You May Not Know Jack, But You BETTER Know About George

George Soros that is. This guy has a finger in every left leaning pie in the world Many people know Soros is one of the biggest financiers of MoveOn.org but there is much more George supports and not everyone knows he is out there working behind the scenes to influence public policy.

There is an organization called the "Open Society Institute. In addition to supporting lots of liberal causes this organization has been very helpful to NASA's James Hansen. Any scientists who is skeptical of the "global warming consensus" is accused of being backed by big oil. James Hansen has been described as a "lone whistle blower" who was allegedly censored by the Bush administration. An accusation that is made laughable by the fact that NASA changed it's media policies to allow Hansen to continue his crusade. It was recently reported that Hansen received $720,000 to help him spread the alarm about "global warming". Who is politicizing science now? How would Hansen's credibility been affected if everyone knew who was backing him?

The Open Society Institute had a hand in another big news story in 2006. When all the "immigration rallies" began it was reported that this was a spontaneous grass roots movement. There was no mention of an organizer or instigator except for a Los Angeles Spanish-language radio station. That was not true. The truth is that the 17 million dollar Justice Fund, a underling of the OSI listed 19 projects for 2006 and one was "immigration rallies" another was funding illegal immigrants activists groups court cases. These immigrants and their supporters didn't "rise up" on their own. They were manipulated by one of Soro's well funded groups.

You have heard, I'm sure, about some of the court cases that seem to favor terrorists. Have you ever wondered who brings these suits? The Open Society Institute spent $74 million in 2006 to "shape U.S. policy". Some court cases they backed and won include the Supreme Court's decision to abolish military commissions judging terrorists at Guantanamo. They financially supported the radicals who pressured the TSA to eliminate their "Secure Flight" program, which matched passenger lists against lists of terrorists names. The lawyers who persuaded the Texas judge to block tracking terrorists cell phones were funded by OSI too. Soros' OSI partners with a group called the Tides Foundation which is a cause Terri Kerry supports and which is know for very quietly transferring funds from wealthy donors to left wing "fringe groups" like eco-terrorism.

Another "below the radar" political organization called "Democracy Alliance" enjoys great largess from Soros. The policy of Democracy Alliance seems to be that the party whose name is closest to the word Democracy gets full control of the government. This group was formed in 2005 and until this week I had never heard of them, had you? This is another group throwing vast sums of money and misinformation around to further their far left agenda.

That brings us to America Coming Together or ACT which is not dedicated to the sexual fulfillment of all Americans, but would be less worrisome if it were. Remember all the news about "disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff"? Well ACT was fined $775,000 by the Federal Election Commission, the third largest fine in FEC history and there was hardly a ripple in the main stream news about it. In 2004 ACT raised $137 million in 17 states, most of which the FEC says were illegal contributions. Why isn't this BIG NEWS?

Wake up America! You need to know who these people are and what they are doing behind the scenes to manipulate you.

ENVIRO-COMMUNISM or Is Green the New Red?

With the fall of the Soviet Union Communism lost most of it's luster. American Liberals finally had to give up the dream. Without the USSR Communism was never going to catch on and overcome Capitalism. Too bad for the Left but those folks, if anything, are resourceful. They saw early that taking up the cause to "Save the Planet" could open another front in the fight against Capitalism.

From the Nixon administration's creation of the EPA on there has been a never ending battle between capitalism and so called environmentalists (which I shall here in refer to as Enviro-Mentals). Whenever and where ever someone wanted to build homes, factories or any commercial enterprise they would have to run a gauntlet of inspections, regulations and frequently litigation. Hundred year-old family farms were left to dry up and blow away while the water was reserved to save a tiny fish, the snail darter. Logging interests had to be shut down to save the spotted owl who we were told could only live in certain trees. This was disproved when a family of these owls took up residence in a K-Mart sign.

The Enviro-Mentals have successfully prevented the construction of an oil refinery in this country for over thirty years. They opposed the Alaskan Pipeline but were unable to prevent it. Their dire warnings of the destruction the pipeline would cause never came true. Just the opposite occurred. Caribou populations expanded as they found some previously unavailable warmth generated by the pipeline. The Enviro-Mentals have successfully prevented us from tapping the huge oil reserves in Anwar while other Liberals and some reasonable folks denounce our dependence on foreign oil.

The new Crisis du jour from the Enviro-Mentals is "Global Warming" Ah, if not for Global Warming we might have heard the last of Al Gore, but no such luck. Again, those who so loudly decry the horror of an increase in the temperature of the northern hemisphere of less than two degrees in one hundred years vehemently oppose the one source of energy which causes no carbon emissions, nuclear power.

Most Americans may be unaware that Canada uses nuclear power for a lot of their energy needs. France produces 76% of it's electricity from 56 nuclear power plants. There hasn't been a nuclear incident for decades and we can certainly make safe use of a power source that has been mastered by the French. Does Global Warming guru Al Gore call for a switch to nuclear power? Absolutely not. Instead he calls for all of us to live our lives greener. Gore himself can't do so, his mission is too important, but he expects you to lessen the way you live your life.

Some scientists disagree with the "global warming consensus". Al Gore calls them "Deniers" comparing them to people who claim one of history's darkest events never happened. Anyone who fails to buy the "global warming lie" hook line and sinker is attacked. During the Clinton Administration any government scientist who doubted global warming was fired any others were advised they would be blacklisted from receiving any government grants.

The only solution the Enviro-Mentals will accept is to throw even more draconian hurdles in front of American business interests. The estimated cost to our economy for reducing carbon emissions per Al Gore's baby, the Kyoto Treaty was 77 to 338 Billion in 1992 dollars. I assure you the price hasn't decreased in the past 15 years. A hefty price tag has never been a deterrent to those on the left who seek bigger and bigger government. No problem, they'll just "tax the rich".

All to keep the planet at it's current temperature. The benefits of some additional warming are never discussed. There is significant scientific evidence to support theories that the earth has been warmer than current temperatures in the past. Directly prior to the Renaissance for example. A warming trend resulted in longer growing seasons and world wide benefits to mankind. Now record heat is big news and record cold is ignored. Here's an idea, if we have to ignore something let's make it Al Gore.

I Love Liberals

I love liberals, don't you? Only a liberal can pick a fight and then if you respond in any manner other than total capitulation they accuse you of attacking them and suddenly take the high road. Recently I had two email encounters that seemed to go that way. The first was quite a shock as seemingly out of the blue a business acquaintance sent me a brief tirade about President Bush and Vice-Pres Chaney. When I replied with some defense I got a haughty reply about how neither of us will likely convince the other so we should drop it. HE started it but WE should drop it. No problem there I deleted him form my address book. He was a flaky attorney from Dade County. He won't be missed.

This does explain how so many liberals can support Hillary Clinton. I find it totally unreasonable for anyone to attack then cry foul, hardly good sportsmanship or even adult behavior. Apparently many disagree and that makes it reasonable, for them and for Hillary to have it both ways. When Hillary accuses some imaginary "Vast Right wing Conspiracy" for making up lies about her husband canoodling with an intern that is a perfectly legitimate claim. When it turns out that her husband was doing exactly what he was accused of he is the only liar in the scenario no apology is offered. When asked by Tim Russert if she owes an apology for that accusation Mrs. Clinton reverts to innocent victim replying only "I wish that none of us had to go through that very difficult time. Never taking any responsibility for causing the "very difficult time".

When Hillary and others accuse the President of every evil imaginable including knowingly allowing September 11th to happen that is their Constitutional Right. If anyone dares to reasonably point out that these statements might damage our country and hurt our chances of winning the war in Iraq they scream foul! "How dare you" they cry! "How dare you impugn my patriotism". It's amazing to me. You can watch it time and time again, first outrageous behavior and then when that behavior is commented upon immediate highhanded victim hood. This passive aggressive ploy has silenced Americans nationwide. Millions of conservative and moderate Americans just pipe down to avoid the theatrics the left employs if you dare speak up.

One good example occurred at a women's bible class of all places. A very outspoken woman thought it appropriate to say in a bible class how she "hates" being in any group that thinks President Bush is so great. This was not in response to anything said in class, politics had not been mentioned. This woman just wanted us all to know that if we had anything positive to say about the President, that would be offensive to her. I think I would have been happier living in the 1950's when folks were more likely to be offended by negative statements about the President.

Here we are, in a country where you would hesitate to say in public "I think President Bush is doing the best job possible under very difficult circumstances". Hows that for muzzeling the opposition. Millions of people are afraid to voice and support for our President. Supporting the President openly has been deemed "rude" but defaming him venomously is perfectly allowed.

It's a crazy time! And, not in a good way.

Second Clinton Fundrasing Scandal - THIS WEEK

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week that a small home in Daly City, CA was one of the biggest Democrat donors. There was a connection between the occupants of that house, the Paw family and a New York businessman named Norman Hsu. Hsu, is a "Hillraiser", the title given to someone who has committed to raising $100,000 for Hilliary Clinton.

Today we learn that Mr. Hsu is a wanted man. There has been a warrant for his arrest in California since 1992. Many Democrats who have enjoyed Mr Hsu's financial support are returning the funds or giving them to charity. So far, only Minnesota Rep. Michael Honda is returning the donations from the Paws and another contributor Hsu lined up.

In an unrelated additional scandal another "fundraiser", Abdul Rehman Jinnah, is thought to have fled the country after an indictment on charges of conspiracy and making illegal campaign contributions. This gentleman, a Pakistani immigrant, disappeared in May after being indicted and is thought to have returned to Pakistan.

Prior to the indictment Jinnah directed $30,000 to Mrs Clinton's campaign and $50, 000 to Barbara Boxer. It is alleged that he organized fake fundraisers where he would collect contributions from friends and family members and reimburse them. His flight makes one think the allegations are probably true.

Please No Forwards on Politics

Today, as a second foreign Clinton contributor has reportedly fled the country to avoid indictment on charges of conspiracy and making illegal campaign contributions, I received a reply to my email about yesterday's Clinton campaign scandal. That reply from a family member was "Please no forwards on politics". That one line sums up the way we went through eight years of Bill Clinton and how some plan to get through Hillary's campaign and heaven forbid another Clinton administration. Normally rational people will close their eyes to any and nearly all Clinton misdeeds with their fingers in their ears chanting "la, la, la, la, la".

The same people who have openly expressed their desire to personally harm our President chide me for daring to bring some shady dealings to their attention. People who never hesitate to tell you how much they absolutely hate President Bush act as though you are behaving boorishly if you mention that Ms. Clinton has not one but two new fund raising scandals to explain. People who will believe our President capable of any evil up to and including knowing about the September 11th attacks in advance but allowing thy to occur in some mad grab for power go all huffy on you for questioning the character of a proved liar, swindler and generally despicable person.

My reply, which will go unspoken to that family member is "I'll respect your wishes but cannot respect your attitude".

Here Comes Another One Just Like the Other One

What is it with the Chinese and the Clinton's? Bill Clinton took tons of illegal donations from Chinese and Hillary appears to be doing the same.

There is a six member family, the Paws, who live in a 1280 square foot residence that sits in Daly City, CA under one of the flight paths for San Francisco International airport. Although Mr and Mrs Paw and their four grown children are of modest means they are some of the Democrat Party's biggest contributors. Since 2005 the Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democrats $45,000 of that going to Ms Clinton.

The Paws are Chinese and all got their Social Security numbers in 1982. They did not seem to be politically active until this recent generous support of all things Democrat. Five of the six Paws are registered to vote as Non-partisans and according to county election officials vote only "sporadically". There was no record of any political donations made by the Paws until they gave $3,600 to John Kerry during the 2004 presidential election . The Paws first donation to Ms Clinton was the maximum allowed (at the time) $4,000 to her Senate campaign in December of 2004. Odd that a member of a middle class family in Daly City, California would contribute to a New York Senate race. Another donation of $17,500 went to Ms Clinton in March 2005.

There is something else fishy about the Paw family donations. Another benefactor for the Democrats and specifically Ms Clinton is New York businessman Norman Hsu and his donations have been made on the same dates and in the amounts as the Paws donations. Oh, one other odd detail, Mr Hsu previously listed the Paw residence as his home address.

I'm sure there is a simple explanation for his but doubt it will ever be given or even asked for by our "main stream media" who always gives Democrats and especially the Clinton's a pass.

LEARNING TO READ

I really wish I could remember learning to read. For an unknown, to me at least, period of time I had "read" Green Eggs and Ham to my Dad every night. I had memorized the book from his prior reading to me and could recite every line on each page so I must of had some idea of the relationship between the words on the pages and the words coming out of my mouth. Although I think I associated the words I remembered with the pictures on the pages.

I have lots of memories from the first grade but do not recall the exact moment when I learned how to read. Kindergarten was optional at the time and no one had ever heard of pre-school. The first grade was my first experience with formal education. I clearly remember standing with the class and reciting the alphabet. There was also a version we did that went "A, apple, B, Ball etc. In that version X was a bit sticky as none of us had ever seen or heard of a xylophone. I later remember sitting in a circle on the floor of the classroom reading aloud when my turn came. I don't recall the reading matter but think I was in the "best readers" circle. Imagine the hue and cry if in today's first grade classroom the teacher tried to designate a small group as "the best" anything and allowed them to read from more advanced texts.

Still, I am sorry I cannot recall that moment of enlightenment when I realized that the letters made words and the words contained meanings. It must have been like discovering an amazing decoder ring that could unlock the mysteries of the universe. Or maybe it was just a quick "Ahhh" moment.

DO WOMEN HAVE FEET?

It is amazing how much time and money women spend on their feet. Shoes are a passion with most women and the prices for designer footwear are off the charts. A pedicure, once a luxury, is now a monthly necessity for almost all women. Why do we put so much effort into the most overlooked feature of our bodies? Sure your girlfriends notice your shoes but men don't. Most men are barely aware that women have feet. By the way, if you meet a man who takes notice of your shoes, kick those shoes off and run for your life!

CARTER SUPPORTS HAMAS

Former President Carters latest outrage clarifies his inclination to support thugs and terrorists.

Carter says the U.S. should stop favoring Fatah over Hamas. In a speech to a group of Irish "human rights activists" Carter said that "the Bush administration's refusal to accept Hamas' election was criminal". Funny, Carter thought his own refusal to accept the 1979 election results in Zimbabwe during his presidency was just peachy keen. Thanks to Carter and others on the Left who ignored the elected leader Abel Muzorewa and continued to support Robert Mugabe he was able to steal the 1980 election and seize power. How has Mugabe worked out for Zimbabwe? Well in the past 27 years thousands have been tortured and murdered, there has been genocide and mass starvation the world's highest level of inflation and lowest life expect ency. Carter leter claimed he had done the right thing but that Mugabe had become corrupted by power.

Since the last Palestinian election there has been a Fatah-Hamas power-sharing government. Last week Hamas fighters seized control of the Gaza Strip by force, driving Fatah out of the area. President Abbas then dissolved the government and set up a Fatah-led administration to govern the west bank. The Bush administration and the European Union (how often do these two entities agree?) decided to provide aid that has been withheld since the election to the interim Fatah government.

Despite the fact that there was a full out civil war going on in the region Cater claimed the decision to give aid to the new Fatah government only was an "effort to divide Palestinians into two peoples". Carter cares not a whit that the Hamas leadership refuses to renounce violence and continues to call for the destruction of Israel.

On Monday of this week as hundreds of terrified civilians tried to flee the Gaza Strip for sanctuary in Israel, disguised Hamas gunmen blended in with the crowd and then threw hand grenades at Israeli soldiers. They killed one Palestinian and injured 15 others at Erez. That is the tactics of the group Carter wants us to treat like an ally.

Are We Ready NOW To Admit Israel Is NOT The Problem?

For the past week the so called "Palestinians" have been busy killing each other in the Gaza Strip. This is the stretch of land formerly occupied by Israeli forces that was handed over as a step in the "road map to peace". Well, thanks to Ha mas and Fatah we have veered sharply off the "road map to peace". Sympathy for the innocent aside I have no problem with these two groups of people killing each other especially if it precludes them from blowing up children and their grandmothers having pizza in Israel.

Hamas got a foot in the door in the recent election and are moving to take full control by force. If you have doubts about the need for us to finish the job in Iraq just look at Hamas in the Gaza Strip to see what Iraq will turn into if we leave prematurely.

Democrats Work Toward American Defeat

Please compare the following statements made by Democrat Harry Reid.............

WP reports that Senator Harry Reid provoked by an article in USA Today took some cheap shots at General David Petraeus. Petraeus, was unanimously approved by the Senate to take command in Iraq four months ago. Still after approving Gen. Petraeus Reid now claims that the General "isn't in touch with what's going on in Baghdad." Reid also indicated that he thinks Petraeus has not been sufficiently open in his testimony to Congress. Noting that Petraeus, who is now on his third tour of duty in Iraq, oversaw the training of Iraqi troops during his second stint there, Reid said: "He told us it was going great; as we've looked back, it didn't go so well.

The quote in USA Today was that the general sees "astonishing signs of normalcy" in the Iraqi capital. "I'm talking about professional soccer leagues with real grass field stadiums, several amusement parks -- big ones, markets that are very vibrant," Petraeus told the newspaper.
Reid went on to say "I was a little disappointed, to say the least, today reading the USA Today newspaper, where he's saying things are going fine." Seeing signs of normalcy is hardly saying "things are going fine." I sincerely doubt that you could find any instance of General Petraeus saying "things are going fine," in a war zone.

Reid had a conversation Tuesday with liberal bloggers, according to The Politico, in which he disparaged both Petraeus and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff whom the administration recently did not nominate for a second two-year term. Reid called Pace "incompetent," and then questioned the integrity of Petraeus by saying he is "waiting to see if General Petraeus can be a little more candid with this."

Compare to statements made by Harry Reid at the time of his last visit to Iraq, March of 2005. "I came away with the feeling that we cannot leave Iraq." He was one of seven Senate Democrats and Republicans that took a week-long trip to the Middle East and several countries near the region. He said, "I came away with the feeling we cannot leave Iraq. If we do, the terrorists will have won." Reid must have forgotten all about that as he actually said "Now I believe myself............that this war is lost" on April 19, 2007.

Harry Reid is a corrupt Democrat. It is well known that you cannot do business in the state of Nevada unless you grease the palms of one or more of the members of the Harry Reid family. However, for the majority leader in the Senate to undermine our war efforts in this way is much more egregious than his ethically questionable and highly profitable land dealings.

Who is more likely to be "out of touch" with the way things are going in Baghdad, the general running our operations there or a fat cat senator sitting in Washington D.C. trying to think up more ways to thwart the President and enrich himself? There is only one accurate description of Harry Reid's behavior and the word is treasonous.

"Bush Lied" Not!

Multiple Democrats have repeatedly tried to assert that President Bush "Lied us into the war in Iraq". Nothing could be further from the truth, but the truth is a small obstical to the left and their obedient minions in the media. Long ago it was alleged that Vice President Cheney pressured analysts in our intelligence organizations to find that Saddam hissain had WMD's. That fallicy was disproved by the 9.11 Report. So the left just waited a week or two and began again to make their "Bush Lied, Kids Died" claims.

Now that allegation is disproved by none other than Al Gore. A video taped speech from 1992 has surfaced. In it Al Gore, then running for Vice President, criticises the first President Bush for not confronting Saddam Hussein. Gore makes all the same arguments for attacking Iraq that were made by President Clinton when he made removal of Saddam Hussein the policy of the United states of America. Clinton never followed through on that policy with the exception of a few high altitude bombings.

If one had the time and the inclination you could put together an impressive collection of leading Democrats calling for action against Iraq and explaining how very dangerous Hussein is to us and the world. It is convenient for those Democrats to pretend that they never made those statements and that no one ever considered action against Iraq until Bush 43 came along. The Media willingly complies by reporting the Democrats current criticism and never mentioning the conflicting statements these same people made just a few years ago.

Unfortunately for the Media and the Left, some of us do have more than short time memories and there is always YouTube to fill in the blanks for those who have forgotten.

Who Really Hates the U.S.?

Our wonderful "main stream media" has been telling us since President Bush took office that our country is hated, truly hated throughout the world. Can we be sure this is true? This is the same MSM who told us that AID's was becoming an epidemic among heterosexuals, which was untrue. The same MSM warned us that the Avian Flu would be killing ten percent of America by now which hasn't happened. The same MSM who are telling us we have changed the climate of the earth, but can't prove it.

I admit that there will always be some anti-American factions out there and the MSM will dutifully report every protest they put on, but how widespread is this feeling? When they report on these protests take notice of the camera angle. If you are seeing an aerial shot of thousands in the streets then there are thousands in the streets. If the cameras are on the ground and the shots are rather narrow you might be looking at a small number of people filmed to look like a lot of people. This ploy was used at a Cindy Sheehan event a year ago. The picture was cropped to prevent readers from seeing that there were more reporters present than protesters.

Lets look at the way the rest of the world has been voting lately. According to the MSM America is hated because the world absolutely despises George W Bush whom we have had the bad taste to elect, twice. In Germany the candidate who presented herself as an ally of the United States was elected and the anti Bush candidate lost. In Australia, our second best ally in Iraq, Prime Minister Howard was re-elected. If you were asked which European country hates us the most you would probably say France. They just had an election in France. One candidate, an attractive woman was clearly anti-American and decidedly anti-Bush. She called her opponent, Nicolas Sarkozy "the Bush candidate" in hopes of using hatred of Bush to win the election. Sarkozy won with 53 percent of the votes!

Apparently it is the MSM that hated America and president Bush, not a majority of Europeans.

Happy Birthday to Me?

Happy Birthday to me,

I am not yet fifty,

fifty is the new thirty

you can take it from me.

Food To Burn

Which is a more pressing threat, world hunger or global warming? I recently lived in Illinois where the move toward Ethanol was heralded as a wonderful thing. Illinois is a state with lots of agriculture and they would profit from anything that would drive up the price of corn. There was no mention of the downside.

Since then the cost of food has been rising steadily. I heard yesterday that food costs are up 17%. Since the fanfare about the wonder of Ethanol I have learned that burning it causes more pollution than burning gasoline. We have been trying to drill for oil in Anwar for 20 years and haven't allowed another oil refinery to be built in this country in 30 years. Perhaps we should do something about those two causes for high oil prices before we take a chance of starving a small percentage of the world population to make ourselves feel good because we are using less oil.

Jimmy Who?

Jimmy Carter might be the most dangerous man in the world. In his life time he has given birth to radical Islam, helped the Marxist, Robert Mugabe, oust Abel Muzorewa, the elected leader of Zimbabwe, embraced Fidel Castro and made it possible for North Korea to have nuclear weapons. That is quite a list of accomplishments for one man. Recently Carter, who has run his mouth more freely than any former President in history called the Bush foreign policy the history of America but history will eventually lay that honor at his feet, one of which will undoubtedly be in his mouth.

Bush Haters, What's Your Beef?

Recently a very nice man I know mentioned with venom in his voice that there is no way this country would elect another Republican President after George Bush. I didn't ask him what President Bush has done that makes this so clear to him but I do wonder. There seems to be a lot of people who truly hate President Bush but I doubt even they know why. As a Bush defender I am simply exhausted and a little sad and resentful. I don't agree with everything President Bush has done but I know he has done nothing to merit the treatment he has received from the media, the Democrats and a portion of the American people.

The left in this country is nonsensical. They hated, absolutely hated Richard Nixon. What for, no one knows. They will say "Watergate" but they were after him long before that whole mess materialized. Richard Nixon tried to placate the left. Nixon created the EPA and OSHA, shouldn't the left appreciate that? Richard Nixon ended the Vietnam War, a war the left railed against for it's entirety. A war, by the way that was started by a Democrat, Kennedy, escalated by a Democrat, Johnson and ended by a Republican. The media was out to get Richard Nixon and Watergate gave them the opportunity to do so. Nixon was not involved in the break-in and had no knowledge of it at the time it occurred. He did come to know about it and was involved in the cover-up. When the time came he did the honorable thing, he resigned. At the time lying to the American People was a big deal, during the Clinton administration it was suddenly insignificant for the President to lie, even under oath which is an actual crime.

The most unfortunate product of the Nixon Administration is this, the leftists in the media learned that they could take down a President. Journalism schools thrived as young lefties lined up to learn how to be the next Woodward or Bernstein. Conservative voices were silenced as liberals took over the management of every news room in America. The New York Times depreciated under the management of a lesser Sulzberger. Arthur senior was nicknamed "Punch" Junior is called (behind his back I'm sure) "Pinch" and he took over in 1997. Since then the motto of the New York Times should have been changed from "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the news that fits our Agenda".

No matter how hard people like Pinch Sulzberger and Dan Rather were pulling for the leftist Democrats to win they continued to pretend they were "objective journalists". Dan Rather is a good example because his bias was so poorly hidden. Recall the vicious interview he did with the First President Bush when he was still the Vice President, in which the usually genteel Bush turned the tables on him with the way his eyes welled up when then President Clinton called him on the phone during a broadcast with co-anchor Connie Chung. The "hardened news man" gushed "If we can just be one one-hundredth as great as you and Mrs Clinton have been...blah, blah, blah".

Once the 2000 election came around even the pretense of objectivity was dropped. Thank heavens by then Rush Limbaugh had been on the air for two decades and we had the Fox News Channel growing by leaps and bounds. The gloves were off on the left but normal Americans had alternatives. If we didn't want to see Chris Matthews tear up as he reported that Gore had finally given up his quest to overturn the election results in Florida we could tune to Fox News Channel. If we were horrified to learn that Dan Rather used forged documents to discredit President Bush and his service in the Texas Air National Guard we could read a book written by John Kerry's "band of brothers". Not the few he carried with him, but the over 200 who said he was unfit to be president.

You see, something else had happened in the recent decade. Books with conservative points of view which were once refused by publishers had been found to be huge sellers. Now those books were published and read by millions. If CBS refused to tell you about the many inconsistencies in Kerry's rendition of his military service (which they did) you could buy the book. Now the big network news folks wouldn't investigate the questions raised, they would only investigate those raising them, but word got out. Think about it, three purple hearts and he never spent the night in a hospital?

Anyway, I digress. The truth of the matter is Bush, however imperfect has never knowingly lied to the American people. Bush has consistently done what he thought was best for this country. Not was was most popular, not what was the most expedient but what he actually felt was in the best interests of the United States of America. So Bush Haters take heed. Your hatred of President Bush has nothing to do with him. it is a choice you have made and one day in the not to distant future Bush will no longer be the president but you will still be filled with hatred and rage. Which is what you deserve and compassionate conservatism aside, I hope you choke on it!

Feel Safe or Be Safe

Feel Safe or Be Safe, the Choice is Yours.

One small madman with two handguns was able to kill 32 innocent people. Some of the students who fled were licensed gun owners, some with concealed-carry permits. None had their guns with them because Virginia Tech is a “Gun-Free School Zone” except of course for the two handguns in the hands of the murderer.
A student had been disciplined the year before for bringing his gun onto school property. If only that student had been armed and present in Norris Hall Monday morning this terrible attack could have been cut short. Since the second amendment gives American citizens the “right to bear arms” gun free school zones have been challenged as unconstitutional.
Last January a bill that would have disallowed schools like Virginia Tech from disarming law abiding citizens was up for a vote. The Virginia General Assembly chose not to pass that bill. Larry Hincker is a spokesman for Virginia Tech and he made the following statement regarding that choice. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus." How safe do you think the parents, students and visitors feel now.
Gun control laws give us the illusion of safety and embolden criminals and mass murderers. This is most clearly displayed by the sharp increases in gun crime in England as private gun ownership was outlawed. Washington D.C. is another good example of how criminals react when they are confident their victims are unarmed and unable to properly defend themselves.
As Economics Professors John Lott and William Landes explained in their book, “The Bias Against Guns”, there is just one policy proven to reduce mass murders like this one. That policy is to enact concealed-carry laws. In their study of all public, multiple-victim shootings in this country from 1977 through 1999 states that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced these attacks by 60% and the death and injury from the attacks by almost 80%.
It is time to stop disarming law abiding citizens and to actually encourage Americans to take responsibility for their own safety. Look how terrible the Katrina crisis turned out because the people of New Orleans waited on government rather than taking action and evacuating as they knew they should.
We are about to have another gun debate in this country and the media is tuning up to sway the public toward more gun control. Stand up and demand your right to protect yourself, your home and your family. As the one person who cares most about your family and home you are the person best qualified to make decisions about protecting them.

It's Time to Improve the View!

The View has gotten quite unsightly in recent months. Rosie O'Donnell seems to be, well, deranged. Like many liberals in America today, Rosie hates the President so violently she cannot think straight. In the past few weeks she has accused the Bush administration of bombing the World Trade Center on September 11th.

Rosie asserts that buildings can't collapse the way they did on September 11th. This is a statement that has been made by several people with no idea what they are talking about, like Charlie Sheen. Shortly after that terrible day a magazine, I think it was Popular Mechanics published a very complete explanation of how the WTC buildings "pancaked" when the floors hit by the airplanes gave way, dropping all the floors above on the floors below. There was some speculation that the structure might have held if the girders were coated with the fire retardant substance that was developed to replaced asbestos. The lower levels were coated but above a certain floor they were not. Although the new product is supposed to be enviormentally safe after all the asbestos lawsuits the builders didn't want to take any chances.

Rosie has attacked Donald Trunp, Miss USA, she has insulted Christians and the intelligence of everyone who has ever watched that show. Some examples of her comments include.......

In America we are fed propaganda

Do you want to know why we would go into Iran, for the money!

Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam.

This is a very angry and poorly informed woman and no one should be subjected to her rantings. Lets improve The View by removing this eyesore. Get Rosie off the air!

Anti War or Anti American?

I am sure that many of the folks calling for an immediate end to the war in Iraq are well intentioned, but that doesn't make then right. I am just as sure that some percentage of the anti war crowd have very bad intentions. There are some who want this country to be defeated, embarrassed and ultimately worse off.

The anti war groups had their chance to prevent this war and they failed. That chance was before we invaded Iraq and the peace activists need to know that their time is before the decision is made. Their time is before military action is taken. That is when they can try to convince Americans that they are right and no action should be begun. Once a majority of the American people support action and our elected representatives authorize that action the time for protests has passed.

Protesting the war once our forces are in harms way is wrong. It emboldens our enemies and gives them the hope they need to keep killing our young men and women. Placing the blame for every death in Iraq on America gives the terrorists a pass on their heinous attacks on innocent Iraqis. We are fighting an enemy that attacks and then hides behind women and children. The peace movement people never blame the terrorists committing these atrocities, they blame the coalition forces who are trying to stop the killing.

Calling our troops home to "protect" them is nonsensical. These are men and women who chose to defend their country. They did not join the military to be safe. They joined to keep us safe. Pulling them out before they have achieved their goals is the worst thing we could do to them. They are willing to die for a cause but you want to take their cause away, or say it is a worthless cause or an impossible cause. You say you want to protect our troops but the only way you try to do so is by forcing defeat on them.

One of the things I heard repeated often in the 18 months of discussion prior to the invasion of Iraq was "The first President Bush should have finished the job in the Gulf War". Well, now some of those same people want to leave the job unfinished a second time. If we do this is a battle that will have to be fought again in ten to fifteen years and by then the terrorists might have nuclear weapons. How many of our brave soldiers and marines will have to die to win that battle?