is a disgrace. He was an officer.
Ryan was a hero, who was first severely wounded and later died doing what he believed in.
God Bless the entire Job family, and my condolences to his parents, brother and pregnant wife.
Watada.... I hope you rot in hell.
Friday, September 25, 2009
The Seattle PI web site is reporting that 1LT Ehren Watada is being allowed to resign during the first week of October.
You remember, Watada, don't you? He's that scumbag that bailed out on his men and his unit to avoid deploying.
While he's getting an "Other then Honorable" discharge (does anyone have any doubt that the ACORN-in-Chief will get it upgraded so this scumbag gets his benefits?) that doesn't come close to what he SHOULD be getting.... which is shot.
While he will, no doubt, be lionized by the fringe-left... the SAME fringe left that has so hypocritically been absent and mostly silent in the face of the empty-suit's mishandling of the war, one can only hope that he'll become so depressed because of his shame that he do us all a favor.
This waste of skin should never have been commissioned. And meekly letting this scumbag go when, at the very least, he should be spending the rest of his life in prison, the Army shames all of us that deployed to where-ever we were needed and where-ever we were sent without abandoning either our troops or our voluntarily assumed responsibilities.
Leftists and other Iran supporters are all about a "measured response." They want "sanctions" and other garbage like that to get Iran to behave on the nuclear issue... and, perhaps, others as well.
Can someone.... anyone... tell me when "sanctions" have EVER worked.... ANYWHERE?
What did "sanctions" do to Saddam and his policies? What did "sanctions" do against Japan? What have "sanctions" done against the NorK's?
The reason that Iran is ignoring the rest of the world, particularly now, is because they rightfully believe that the rest of the world lacks the will to DO anything to stop them.
Iran believes that they hold their foot on the oil hose in the middle east. They believe that the rest of the world is powerless and terrified because of the threat of cutting off our oil.
The simple idiot in the White House plays into that perfectly by refusing to open up every possible area in the United States for exploration and drilling. As a result, we've done NOTHING to gain energy independence... and ARE doing nothing to gain that independence... precisely as the Iranians and the rest of the oil producers KNOW we won't.
So... why should Iran behave? Why should they end their military nuclear program, when they know we lack the will, if not the capacity, to FORCE them to do end it?
We have a gutless leader in the White House, incapable of taking the tough stand and equally incapable of making the case to the American people that we ALL need to sacrifice in the name of our security.
He doesn't want to be the bearer of bad news. He doesn't want to be the next George Bush.
And many of us are going to die as a result.
"Sanctions?" Iran treats such threats with the contempt they deserve. The Russians will say anything, but do nothing. The Chinese will foster Iranian intransigence under the "confusion to our enemies" rule... and Americans will continue to die.
Yeah.... sanctions. Sanction the hell out of these people, and watch them laugh out loud at our rank stupidity... while they continue to build their nukes.
Gee... having a clueless moron in the White House makes me feel GREAT about now: Iran building SECOND nuke plant.
A small poster has been making the rounds on the net over the last few days. It shows George Bush in a rather humorous pose and the title under the picture is "Miss me yet?"
I'm not exactly sure. But if the question were asked a different way, something like: Given the latest news concerning Iran's drive to get a nuke, would you rather have George Bush or Barack Obama at the helm? that answer is easy.
And it ain't the empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot, either.
We have an unpleasant task in front of us. The question here is this: does the ball-less moron that's president get it? Does he have what it takes to do what needs to be done?
I'm not 100% sure that Bush would have what it takes, either. But I think he would be much more LIKELY to have it.
First, Obama and the Russians are too stupid to figure out that WE are number one of their target list... not Israel.
I'm pretty sure that Obama's lack of depth and his built-in anti-semtism, as repeatedly illustrated by his nazi preacher, would oh-so-secretly thrill the empty suit if Israel were the target... and if Iran's chief nutberger actually would blow Israel away.
The trouble with that, however, is Whackjob isn't all that keen on creating 2 to 4 million martyrs at one time.... martyrs that would be laid at his feet. His strategic problem is that he, Whackjob, cannot pop a nuke in Israel without killing hundreds of thousands of Arabs.
But killing millions of Americans? Killing millions of Russians? Why, that's a whole different kettle of fish.
What to do.... what to do.
The scumbag running Iran is fully capable of killing millions.... of us. He's shown his nazi-like tendencies when it came to murdering his own people in cold blood while they were protesting... mostly to the amazingly deafening silence of that idiot in the White House. A dictator capable of slaughtering his own would feel no compunction in slaughtering anyone else.
One wonders: has the thought occurred to the fringe-leftists infesting the White House that all of Whackjob's bluster about Israel is a feint? Is this scumbag's hatred, aimed at Israel, designed in it's entirety, to make his actions "acceptable" to the empty suited idiot running the show in DC?
Question One: Will that idiot we call "President" do anything that will make any difference?
Question Two: Does he fully understand the threat?
Question Three: Does he know what needs to be done?
Question Four: Will he do it?
The ACORN in chief has spent all of his time paying those who got him elected off, and wasted considerable time on health care reform that is going no where.
During the entirety of the campaign, and years before, the left whined and sniveled about how tough our military was having it. They cried, and bitched about how long and how many tours our ALL VOLUNTEER FORCE had to spend in Iraq.
OK... the leftist scum took power in 06. Their moron became president 9 months ago.
What have they done to fix this?
So now, we're faced with an inability to immediately respond with the force we need for our own security.
Yeah, the leftists ALL knew how to do it SO much better.
Except they didn't.
Unfortunately, we have little ability to put boots on the ground. Further, at this point, we lack the guts/will on the part of the simple-minded idiot running the show. Because of leftist game playing, where NOTHING was done to address this scenario, we only have one choice: Does this country become fully committed to end the threat of Iranian nukes?
Or do we, as I suspect the Coward-in-Chief ultimately will, just accept it as a fate-accompli?
That is the temporary, short-lived solution. That is, putting off the ultimate problem will keep us comfortable for a little while longer.
But then what?
If we fail to act... THEN what?
The now-acknowledged presence of this SECOND (the first was bad enough) nuclear facility DEMANDS action.
FAILURE to act sends a message... just like making the tough decision sends a message.
We must mobilize the entirety of the Armed Forces of the United States.
We must immediately re-implement the draft, to include women.
We must NOT count on our "allies" to help us; we must be prepared to go it alone.
We must NOT allow Russia or China to threaten us out of doing what must be done.
Yes, I know. It will take away some of the comfort that we've experienced for the past 8 years; when we SHOULD have mobilized as a society and a country to defeat the threat; had we done so back then, we wouldn't be facing an Iranian nuclear threat NOW.
But the time to act is NOW.
And our failure to act NOW will cause rivers of American blood to flow later. Not much later... but later.
So the leftist idiots can bury their heads farther and deeper into the sand... so that when these scum get around to hurting us.... they will hurt us really, really, bad.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Imagine my surprise when I found out that one of the most clueless politicians ever was running for the US Senate!
Yes.... Our own Craig Williams apparently didn't get either of the two memos from the last election: Politically, he doesn't know what he's talking about.... and politically, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
The first memo was a result of the actual vote during the primary. Williams did an abysmal job with his leftwing agenda, and managed just under 5% in the primary.
Having had his ass handed to him in a basket by the electorate, he then proceeds to assure the Columbian that, well, Clark County Commissioner Tom Mielke, wouldn't be.
Further, this clown wants an unneeded, unwanted and hugely wasteful I-5 Bridge replacement complete with loot rail... and he wants all that without a vote.
So, why should we vote for a political moron to represent us in the senate? Don't we already have that, both in the senate and the White House?
Craig SHOULD have taken the clue. Now he's going to go out and get humiliated at the polls AGAIN, and running as a fake Republican ain't gonna help.
Yesterday, the empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot, so admired by his fellow communist, Castro; and essentially "owned" by his soul brother Qaddafi, gave one of the most politically inept and ignorant foreign policy speeches ever uttered by a sitting president; well, at least since his fellow democrat Carter had the job; and our local stain on journalism slobbers all over themselves in adoration.
The moron who wrote that garbage tells us: "Obama's message to world leaders is clear"
On that much, of course, everyone can agree.
It's clear he's selling out Israel. It's clear he sold out Eastern Europe to the Soviets (I mean the Russians) It's clear he, personally, will allow the psychotic Iranians to develop nukes. It's clear that he's a cowardly moron, incapable of standing up for what's right and what's just.
Here's the speech he SHOULD have given.
The rest of this speech SHOULD have been along these lines covering energy, human rights and trade and the like.
"Thanks for coming by and listening. This is how it's going to go.
Any attack on Israel by anyone is an attack on democracy everywhere. With the first attack, we will cut off all foreign aid to the country where the attack comes from. Thus, it's in that country's best interests to protect their borders from such attacks. Foreign aid will be restored at one half the prior level, 6 months after the last attack.
The money we save from ending foreign aid will be used to offset the costs of providing Israeli security. You people don't like it? You don't want to use the dollar as the standard trade currency? Swell. Get your free money somewhere else.
We will begin conventional bombing operations against Iran before the end of this speech.
We are going to start with all military assets and if Iranian support for terrorism does not stop, we will then begin to destroy civilian architecture. Interference with American affairs will no longer be tolerated, and those who draw blood from us are going to suffer a terrible price.
As a nation, we are tired of Iranians murdering our military members with impunity. We have no interest in simply sitting back and allowing you to become a nuclear power so you can use that threat against your neighbors. Any nuclear attack from Iran to anywhere will be met with massive retaliation that will eliminate Iran as a country.
To that end, you have one week to run over the entirety of you nuclear program, including all materials, plans, structures and personnel. Failure to do so will result in immediate and massive conventional bombing of your civilian infrastructure.
If things like running water and electricity are of particular note to you, then you had better pay attention.... because in a short time, you will have neither.
To the people of Iran, your government is your business. You continue to allow a repressive, psychotic nutjob to run your country... but you do so at your own risk. The time has come to put an end to the threat that is Iran. Further, the time for "talk" has ended.
It is now time to act.
In Eastern Europe, we will be installing a massive missile defense shield to help protect our NATO allies.
I admit it; we screwed up when I foolishly and stupidly told the Russians we would not set up the missile defense system promised by the prior administration... in the vein hope that Russia would join with us to help control that whackjobs running Iran. That was no excuse.
Right or wrong, we gave our word. Our word MUST be something that can be counted on around the world.
Once given, there will be no intransigence, no hesitation, no prevarication. Once given, we will keep our end of the bargain.
And if Russia believes these defenses are aimed at them, I would point out that, unless Russia has any designs that would REQUIRE defenses on other countries, then even if those defenses ARE aimed at Russia; Russia should not care.
These weapons will be entirely and only defensive in nature. Why should Russia concern itself with the defensive actions of others?"
Instead, it was another of his "blame America First" productions, so beloved by leftist scum... such as those cranking out our local disgrace to journalism... the embarrassment of our community.
These types of editorials are inevitable. When a leftist rag endorses a fellow fringer, they really have no choice but to continue the charade that their decision to become left wing lap dogs was somehow justified, especially now that this blithering idiot is telling them that they'll be getting a taxpayer-financed bail out.
Yup. Fringe-left journalism at its finest.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
There's a certain level of irony when it comes to Jon Russell's doomed-to-failure congressional campaign theme.
I've known Mr. Russell for five years now; I've worked with him on the campaign trail.
I have to admit: actions DO speak louder than words.
For example, when Russell called me to try and get Pam Brokaw's social security number (that was actually his second call to me... ever) while I was working on the Curtis campaign.
I, of course, didn't HAVE her social security number, and wouldn't have given it to him if I had.
But the question here is this: what does that "action" have to say about Mr. Russell?
Actions DO speak "louder than words." So imagine my surprise when I discovered that Mr. Russell was the campaign manager/consultant for the recently smashed Vancouver Port Levy... the largest local tax increase, had it ultimately been successful, in the history of the region... a tax increase which, ultimately, was not needed and was utterly rejected at the polls.
What, precisely, does THAT action speak to?
Look at the results. Look at the results of Russell's efforts to get Roy Rhine and Paul Harris elected. Look at his short tenure as both an HROC staffer and a legislative staffer.
And then, according to Lew the PCO's were regaled with Russell's experience on the Washougal City Council... and then...
Uncalled for in his (Russell's) speech was a subtle but obvious slap towards David Castillo when he said words to the effect of any candidate can speak of work in the government that(sic) may have done.So, as far as that goes one has to wonder: if "any candidate can speak of work in the government" does that "any candidate" include Mr. Russell?
Castillo is the guy. He has COMPETENT experience and professional credentials and accomplishments that put Russell's to shame.
And that's in addition to trying to portray yourself as a fiscal conservative after you've run the campaign for the biggest tax increase in our region's history.
H/T to Clark County Conservative
Today's quiz question:Why aren't we allowed to vote on the multi-billion dollar boondoggle that is the I-5 Bridge/loot rail project?
I stumbled across an interesting law this morning. it's RCW 42.30.010, the pre-amble to the Open Public Meetings Act:
The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
So... can somebody tell me why we have "surrendered our sovereignty" to the CRC... to CTrans... to Portland.... to Vancouver.... to WADOT?
We have a law in this state that plainly says:
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them.So, the question: why have we surrendered our sovereignty about this project? Why is it that our elected officials have taken no steps to allow us to exercise the sovereignty that, by state law, we do NOT surrender?
No elected official who does not advocate for a vote on this massive waste of money that will impact generations is fit for election, regardless of party.
And that means those running for mayor of Vancouver.
H/T to clarkblog.org.
So... is it the typically poor writing of the local paper? Or is it the disturbing revelation that the county has not been confirming the citizenship of the county work force?
The only aspect of the new policy that I find myself in disagreement with is this:
The commissioners asked Tuesday for a proposal by Jan. 1 to start feeding the Social Security numbers of new deputies, secretaries, janitors and other county workers into the federal E-Verify database.
My operative concern is for the word "new." Why is it just "new?" Why doesn't this apply to all current and retired county employees as well?
As for Commissioner Boldt's concerns.... and subsequent efforts to placate the so-called "League of United Latin American Citizens".... that's a crock as well.
If ONE job is held by an illegal alien, that's one job too many.... one county job... one private sector job.
Assigning some level of power or concern to illegal alien advocates is a bad idea. Bad for this community and bad for our economy.
Printing an obvious lie:
"Many municipalities are having problems with unemployment," said Maria Rodriguez-Salazar, a local LULAC leader. "And it has nothing to do with illegal immigrants. It has to do with greedy people who made some bad decisions."
and caving to the faux "victimization" agenda:
Also Tuesday, Commissioner Marc Boldt said the commissioners shouldn't have implied, in their earlier action, that illegal immigration is responsible for the county's unemployment rate.to further the leftist, illegal alien agenda gives this fringe group power they do not merit and assigns them a platform they do not deserve.
The Sept. 1 resolution mentioned the local unemployment rate as a reason to check contract workers' identities electronically.
"It almost made the reader believe that we have high unemployment because we have undocumented workers," Boldt said. "And that's not true."
There are three, absolutely unassailable facts here:
First: They are not "undocumented workers." An undocumented worker is someone that doesn't have the paperwork to prove they have a legal right to work. That someone CAN have the right to work by citizenship.... they just don't happen to have the necessary ID.
We are not discussing those who have the legal right to work here, and I am getting sick of public officials who turn their backs on their legal responsibilities by kowtowing to political correctness.
We are discussing ILLEGAL ALIENS. ILLEGAL ALIENS HAVE NO RIGHT TO WORK HERE. THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE. And no amount of lipstick on that particular pig can change it. That local illegal alien advocates don't like the phrase "illegal alien" does not make it any less accurate or useful as a term of description.
Words have meaning. Illegal aliens are violating our laws. The prissy use of the term "undocumented workers" provides them with cover for being here and cover for breaking our laws... as if the issue was merely one of some paperwork snafu and not one of a deliberate choice to violate the laws of the United States.
Second: we have illegal aliens working in Clark County.
Third, contrary to the lie that illegal aliens do NOT contribute to our unemployment, the mere fact that an illegal alien is holding a job in Clark County during these difficult times by definition indicates that their presence here DOES, in fact, do the very thing they now claim it does not:
Contribute to the highest unemployment rate in the State of Washington.
Boldt needs to be a little less concerned about placating those who do not deserve it, and a little more concerned about enforcing the laws he's sworn to uphold.
It’s an amusing thought but one without a real-life image, as you can be sure the carefully manipulated Drive-Bys would never be permitted the opportunity to snap what would be one of the most forwarded jpegs on teh Internets.
We are therefore left with the cartoon stylings of Ramirez, who seems to ask: what would happen if the Man-Child threw a tea party for madmen dictators and none of them showed up?
Manly's Republic get's the H/T
by Larry Huss Wednesday, September 23. 2009
There is a peculiar custom that permeates the societies in the Middle East – a lack of commitment to telling the truth. It is cultural – they will tell you what they think you want to hear. It is difficult to understand whether this arises out of an attempt to not embarrass you by disagreeing, or, because you are not a member of their culture – you are an infidel – lying to you is of no consequence.
It is rapidly becoming a staple of America’s political culture with a myriad of politicians denying sordid personal affairs and parsing words to justify departure from previous commitments. Its chief practitioner now appears to be President Barack Obama and, with his most recent departure from the truth, the price will be the lives of literally hundreds of our young men and women in the armed forces.
During the campaign President Obama argued that we were fighting the wrong war – the one in Iraq. He said our focus should be on Afghanistan and defeating al-Qaida and he committed to defeating al-Qaida and the Taliban. He even went so far as to urge that we invade Pakistan to destroy the “safe-havens” of these insurgents in mountainous border regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
After his election President Obama used his intent to refocus our military strategy in Afghanistan as a partial justification for setting an artificial timeline for withdrawing from Iraq and for beginning a draw down of both our forces and our commitment to engage the insurgents.
But his “commitment” to Afghanistan and defeating al-Qaida and the Taliban were just words because that’s what he thought we wanted to hear. He knew that he could not get elected by supporting a complete withdrawal because he like former-President Jimmy Carter and former Democrat presidential candidate Michael Dukakis would appear to be weak on defense.
So he talked tough about Afghanistan – just like he’s talked tough about the pursuit of nuclear weapons by rogue regimes in North Korea and Iran. But in the end, he has done nothing – nothing overtly and even less covertly.
And now General McChrystal – President Obama’s handpicked leader for the Afghanistan conflict – has pointedly said that without more troops and weapons al-Qaida and the Taliban will win the war. This isn’t some policy wonk in a university affiliated think tank talking; this is the guy on the ground giving the commander-in-chief a realistic assessment of battlefield conditions.
And what is President Obama’s response? He went on David Letterman’s late night show to announce that, because of the increasing number of casualties in Afghanistan, he was not going to send additional troops immediately. Instead, he wanted to make sure “we had the policy right.” Given the political leanings of the former comedian, it is doubtful that the question was spontaneous or the answer unrehearsed.
But, it is a frightening reminiscence of President Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam War. Johnson would routinely overrule his generals and plan and conduct military strategy from the White House. It was a disaster. Tens of thousands of America’s young men gave their lives in a fight that Johnson had no intention of winning but did not want to accept blame for losing. He agreed to a variety of limitations on the conduct of the war that gave the enemy undisturbed sanctuaries and allowed a hostile Congress to second guess every military request.
Now, today, we have President Obama whose total life experience prior to being elected president was that of a community organizer and a petty politician in America’s most politically corrupt city – Chicago. He has even less experience than President Johnson. He asked his own appointee for expert military advice and as quickly as he has received it, he has discounted it – speculating instead that maybe we should increase the number of drones.
He has agreed to limitations that endanger our troops and inhibit our ability to collect real time battlefield intelligence – chief among them is the agreement to turn over all insurgents to the Afghan government within 36 hours of capture. In most instances, given the remote areas in which the fight is engaged, it takes 36 hours to merely transport, let alone interrogate, such prisoners. And the Afghan government – as corrupt as any – treats these prisoners with a revolving door by releasing them almost immediately after taking them into custody – that is except for the few for whom there are tribal scores to settle and for whom torture and death await.
Let’s face it. President Obama is a product of the far left wing of the Democrat Party. He was born and raised in a political radicalism that views America as an “imperialist power” imposing its political will on others. As a result, he will never confront, with force, an oppressive foreign power or ideology. He will talk tough and do nothing.
Prior to President Obama’s inauguration, Vice-President Joe Biden predicted that the world would test the young and inexperienced president. Unfortunately, Biden believed that such a test would be in the form of an international crisis. But that isn’t how the world works. When confronted with an unknown quantity, the world probes. It doesn’t confront – at least initially.
And the world has been probing President Obama – North Korea’s continued escalation of its nuclear weapons capability, Iran’s continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, Russia’s bold invasion of Georgia, the resurgence of al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the abandonment of the European missile shield despite his promises to implement it, and so on and so on. In every instance, the world has found Obama weak and indecisive.
It’s happened before. The Soviet Union routinely tested a new president – John F. Kennedy – and found him weak and indecisive. So much so that they dared to locate nuclear missiles in Cuba and set the stage for an international confrontation that could have been avoided in the first instance.
But President Kennedy was dealing with rational men – ruthless but still rational – and they understood the impact of a nuclear war. Today we are confronted by irrational leaders – Kim Il Jung in North Korea and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran – and when the inevitable international confrontation occurs we can be less certain that the assurance of nuclear destruction will deter their ambitions – especially if they conclude that President Obama lacks the will to pull the trigger.
So where does that leave us in Afghanistan? It leaves us with a President who apparently is willing to fiddle indefinitely while he “gets the policy right” and who, in the meantime, is also willing to sacrifice the lives of more young men and women while imposing limitations on their ability to conduct the war, denying the reinforcement they need and allowing Nancy Pelosi and her cronies the ability to de-fund the combat effort.
For my part, bring the troops home – today. It is not worth sacrificing another American’s life on a war the President Obama has no intention of winning but for which he does not want to accept blame for losing.
With President Obama, you have to ignore what he says and focus on what he does. Just ask Pope Benedict who listened to President Obama say that he would do everything possible to reduce the number of abortions while signing an executive order permitting the use of federal funds to promote abortion internationally and arguing before the United Nations for expanded access to abortions on demand. Just ask Rep. Joe Wilson who listened to President Obama tell Congress that his universal healthcare bill would not apply to illegal aliens and watched Obama and his fellow Democrats reject amends which would do just that, preferring instead to leave in place a provision that prohibits inquiring into citizenship as a condition of receiving healthcare insurance.
It’s not so much that he lies, it’s that he tells you what he thinks you want to hear without any intention of doing what he says.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
There's an increasingly major element of tragedy that is the comedy in the White House... now that Paterson blames the empty suit for his troubles.
Unforced errors that would make even the newest beginning tennis player blush and hide their heads in shame. An inability to avoid the appearance of incompetence and short-sightedness that is going to cost, if it isn't already costing us, major amounts of spilled blood.
We all know the idiocy that has marked the tenure of the empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot occupying the White House; it would serve no purpose to rehash those elements of a failed presidency here.
So when we look at the stupidity of the White House and Paterson, all we can do is shake our collective heads at the morons running this country and believe we, as a Nation, can actually survive the empty suit's hopefully impeachment-shortened tenure.
The set up? Paterson, something of a major-league adulterer himself, took over for a dumb ass named Eliott Spitzer, who felt the only way he could get laid was to pay for it, in amounts that simply boggle the mind.
The problem is that Paterson has been an abysmal disaster as governor, not unlike most leftists who manage to scam the job.
That he was/is a disaster isn't a particularly difficult problem for the empty suit. The problem is that, unlike our half white president, Governor Paterson is all black... and vision impaired to boot.
Now, any fringe-left scum will tell you that no thinking, sentient being could POSSIBLY disagree with the empty suit's program of turning this country into a Marxist, Socialist Utopia unless they are possessed by the demon racism.
It's an automatic, built in, fall back possession for almost every leftist politician: explain and mute the opposition by running around, screaming, "RACIST!!!!"
It's a crock, of course. But playing the racism card knocks the opposition off message and plays to white guilt.
So... how are we to react to the Empty Suits's interference in New York politics? It's difficult to claim racism under the circumstance. Given the president's half-African, half Caucasian bloodline and Gov. Paterson's black genetic make up, can either party claim "racism?" Can their surrogates, like Obama's Winged Monkeys?
Of course not. Thus the moronic handling of this relatively simple matter again brings to light the rampant stupidity at play here... the frightening incompetence again displayed by the ACORN-in-Chief.
Paterson's insistence on running is a huge help to the GOP. Leftist efforts to clear the field for Cuomo, now exposed as most of their amateurish crap eventually sees the light of day will hurt them with key constituencies and provide the possibilities for major inroads by Giuliani with both minorities and a frequently overlooked group that can still vote in large numbers: those challenged with physical issues can be exploited for purposes of charging, this time accurately, discrimination by those who would sweep Paterson out of the way in the interests of political expediency.
And if those running this show weren't complete idiots, they'd already know that, and this whole sorry episode could have been avoided.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Yup, it's gonna be a toughy.
Do they go with the guy that's carried their water like Gunga Din?
Or do they go with the guy that's carried their water like Gunga Din?
We have Royce "No Choice" Pollard, the current incumbent, who has ran this city like the fringe left editorial staff of the wrapper was sending him a weekly check.
We have Tim "The Liar" Leavitt, who has done precisely the same thing, but is now trying to package himself using the New and Improved Leavittarian Double Speak veneer to get it done.
On one hand, if they bail on No Choice after all he's done to implement their agenda, what impact is that going to have on future "leaders" of our community?
On the other hand, if they guess wrong and endorse "No Choice" and "The Liar" pulls this out, then they can expect their access to city hall to be somewhat restricted... until they've paid their "penance."
The problem for the paper is that these clowns are as close together as two different politicians could be.
Yeah, yeah... The Liar points out a few occasions where he's differed... but not often... and no on much. Their number of similarities far exceeds their number of differences.
Neither of them want to allow us a vote on this massive, huge waste of billions known as the I-5 Bridge replacement and loot rail; both want tolls, but The Liar lies about it by falsely claiming he doesn't want tolls; both believe the utterly and criminally worthless waste of hundreds of millions known as loot rail is all that and a bag of chips. Both believe that wasting billions for a replacement bridge is a perfectly acceptable vaporization of dollars they, personally, won't have to pay.
Both would assign 65,000 people besides themselves a debt that will last decades that they won't have to pay.
As a result of the monumental arrogance that can lead to this kind crap, neither are fit for elective office.
Unfortunately for Southwest Washington, they're all we have to chose from.
Yeah... it's gonna be tough.