It’s Not Gun Control Stupid!

"Clearly, mental health professionals have a legal and moral responsibility," when a student presents a possible risk we have a duty to warn."—Christoper Flynn, Head of Virginia Tech Counseling Center

We are a litigious society that loves to place blame. As Liberals root around to find the latest fall guy to blame for the 4/16 massacre at Virginia Tech the number one culprit that will be blamed is guns and the lack of gun control. Liberals if they had their way would make it virtual impossible for a citizen of the United State to get a gun.

One small problem with this thinking, every citizen of the United States has a Constitutional right to have a gun. So if liberals are going to blatantly disregard the Constitution, as they always do, they must have a compelling argument for violating the second amendment. So what is it?

Liberals will undoubtedly say, if Seung-Hui Cho, the deranged and mentally ill gunman of Virginia Tech was not able to purchase a gun 33 people would not have died on 4/16. It is much to simplistic a view.

So according to Liberals the Second amendment, a Constitutional guaranteed right, is at fault for the 4/16 massacre.

Also anyone who supports this Constitutional right to own a gun namely Conservatives are indirectly at fault because they are the ones standing in the way of anti-gun advocates’ ability to take away the Constitutional second amendment right to own a gun.

Courts let him Go

Still there is another way of seeing this. If we must have someone to blame then why not blame the court that found Virginia Tech killer Seung-Hui Cho was "mentally ill" and potentially dangerous. Then it let him go. We blamed President Bush for the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita when the State and City were the actual first responders.

President Bush’s administration has been accused of incompetently handling Katrina so by that same logic who are the incompetents that allowed Cho Seung-Hui to kill 33 people?

In December 2005 -- more than a year before Monday's mass shootings -- Justice Elinor Williams, a district court in Montgomery County, Va., ruled that Cho presented "an imminent danger to self or others." That was the necessary criterion for a detention order, so that Cho, who had been accused of stalking by two female schoolmates, could be evaluated by a state doctor and ordered to undergo outpatient care.

Psychologist Roy Crouse found Cho's "affect is flat and mood is depressed.”

After Dr. Crouse's psychological evaluation of Cho, Special Justice Paul M. Barnett certified the finding, ordering follow-up treatment on an outpatient basis.

What’s so tragically laughable about this situation is the so-called experts in psychology offering their assessments of the pathology, which would allow someone to perform such a grotesque attack against innocents after the fact. So where were these “experts” when the courts where attempting to determine what to do with Seung-Hui Cho?

And contrary to what pundits and so-called experts are saying now the courts did have the power to hold Seung-Hui.

Dentention Order

According to the court documents: The judge may rely solely upon the evaluations and reports of the appointed examiner and of the Community Services Board, to order your involuntary commitment, if these reports are not contested by you.

But regardless of whether Seung-Hui contested the reports there was enough evidence to demonstrate that Seung-Hui was a danger to himself and to others.

Justice Elinor Williams, Psychologist Roy Crouse, Special Justice Paul Barnett, the Police Department, Virginia Tech Counseling Center and Virginia Tech Administrators all acted incompetently and negligently by allowing Seung-Hui Cho to remain at Virginia Tech thereby remaining a threat to himself and his fellow students.

Had one of the professionals that came in contact with Seung-Hui Cho had done his or her jobs correctly Cho would not have been able to purchase a gun because he would have received the help that he needed. But instead the worst massacre in the history of the United States was allowed even though at any time someone could have prevented it.

It’s not gun control that we need to waste our time discussing. We need to know why people who we entrust to protect us did not do their jobs.

Their egregious negligence is the best argument for second amendment rights making the point ever so cleary that we can not expect anything but post massacre investigations and media coverage of tradegies however if you want protection, as always, you’ll have to do it yourself!

White men can’t Joke

Don Imus

Fired and disgraced radio host Don Imus has taken his sophomoric brand of comedy over the fringe of social acceptability. Imus told producer Bernard Mc Guirk in reference to the women’s Basketball team from Rutgers, "That's some rough girls from Rutgers," he continued “Man, they got tattoos…” However the phase that cost Imus his job was the exclamation, “…That’s some nappy-headed hos there I’m going to tell you that”

In the film White men can’t Jump Wesley Snipes’ character Sydney Dean and Woody Harrelson’s character Billy Hoyle use the racial stereotype that blacks are superior to whites in basketball to play a big money con on the unsuspecting. Billy Hoyle, Harrelson’s character was an extraordinary basketball talent who first feinted basketball ineptness and then for the final set up couldn’t miss with his killer shot!

Don Imus of Imus in the Morning radio fame used racial stereotyping for years to point at the often outlandish but true to life self-stereotyping that we have all come to accept from the media. So why is he out of a job?

Bad taste? Yes! Racist, misogynist or sexism? No! According to title 11 Intercollegiate athletics policy of equality and fairness in athletics women are to be funded equally to men in college sports. Meaning that men and women are to be treated the same.

And in addition to codes that demand equally treatment of the sexes in sports it seems that women have taken on the persona of men from crossovers moves on the basketball court to their tattooed bodies women emulate men in their play of the sport.

Imus was wrong in emulating rap culture which by the way is misogynist and sexist in the way it demeaning portrays females as gyrating booty shaking scantily clad eye candy. Not to mention that Rappers all too frequently referred to women as bitches and hos.

Women themselves commonly refer to one another as bitch and ho but that’s another story.

What Imus did was two fold, he took a verbal picture a snap shot, if you will, of the American culture. A culture that encourages women to be tattooed Manish sportspersons and at the same time he showed us a culture that has become boorishly crude in the way we speak about and to one another.

The fact of the matter is, we didn’t like what we heard when Imus shot back a picture of ourselves through his white wanna-be hip-hop lens of a broadcast mic, and instead of dialoguing about where we’ve gone wrong by encouraging females to be thuggish Alan Iverson wanna-bes and instead of speaking about why we allow our culture to pimp eager young voluptuous “pump it hotties” and “girls gone wild” we got mad and did the easy thing we blame a white man for calling this all to our attention and then we collectively got him fired so we could go back to business as usual and forget about it.

However, millions of consumers can’t be wrong. We buy the videos we purchased the rap music, we go to the movies and we support the tattoo wearing hard playing sweaty gym rats that just happen to be girls by buying tickets to their basketball games.

But what we absolutely can not allow is some wrinklely old white guy, even if he is a liberal, to say what he sees in our culture no that is too shocking to revolting, to repulsing!

We won’t do the hard work and examine whether what Imus said had any validity no we simply shot the messenger.
Understand this is not an apology for the loathsome kind of social characterization that Imus trafficked in however let’s be clear, what Imus said was a picture of what is out there. It’s real as Snoop Dog’s next joint! (CD)

The question is what are we going to do to fire the purveyors of social denegation?

Are we at least willing to talk about it? Or are we happy with the reality that there are nappy-headed hos in the world and people who are willing to exploit and call them that, but we just prefer not talk about it.

Where Imus when wrong is that he didn’t call President Bush a nappy-headed ho, he would still have his job and probably Al Sharpten’s and Jesse Jackson’s blessing.

At any rate you’ all would have nodded your collective heads and agreed, “Yeah President Bush is a nappy-headed ho who lied us into war and caused the devastation of Katrina and Rita. Right on Imus!

What a sick culture!

How can 60.6 Million Brits be so Stupid?

Some of ex-Captive Royal Navy

The British have been played like chumps. It’s called propaganda and British people act as if they’ve never seen anything like it. Iran committed an international crime against 15 Sailors and Marines of the Royal Navy by capturing and illegally holding them for 14 days under threats of imprisonment, torture, death or all three.

Then after forcing humiliating confessions and violating the Geneva Convention by using the 15 captives in humiliating and compromising videos, dressing them up and parading them in a dog and pony show before Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran finally after using the captives like utterly useless fodder then releases them back to their disgraced Country.

In this whole despicable affront to British national dignity not one peep of outrage from the British people against Iran.

No Brits just seem to be resigned to the fact that it was Blair’s and Bush’s fault that Iran violated Iraqi waters captured Royal military personnel and held them under threat and in violation of Geneva when the U.S.A. or the U.K. are not in conflict with Iran.

Now that the 15 captives have been released they tell a much different story of their captivity; blindfolds, bonds, isolation, clicking of cocked guns, psychological torture and foaming mouth bullying captors.

But to offset anything that the captives might say when they got home Iran took plenty of pictures that showed the “good treatment” of their most esteemed and honored guest.

Pictures that showed the captives playing, laughing, smoking and in good humor and then finally President Ahmadinejad’s sarcastically asked question to his about to be released prisoners, “Have you enjoyed your mandatory vacation?”

This was an international outrage! So why are the Brits so complacent when an act of war was committed against them?

Maybe the Brits believe Iran’s propaganda, maybe Brits believe that their apparent passive Royal Navy is incompetent too and did stray into Iranian waters.

Maybe the Brits believe that their armed forces deserved to be captured and threatened and subjected to humiliation.

Maybe the Brits believe the Iranian government over their own government that they were in the wrong and Iran was in the right. And so the question goes begging, HOW COULD 60.6 MILLION BRITS BE SO STUPID?

Pelosi’s Syrian Visit is a Felony, So What? She’s a Democrat

Nancy Pelosi

The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.—ROBERT F. TURNER

We are a Nation of laws… not so much. We are a Nation that selectively chooses to enforce laws given the politics behind them.

Need some examples? For instance enforcing the laws that govern illegal entry into this country these laws are just now being reluctantly enforced because U.S. citizens have made it plain that no one will be elected to govern if they do not protect American borders.

Republicans lost their twelve years control of both houses of Congress because Democrats and their allies in the media were able to convince the American people that Republican governed in a “Culture of Corruption.” Democrats made this case all the while attempting to suggest that any corruption was separate and apart from anything that Democrats were doing.

Tom Delay, Randy “Duke” Cunningham, Mark Foley, Dennis Hastert, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Presidential advisor Karl Rove, I. Scooter Libby all have been persecuted some have been tried and convicted by Democrat lead efforts.

But Democrats not so much, it doesn’t matter that Now Senate Leader Harry Reid received $30,500 dollars of Jack Abramoff related money. Nor is it important that John Murtha was an unindicted co-conspirer caught on video saying that he would consider taking bribes in the FBI Abscam sting from his earlier days in Congress.

Or Rep. Alcee Hastings is only one of six federal judges ever to have been impeached and removed from the judiciary, for taking bribes in a racketeering case. Or the $90,000 in cash bribes found in the home of Democratic Rep. William Jefferson's home in a freezer. Or Sen. Dianne Feinstein steered Halliburton like moneys from a senate committee which she sat on, Billions of dollars to her husbands two company in a blatant unethical conflict of interest.

What’s the difference between so-called Republican corruption and Democrats corruption? Republicans are persecuted, prosecuted and or put out of office, Democrats all to a man and woman stay in office and even tend to get promoted to higher office.

That brings us to the latest Felony that a Democrat politician has committed. Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is apparently in violation of the Logan Act an act that prevents interference of individual citizen(s) in the conduct of foreign policy by our Government with foreign governments."

Speaker Pelosi, over the strenuous objections of White house, took it upon herself to conduct foreign negotiations with a government that supports terrorism when she visited Syria.

Pelosi’s hubris and disregard for the advice which recommended that she not interfere in foreign governmental relations was quite apparent when she related a peace message to Syria from Israel that Israel says was egregiously mis-communicated.

But alas will Pelosi face Congressional censor for her actions? Will there be a special prosecutor appointed to investigate this felonious violation of the Logan Act. Will the media call for Pelosi to step down from the Speaker position? Will any Republican Representative do what Democrats did the twelve years that Democrats were in the minority?

What is that? Fight for what Republicans say that they believe in. If Republicans claim that this is a nation of laws then as sure as we know that if this situation were reversed and had a Republican violated the Logan Act he or she would be inundated with a fire storm of criticism Republicans should demand that Ms. Pelosi answer for undermining the Constitutional separations of powers. She has already undermined the troops with a war funding bill that the President can not sign.

Democrats have leaked government secrets regarding the war; stole government documents from the National Archives, and committed various criminal acts and have remained virtually unscathed. Why is that?

That is because we are not a nation of laws; we are a nation that selectively chooses which laws to enforce at any given time according to the politics behind them!

And right now the politics are eight years of get Bush so all Democrats, any Democrat that does anything short of denouncing Global warming will get a free pass even if their crime is a felony.

When Rep. Pelosi resumes her position with not so much as a slap on the hand we will know that we live in a divided America one which John Edwards spoke of. Two Americas separate and unequal one Red and one Blue.

Desperate Clintonian attempt to manipulate Media Backfires

Senator Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton's campaign today announced it will report $36 million in total receipts for the first fundraising quarter, which ended March 31, 2007. The staggering number reflects the strength of support for Clinton from every walk of life and every part of America.-- Drudge Report

It's a record! Everybody loves Hillary. Clinton campaign raises more money that any other Democrat during a single primary quarter. This type of media manipulation portents to be what awaits America if Hillary Clinton should become President.

Attempting to counter negative reporting that a recent poll reported by TheHill.com of a Harris Interactive poll which suggest that huge numbers of Americans would not and will not vote for Hillary Clinton the Clinton campaign leaked a story to the Drudge Report so that an unsuspecting Drudge would become complicit in propagandizing for the Clinton campaign.

So now the truth is out, Clinton Raised $26 million dollars and transferred 10 to 11 Million dollars from her Senate campaign to boast of a 36 million dollar campaign war chest. This move was intended to discourage Clinton's Democrat rivals for the party's nomination for President of the United States. Also the leak was intended to knock any news of an unpopular Hillary Clinton out of the news cycle.

Only one little problem recent news reports that political new comer and Presidential hopeful Barak Obama has raised just as much money as the political savvy and political establishment favored Clinton.

Senator Obama campaign has announced that they have raised $25 million dollars in his presidential campaign bid.

While Clinton has honed a vast national fundraising network through two Senate campaigns and her husband’s eight years as president, Obama launched his bid for the White House with a relatively small donor base concentrated largely in Illinois, his home state.

Given Senator Clinton's attempt to use media to give the impression that her campaign alone is the only viable Democrat campaign was false, Senator Clinton signals that if she were elected President her Presidency would be a continuation of Clintonian deception and political manipulation that was the hallmark of Senator Clinton's husband's White house.

Britian, Iran and the Geneva Convention

British captive being used as a pawn

Where are all of the Geneva Convention experts when you need them? When Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay were in the news every message board pundit, every Internet hack and talking head were instant Geneva Convention analysts.

The outrage, the insult, the inhumanity that imprisoned Iraqis were subjected to was all against the Geneva Convention and someone should be brought on charges and tried before the International Court at the Hague ! Oh the righteous indiction throughout the United States hating world was palpable. America and Americans were in violation of the Geneva Convention!

In recent news Iran has captured 15 British Marines in disputed waters. The British say that they were in Iraqi waters and the Iranians claim that Britian military personal was in Iranian waters.

Leaving that issue just for a moment it is an undisputed fact that Iran is holding British military captives no one is disputing that.

It is also a fact that these hostages were forced to give various video and written confessions, denouncing their own government, and the women were force to dress in customary ways that were not their own.

I'm asking all of the Geneva Convention experts that condemned the American Government's treatment of imprisoned Iraqi terrorists, what does the Geneva Convention say about the treatment of captured military personnel, is Iran in violation of any Geneva Convention regulation concerning the handling of prisoners and why is my question the first in this regard?

Article 2 of the Geneva Convention says:

Prisoners of war are in the power of the hostile Power, but not of the individuals or corps who have captured them.

They must at all times be humanely treated and protected, particularly against acts of violence, insults and public curiosity.

Measures of reprisal against them are prohibited.

Does video confessions and using prisoners as pawns to point out locations on a map to show that they were in Iranian waters, in complete contradict of their Government, in violation of Article 2?

Article 3 of the Geneva Convention says:

Prisoners of war have the right to have their person and their honor respected. Women shall be treated with all the regard due to their sex.

Prisoners retain their full civil status.

Is forcing a British female Marine to wear customary Islamic head covering for women in violation of Article 3?

In America and Britian women are treated the same as men so why is the forced putting on of a veil, a sign of women's inferiority to men, not in violation of the Geneva Convention?

Here's a thought maybe there really aren't any experts regarding the Geneva Convention maybe all of the hate and heat directed toward Amerian concerning Abu Ghraid had little to do with violations of the Geneva Convention maybe all of that was just plain bias against America.

It had to be because if one is concerned about the Geneva Convention being violated wouldn't one be just as concerned now that Iran has apparently violated at least two articles and perhaps even more?

So where are the experts that were pointing out America's failings in this regard why aren't they demanding the just and immediate release of the Brits?

I wonder...

Code Pink Congressional Democrats Move to End War in Iraq

Speaker Pelosi and Code Pink Democrats

"We are starting to turn things around" in the Iraq war" and that a timeline for withdrawal would embolden the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere.—John McCain (R-Ariz.)

Stategy for winning in Iraq? Democrats don’t have one. Stategy for cut and run, got one!

Cindy Sheehan would be proud. Code Pink Liberals have taken a page out of Sheehan’s Camp Casey playbook and come up with Camp Pelosi.

With upwards of thirteen days of camping out in front of the speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco residence this left-wing group has made in roads into the party that now controls the agenda on Capital Hill in Washington D.C.

The radical anti-war movement is finally making decisions for America as their influence is felt by the New Code Pink Democrats who have set a withdrawal date of September 1, 2008 for U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Iraq.

Fearing that she could not get her colleagues to go along and back such radical legislation Speaker Pelosi crafted a total shopping spree of a Supermarket bill chuck full of 20 billion dollars of bribes (or pork spending) earmarked for reluctant moderate and conservative Democrat Senators that where recently elected on promises that they supported the troops just as much as the Conservatives that they defeated.

Rep. Pelosi’s bill so egregious that Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA) took personal umbrage and took time to put it on record.


The California Congressional Representatives have demanded help for citrus, avocado and other Central Valley farmers facing $1.2 billion in losses from a devastating January freeze in exchange for their vote, that’s in the Pelosi bill, Gulf Coast Congressional lawmakers want $1.3 billion above the $3.4 billion requested by Bush for hurricane relief, that’s in the Pelosi bill. Northwest Congressional lawmakers are desperate for about $400 million to extend payments to rural counties hurt by cutbacks in federal logging that is in the Pelosi bill. As well, Wisconsin dairy farmer subsidies are in the Pelosi bill and aid for New Orleans, storage fees for peanut growers are in the Pelosi bill.


Let see that’s peanuts, milk, citrus, avocados and logging moneys to bribe Congressmen for their votes which would put a capricious and arbitrary deadline of September 1, 2008 attached to the President’s request for providing funds for the troops.

And all of this is in exchange for a virtual cornucopia of Democratic favors thereby Code Pink Democrats sabotages the war effort in Iraq by forcing the President to veto a bill meant to fund the troops, umm, umm good!

But that’s not all that Code Pink Democrats are up to. You recall the war protests that were coordinated throughout the country in hopes to garner support for immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq?

Well Code Pink Democrats are not even carrying on the Democrat façade of, “we’re against the war but we support the troops. Nope these radicals are emboldened now that they own both houses of congress and they want to let you know how they really feel about the war.

On March 18th, in Portland Oregon, USA to show their growing dissatisfaction with the United States government and growing discontent with people who say they are for peace and do nothing. Anarchists burn an effigy of a United States Soldier and American flag.

That’s right a U.S. soldier has been burned in effigy right here in the good old U.S.A.


With Code Pink Democrats in Congress sabotaging the war effort by calling for immediate troop withdrawal in spite of indications that the President’s planned surge of troops is working and with Liberals, Democrats and anarchist in U.S. streets burning U.S. soldiers in effigy it may no longer be a question of fighting the war in Iraq.

Code Pink Democrats have declared war, war on the government of the United States of America and war on the people of the United States of America who do not think as they think. Is there any clearer sign than the outrageous burning of an upside down American flag along side of the effigy of an American soldier?

Yeah one…Code Pink Democrats in Congress playing games and food fighting with money meant to fund the men and women fighting for America. That’s the clearest sign of all!

The Clintons Poll-larizing America again!

[President] Clinton's legacy is in many ways a story about polls. It is not true, as some critics say, that Clinton always did what pollster Mark J. Penn's numbers told him to do. It is true that no previous president read public opinion surveys with the same hypnotic intensity. And no predecessor has integrated his pollster so thoroughly into the policymaking operation of his White House.—John F. Harris, Washinton Post.com

Public opinion, or mobtocracy, float a few trial balloons, see which direction the herd is stampeding and get behind them. That was the way former President Bill Clinton governed and his homies loved him for it because he'd always said what was hip and cool and just what they wanted to hear.

It was the first, “And survey says…” Family Feud Presidency in American history. It was truly a, don’t be mad at me, I just want you to love me, style of governance that would make really bad parents but super primo cool best friends of any parent and child’s relationship.

Yes Polling is what the Clinton’s did best or was it Polarizing? Not everyone agreed that America should be governed like one great big popularity contest. Things like Slavery and White superiority were hugely popular in their day but it took men and women with conviction and faith to stand against popular opinion to change America for the good. If President Clinton instead of President Lincoln would have been deciding, we’d still be owning slaves today. Now that’s a thought!

Clinton a man without convictions or moral turpitude didn’t make decisions based on what was good for the country his decisions where based purely on what was good for his political career. President Clinton believed that as President if you talked about popular things you would be popular.

It was with the critical assistance of polls -- literally hundreds of them, taken daily during campaigns and other critical moments, and at least once a week all through the second term -- that Clinton refined the centrist "new Democrat" language and policies that are one of his distinctive political contributions…

Two once-close Clinton aides, former senior adviser George Stephanopoulos and former labor secretary Robert Reich, wrote memoirs after leaving the administration that recalled bitterly Clinton's reliance on consultants and polling. This contempt for Clinton's data-driven brand of politics is widely, though privately, shared even by many people who still work for him.

"He institutionalized the notion that the presidency is about policy and polls, and this very mechanical notion that if you talk about something that is popular than you will be popular and that's all that matters," a former senior White House aide said. "It drained the majesty out of the presidency. In some ways that was what saved Clinton, but it came at some cost."

Well, speaking of polling here’s some interesting numbers. In a recent poll by a Harris Interactive poll, half of voting-age Americans say that they would not vote for Senator Hillary Clinton if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008.

Half of voting-age Americans say they would not vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, according to a Harris Interactive poll released Tuesday.

What’s more 1 in 5 Democrats say that they would not vote for Senator Clinton. And 48 percent of Independent voters say they would vote for someone other then Hillary.

If Democrats offer Hillary Clinton as their nominee for the Presidency polling indicates that she is not popular with Americans and they will not support her. I would say that is quite a dilemma for a popularity driven campaign, wouldn’t you?

The question is will the Clintons leave their long established tendency of going with the polls for an unveiled narcissistic attempt to make Hillary head cheerleader. Or will they do what is best for the Democratic Party and let someone else who can win it, in it?

Survey says…She won’t step aside and she’ll lose the election. But who listens to polls anyways?

Deporting Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorney

Start the bus because the Politicalchickens in the Whitehouse are going to throw AG Alberto Gonzales under.

Oh he won't be sent across the border to Mexico, after all he isn't illegal, but Democrats will definitely find that he did something illegal and deport him right out of Washington D.C. Even if he's innocent of breaking the law.

The Feckless Democrats and some of their lap dog Republicans allies are working public opinion with hearings designed to come to one conclusion remove another of the President’s political aides.

At this rate I’d be surprised if Democrats will allow Laura Bush to remain in the White house for the President's remaining 2 years, Lord knows if Democrats come after her there’s not a Republican who would or could fight for her. Heck there isn't a Republican willing to fight for anything right now. (Troops you're coming home!)

It all over, this U.S. Attorney firings is a non-issue a so-what but Republicans are running for the hills like they are Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)and they've lined their own pockets with billions of dollars of tax payers money in a self enrichment scam, not competent politicians who made a decision and are standing by it.

Why would I say that this is a non-issue? The underlining claim is that the Bush White house is persecuting prosecutors in a knee jerk political reaction to prevent them from prosecuting Republicans. However that couldn't be true because there were those in the White house considering these firings as long as two years ago!
And all the evidence points that the considerations were based on performance not politics!

But more than two years ago, Rove had sought input from the Justice Department on how many U.S. attorneys should be retained in the second term.

That is exactly what Senator Hillary Clinton said should be done!

Yes, even Hillary is speaking up and she's admitted to the fact that her husband's administration fired 93 U.S. Attorneys for purely political reasons and she's cocky enough to say that she'd do it again!

[Senator Clinton] conceded that should she win the presidency in 2008, she likely would replace all of the U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush. She said that's merely following traditions in which presidents appoint prosecutors of their own party.

So what's the big deal? It's political! Democrats have made everything political, they've made the 2000 and 2004 elections political, the war in Iraq political, confirming U.S. Supreme Court Justices political, Valerie Plame political, John Ashcraft political, Karl Rove political, and now AG Alberto Gonzales is victim of the politicizing of everything that the Republicans do.

It's a game, a con, like everything that the Democrats do! Just put and keep up the political pressure on the White house and before you know it 2008 rolls around and we'll all be singing hail to the Cheifette before anyone realizes the con job that was just played on the American people.

There were no laws broken, nobody's going to jail but with Senate hearings crippling the White house for the remaining 2 years of his Presidency, President Bush is going to look like an embattled, weak ineffective incompetent instead of the leader of the free world! Yeah even the terrorist are liking this!

That's two birds with one stone, diminish the out going President and besmirch any incoming Republican with the memory of two years of a scandal ridden Republican White house. Works every time!

Like the Democratic front runner said, She's in it to win it. There's another old saw, All's fair in love and war. And Republicans thought that the war was only over in Iraq?

Both are lessons that Republicans will probably take another 49 years of Democratic total control of government to learn!

So turn on each other Republicans, jump ship, point fingers because Republicans are going down. Heck you stand a better chance of being an illegal alien and staying in America than Alberto Gonzales has of remaining in the White house for the next two years with weak kneed Republicans bowing and scraping before every Senate hearing that the Democrats feel like they want to call.

To bad Alberto can't get a million or so illegal's to march it the streets for him. No one has more clout in D.C. these days than illegal aliens backed anything.

Maybe after the President accepts Mr. Gonzales' resignation Alberto can go work the fields in Mexico for his next job. President Bush seemed to like it, yeah he liked it alot!

Democrat Culture of Corruption the Re-Mix

Senator Dianne Feinstein

In November 1992, a slow economy and public dissatisfaction with the status quo gave the Democrats the White House for the first time in 12 years. Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton ran as a politically moderate "New Democrat" who was pro-business and pro-death penalty, focusing on the nation's economy ("It's the economy, stupid").

Clinton won 32 states, holding then-President Bush to 37.5 percent of the vote. While the Democrats regained the Oval Office and held Congress, the GOP picked up 10 seats in the House.

In 1994, Republicans, galvanized by Clinton administration missteps (including its ill-fated national health care proposal), [49 years if Democrat Congressional Corruption] ran on the "Contract With America," and took complete control of Congress for the first time since 1955.

Further, the GOP claimed 30 of the nation's 50 governorships, including eight of the 10 biggest electoral states, and drew even with the Democrats in many state legislatures.—Democratic Convention 2000, www.cnn.com

Dianne Feinstein is a Democrat and she is corrupt. She is as corrupt as Liberals believe Halliburton is.

As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee. Blum was a majority owner of both URS Corp. and Perini Corp.

In 2006 now Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi read the Republican play book and re-coined the phase a Culture of Corruption and used it back on the Republican majority which had only been in power for 12 years opposed to the previous 49 year Democrat corrupted monopoly in the Congress. Pelosi used the short memory of voters and incompetent Republican politicians to orchestrate a sweep of Congress transferring power and control of the Congress to the Democrat Party. A Party that promised a new and ethical direction.

This is not the first time a Democrat sitting on a powerful appropriations committee has used their sacred trust to enrich themselves. Congressman John Murtha was the ranking Democratic member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and for three years he was the House's top recipient of defense industry cash. Few in Washington are surprised that his lobbyist brother, Robert "Kit" Murtha, was until his retirement this summer an enormously successful "earmark specialist" for the Beltway firm KSA Consulting. In recent years, Kit Murtha brought in a mother lode of earmarks for at least 16 defense manufacturers with business before the Appropriations Committee.

As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms. From 2001 to 2005, URS earned $792 million from military construction and environmental cleanup projects approved by MILCON; Perini earned $759 million from such MILCON projects.
In her annual Public Financial Disclosure Reports, Feinstein records a sizeable family income from large investments in Perini, which is based in Framingham, Mass., and in URS, headquartered in San Francisco. But she has not publicly acknowledged the conflict of interest between her job as a congressional appropriator and her husband's longtime control of Perini and URS--and that omission has called her ethical standards into question.

Since Senator Feinstein’s unethical behavior has been reported by Metro Active she has stepped down from MILCON.

Senator Feinstein has profited at the expense of U.S. soldiers in Iraq at a time when medical care for Iraq war veterans is inadequate. While leading MILCON, Feinstein had ample warning of the medical-care meltdown. But she was not proactive on veteran's affairs.

Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problems were surfacing in the media, and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised voters a new direction if Democrats were elected to Congress. From Halliburton to Senator Feinstein’s URS Corp. and Perini Corp now that’s a new direction!
Yeah back to Democrat Corruption!

PUT UP or SHUT UP

Chemical forms of uranium during conversion: yellowcake and uranyl nitrate solution [UO2(NO3)2].

Recently I was challenged to prove that President Bush did not lying when he said that British Intelligence reported that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Niger and that the The Senate Intel Commitee report stated "that Iraq indeed did attempt to buy yellowcake",well I’m putting up!

As you recall this statement was a part the President’s 2003 State of the Union speech where he stated,“The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .”

This statement was called a lie by Joseph Wilson IV who subsequently accused the White house of outing the identity of his CIA agent wife Valeria Plame in a vendictive attempt to discredit him.

Without going into all of the pretext and subtext surrounding this issue it has been determined, after the fact, that we do not know if Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium. However without a doubt at the time that the President spoke those words the President had all of the authority behind him that former Vice President Al Gore presently enjoys on the topic of Global warming. All of the experts in the intelligence gathering community believed that Iraq attempted to get uranium and based on the experts findings the President made his remarks.

Further, Democrats on the US Senate Select Intelligence Committee also reluctantly concluded that the intelligence received by the Bush people suggested that Iraq was attempting to secure enriched uranium in order to produce nuclear weapons. That same intelligence suggested that Iraq already possessed a stockpile of both chemical and biological weapons.

This is part of the official conclusion of the US Senate Select Intelligence Committee and statement from the Chair of the Committee Pat Roberts:

Conclusion: The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador’s wife, a CIA employee.

The former ambassador’s wife suggested her husband for the trip to Niger in February 2002. The former ambassador had traveled previously to Niger on behalf of the CIA, also at the suggestion of his wife, to look into another matter not related to Iraq. On February 12, 2002, the former ambassador’s wife sent a memorandum to a Deputy Chief of a division in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations which said, “[m]y husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possible shed light on this sort of actiity.” This was just one day before the same Directorate of Operations division sent a cable to one of its overseas stations requesting concurrence with the division’s idea to send the former ambassador to Niger.

Conclusion: Other than speaking publicly about his actual experiences during his inquiry of the Niger issue, the former ambassador seems to have included information he learned from press accounts and from his beliefs about how the Intelligence Community would have or should have handled the information he provided.

At the time the former ambassador traveled to Niger, the intelligence Community did not have in its possession any actual documents on the alleged Niger-Iraq unranium deal, only second hand reporting of the deal. The former ambassador’s comments to reporters that the Niger-Iraq uranium documents “may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’”could not have been based on the former ambassador’s actual experiences because the intelligence Community did not have the documents at the time of the ambassador’s trip. In addition, nothing in the reprot from the former ambassador’s trip said anything about documents having been forged or the names or dates in the reports having been incorrect. The former ambassador told Committee staff that he, infact,did not have access to any of the names and dates in the CIA’s reports and said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct. Of note, the names and dates in the documents that the IAEA found to be incorrect were not names or dates included in the CIA reports.

Following the Vice President’s review of an intelligence report regardig a possible uranium deal, he asked his briefer for the CIA’s analysis of the issue. It was this request which generated Mr. Wilson’s trip to Niger. The former ambassador’s public comments suggesting that the Vice President had been briefed on the information gathered during his trip is not correct, however. While the CIA responded to the Vice President’s request for the Agency’s analysis, they never provided the information gathered by the former Ambassador. The former ambassador, in an NBC Meet the Press interview on July 6, 2003 said, “The office of the Vice President, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked and that response was based upon my trip out there.” The former ambassador was speaking on the basis of what he believed should have happened based on his former government experience, but he had no knowledge that this did happen.
These and other public comments from the former ambassador, such as comments that his report “debunked” the Niger-Iraq uranium story, were incorrect and have led to a distortion in the press and in the public’s understanding of the facts surrounding the Niger-Iraq uranium story. The Committee found that, for most analysts, the former ambassador’s report lent more credibility, not less, to the reported Niger-Iraq uranium deal.

During Mr. Wilson’s media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and he had “debunked” the claim that Iraq was seeking uranimum for Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT “debunk” the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements maded by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect but, had no basis in fact.

The website FactCheck.org summaries the Joseph Wilson allegations as such.

Summary
The famous “16 words” in President Bush’s Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address turn out to have a basis in fact after all, according to two recently released investigations in the US and Britain.
Bush said then, “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .” Some of his critics called that a lie, but the new evidence shows Bush had reason to say what he did.
· A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bush’s 16 words “well founded.”
· A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from “a number of intelligence reports,” a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
· Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bush’s 16 words a “lie”, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .
· Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.
None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldn’t have been part of Bush’s speech.
But what he said – that Iraq sought uranium – is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time. So Bush may indeed have been misinformed, but that's not the same as lying

Finally in the Senate

Congressional Reports: Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq; "II. Niger Section K." is the reluctant admission by the committee that that Iraq indeed did attempt to buy yellowcake it states:

K. Niger Conclusions
(U)Conclusion 12. Until October 2002 when the Intelligence Community obtained the forge foreign language documents on the Iraq-Niger unranium deal, it was reasonable or analysts to assess that Iraq may have been seeking uranium from Africa based on Central intelligence Agency (CIA) reporting and other available intelligence.

(U)Conclusion 13. The report on the former ambassador’s trip to Niger, disseminated in March 2002, did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal, but State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) analysts believed that the report supported their assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq.

Meaning that the original assessment of the NIE report stating that Irag had attempted to gain uranium from Africa, according to this Senate Community, was deemed creditable even in light of Joe Wilson’s attempts to discredit the war and the President.

To conclude; to my friend who has challenged me to put up or shut up, as I said the President did not lie America into War, The White house did not out Valerie Plame and the Senate Intel Commitee report stated "that Iraq indeed did attempt to buy yellowcake"as reported by NIE. Face it friend you, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame are liars just like the rest of your Liberal Democratic cohorts.

The Plame Game

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald

For a year, for two years, for however long Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has known that Dick Armitage was the leaker, and however long he has kept that information secret, concealing it from the Grand Jury and from Congress, both of which had a right to know, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has been willfully, knowingly, and deliberately obstructing justice, by concealing evidence of the innocence of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and their aides, in violation of 18 USC Sec. 1500 etc., which prohibits the obstruction of justice. By concealing his knowledge of the true source of Novak's information, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has made himself the obstructer of justice.

And by instructing Dick Armitage to conceal his own identity as the source of Novak's information, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has impaled himself, and Armitage, too, on the spear of conspiracy to obstruct justice, two or more people acting in concert, the independent crime of a conspiracy to commit a crime. A conspiracy of his own making. -- Raymond S. Kraft, The New Media Journal

Anna, Anna bo banna… is the Name Game! The Plame Game is something like it. It goes: Karl, Karl let’s get him or any one in the White house, my friend! (Sing to the tune of the name game)

This whole injustice has been the lowest point ever in American politics; it’s the Democrat’s Blame Game. President George Bush, VP Dick Cheney and White house advisor, Karl Rove have all been falsely accused by Joseph Wilson IV (a proven liar) and Bush hating Liberals (also proven liars) of outing his wife’s(Valerie Plame) identity as a covert CIA agent and lying about the evidence that lead to the decision to go to war in Iraq.

It is now known that the White house did not out Valerie Plame but the greatest injustice in this whole sordid tale of Democrat partisan sabotage of the Bush White house is that it was Joseph Wilson who lied. He lied about yellow cake thus setting in motion the double political hurricanes Katrina and Rita that sent the Bush approval ratings underwater and that windswept the Republican control of Congress away thus giving Democrats control of Congress leaving Republican politicians strewn all over the streets of political unemployment.

In 2003, Mr. Wilson publicly debunked reports that Iraq was seeking uranium ore from Niger. Mr. Wilson also said his report ruling out the attempted purchase was ignored.

However, recent reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee and the British government have undermined Mr. Wilson's charges. The Senate says Mr. Wilson's report, contrary to his charges, actually bolstered their view that Iraq was seeking uranium ore from Niger. –Bill Gertz, The Washington Times

Interestingly enough a U.S. Senate Committee just like the one that Democrats wish to get Karl Rove before in regards to the eight U.S. Attorney firings, said that Joseph Wilson charges that Iraq was not seeking uranium ore from Niger completely contradicted his filed report on the matter. In other words Joseph Wilson IV lied.

Wilson lied about the yellowcake, Wilson lied about who outed his wife and Democrats used those lies to beleaguer the President and his administration for two years. In fact, Democrats used Joseph Wilson, Valerie Plame and Wilson’s lies about the war to incite the country against the war, the President and the Republican controlled Congress.

It’s all lies! Democrats have lied themselves into power, they have lied on the President and his advisers and they have lied to the American people. Yet they continue to point the finger.

No, this was a scandal of Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame’s own making. Valerie suggested to her CIA superiors that they send her husband to Niger to investigate the claim that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium ore, which Joseph Wilson initially misrepresented by intimating that VP Dick Cheney personally sent him. Then Wilson, who was against the war and is anti-Bush, took it upon himself to contradict the President’s 2003 state of the union address in which the President stated that according to British Intelligence Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Africa.

So Robert Novak is not the villain here, Joseph Wilson, Valerie Plame and all the Liberals who blamed the President for lying about the reason we went to war are the villains. All the liberals who said and continue to lie by saying Bush lied and people died are the villains. And the mainstream media attempting to point the finger at a journalist when they along with all other Liberals blamed the Bush administration for outing Valerie Plame and lying America into war are the villains.

Finally Patrick Fitzgerald is one of the villains in this blithe on American politics too. Fitzgerald knew early in his investigations that it was Richard Armitage that spoke to Robert Novak and actually outed Valerie Plame but for two years he allow the country to doubt the President, for two years he ran a fake sham investigation obstructing the very justice that he would later win a sham conviction against I. Scooter Libby for obstruction.

This event, the obstruction of justice by the Special Prosecutor, the concealment of evidence that would have instantly resolved the investigation and exonerated the White House, whether to assure his own employment, or enhance his own prominence, to feed his own ego, or for the politically partisan purpose of going deep sea fishing to see if he could discover any evidence of any wrongdoing anywhere among the President's staff, despite the absence of reasonable suspicion, or probable cause, and despite actual knowledge of the source of Novak's information, can only be described as corruption - the corruption of the office of the Special Prosecutor, the corruption of Patrick Fitzgerald who willfully concealed evidence in order to obstruct the exoneration of President Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, in order to serve the petulance of Joe Wilson, in order to obstruct justice.

Fitzgerald's obstruction of justice has given America's Democrats and other Liberals a year, two years, in which to hammer and flail away at President Bush for allegedly violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act in a petty retaliatory tiff against Joe Wilson, all based on the uncorroborated allegations of Joe Wilson which are instantly disprove by the truth that Fitzgerald concealed. Fitzgerald's obstruction of justice has given America's enemies a year, two years, of encouragement and comfort, as they watch America tearing itself into partisan pieces over who allegedly "outed Valerie Plame," rather than uniting to win a global war on the puritanical Islamic Nazism that threatens the future of Liberal, Western, Euro-American, Judeo-Christian Civilization.

Liberals everywhere should be apologizing, “We were Wrong Mr. President” or “We’re Sorry President Bush” or even “We’re sorry America” But to try to Blame anyone except Joseph Wilson IV, Valerie Plame and Liberals who propagated what is one of the worst lies ever told on an America President is simply unconscionable.

Democrats Are Hawks

Politicalchickens Now

Democrats want to fight! No not in Iraq when it comes to defending this country Democrats are Dovish.

Democrats would rather switch than physically fight, which is good for Osama bin Laden because that is exactly what he said is the only thing to end his terrorist war against the United States.

According to bin Laden America needs to switch to Islam before he stops warring against us, maybe that’s the Democrat’s plan, withdrawn U.S. troops from Iraq and surrender to Islam when we are attacked on American soil again. After all that will stop the war! And stopping the war is the only thing that matters right war protestors?

In spite of that Democrats are PoliticalHawks. They love political violence; subpoenas, Congressional hearings, filibusters, bombastic anti-Republican press conferences, going after Karl Rove (Democrats love going after Karl Rove), Dissing the Bush Administration, hijacking the U.S. electoral process by accusing their opponents, the Republicans, of cheating or disfranchising Democratic voters and causing general electoral Chad chaos.

Democrats love the smell of political chaos in the morning probably just as much as Robert Duvall’s character Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore in the movie Apocalypse Now loved the smell of napalm in the morning.

In fact a Democrat will go out of his or her way to set a political road bomb if they think that they can cause some political blowback for President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove. (Democrats love blowing up Karl Rove)

Politicalhawks soiling for a fight, setting dates for pulling out the troops from Iraq, they’re attaching pork amendments to the war budget in order to force a budget show down with the White house and holding Valerie Plame hearings even though it has been legally established that Ms. Plame was not a covert CIA agent (her cover had been blow by Russia years before) and no one in the White house leaked her name and finally they’re issuing subpoenas for White house aides to force a Constitutional show down with the White house. Democrats are Politicalhawks and litigation, politics, and Congressional hearings are their theatre of warfare. And they want to fight!

What’s so paradoxical about this whole scenario is the Republican Hawks who vote for war in Iraq and who talked about building Democracy in the Middle East have been reduced to Politicalchickens Republican don’t what to fight the Democrats they wish to be friends. The Republican theme is “Can’t we all just get along?” ala Rodney King.

Republicans didn’t fight to retain their majority control of the Senate and the House of Representatives. (Not really) Like politicalchickens many of them sided with the strong Democrat caucus. Even though Democrats unified against Republicans for the 16 years that Republicans had the majority in Congress, weak-kneed Republicans are still as fractured as they have always been. They’ve lost their majority because they were too chicken to unify and fired back when Democrats attacked the White house or their fellow Republican colleagues. Republicans are mavericks, independents and even liberals. Republicans are politicalchickens!

Republicans have been called chickenhawks for having a strong war stance though they have not actually been warriors themselves. Whether that is the case or not, the term is a political weapon used by Democrats to diminish Conservative credibility regarding the war.

The term politicalchickens hardly will be used by Democrats because it is not in their interest to do so, but as Democrats became increasingly Hawkish in their politics and as they increase their hold on the politics of this Nation it should became apparent to all that Democrats are Politicalhawks and Republicans are Politicalchickens.

The reality of it is, whether in war or politics Hawks usually carry the day. That is as it should be! My prediction is that the Hawks will win the Presidential election in 2008. It’s the survival of the fittest, who needs weak ass Leaders?

Let the chickens peck around in the farmyard. There is plenty of vermin that only a Hawk will be able to deal with. At this point it is not important to me what party affiliation the Hawk holds, my only question is can you fight… then let’s roll!

When Qualifications Don't Matter

Senator Hillary Clinton

It’s obvious, when you’re a Democrat! And when you are a Woman!

“Reporting for duty!” Was presidential hopeful senator John Kerry's opening remarks to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Kerry's hope was to parlay his war home movies, shot on location, and medals received in Vietnam (but later thrown over the fence or put though the fence...)into a successful Presidential bid.

America needed someone with Commander-in-Chief experience in this time of war and John Kerry who made himself over in the image of John Fitsgerald Kennedy thought that it should be him.

President George W. Bush on the other hand was vilified for his service in the National Guard. He has been called everything from a deserter to a chickenhawk his distracters feel that since the President did not actually serve in a battle theatre he doesn't have the moral authority to send U.S. Troops into war.

So the war about the war was clearly who has the credentials to lead America and command our troop in war.

If these arguments were so significant and are so significant today then why does Democratic front runner Senator Hillary Clinton receive a free pass on the crucial question of whether she is qualified to lead America in a time of war? Come on Democrats you know that ain't fair everyone has to be treated equally!

John Kerry paraded around his war veteran qualifications, George Bush was excoriated for his qualifications, but if there is a Democratic Nominee for the President of the United States and that nominee is Senator Hillary Clinton are we simply supposed to forget that for eight years we argued about who was qualified and who was not?

Is Senator Clinton campaign based on political affirmative action? She doesn't have to be qualified she only has to be a woman? The first woman to possibly be elected President so nothing else matters?

Will no one in the media even raise the question of her apparent lack of qualifications? I'm sorry but if for eight long years Democrats ridiculed Republicans for George W. Bush's military experience I don't see how these same Democrats who were so concerned that a qualified individual lead America can consciously back a candidate who obviously is not qualified. What would that campaign slogan look like, “Hell she ain't qualified but at least she is a Woman!”

I guess the Democrats weren't kidding when they said that they'd elect anybody but Bush, that anybody qualified or not, that anybody is named Hillary!

Democrats Reintroduce Legislation Meant to Deny Constitutional Speech

U.S. Congressman John Conyers

In France they have hate speech laws. In America Democrat Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) has reintroduced hate speech legislation now that Democrats have been unleashed and control the agenda in the Congress.

You remember the Muhammad Cartoon riots? PHILIPPE VAL, editor of Charlie Hebdo a France newspaper published those cartoons and because of Frances hate speech law Val faces imprisonment for six months and a fine of thousands of euros if he is found guilty of hate speech violations against Muslims.

You might be wondering what about freedom of the press, or what about freedom of speech. Wrong country those freedoms are particular to America or at least they are for now. You see if the Democrats and John Conyers backed by homosexual activist have their way anyone who says anything outside of the politically correct accepted views regarding homosexuality will face court sanctions resulting in jail time and fines just like Philippe Val faces today.

What did you think the Ann Coulter row was all about? It was about controlling the free expression of words and ideas. If Ms. Coulter can be silenced or made to restrict her choice of words to appease influential government lobbying groups as homosexual activists no one will be safe from these oppressive word and thought police who disguise their Draconian legislation as if it were some sort of helpful anti-hate speech policy.

Democrats intend to control speech, thought and behavior by their effort to place the John Conyers backed bill into law in the United States similar to the way that speech is controlled in Europe.

Of course the homosexual lobby will trot out all of the false arguments. Ones like this law is needed to prevent hate crime against homosexuals, hate speech results in violence against homosexuals and they will attempt to argue that there is an unrelenting and under-addressed problem of violent hate crimes committed against homosexuals none of this is true, however the only way to persuade the public and manipulate public opinion is to create images of hateful violence against homosexuals where there is none.

That way no matter how Draconian or how unconstitutional the law that Representative Conyers and the homosexual lobby proposes people will allow it because they have been deceived into believing that allowing Democrats to strip away constitutional rights of freedom of speech is somehow justified because of falsified threats of violence against homosexuals.

One thing that is for certain whether in Europe or America socialist Liberals in power will always use the law to oppress people.

Philippe Val will learn his fate today. He printed cartoons that depicted violence being perpetrated in the name of Islam. Those who practice political correctness in France are persecuting Mr. Val a journalist that was doing his job of freely publishing the truth. In a complete miscarriage of justice Mr. Val is being labeled a criminal that engaged in acts of hate speech.

If Representative John Conyers, the Democrat party, left-wing Liberals and homosexual activist have their way anyone who disagrees with them about homosexuality will be like Philippe Val, on trial for hate speech in America. A country, ironically, that does have constitutional guarantees of freedom of press and freedom of speech.

Just think we’ll finally be like Europe, something to look forward to right?

Democratic Operative Outed

Senator Hillary Clinton

A Democratic operative who worked for a digital consulting firm with ties to rival Sen. Barrack Osama was involved in what is perhaps the most brilliant political statement in any campaign to date.

Philip de Vellis, a strategist with Blue State Digital, acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that he was the creator of the video, which portrayed Senator Hillary Clinton as a Big Brother figure and urged support for Obama’s presidential campaign.

Senator Obama’s campaign maintains that they had nothing to do with the video was attacked themselves by a copy cat version of the video featuring Senator Obama as a Big Brother figure. It ends with Obama donning a Chicago Bears cap while humming the Monday Night Football theme.


The original ad portrayed Clinton on a huge television screen droning to Democratic Zombies in a stark, futuristic hall. A female athlete tosses a hammer at the screen, destroying Clinton's image with an explosive flash. Then this text: "On January 14th the Democratic primary will begin. And you will see why 2008 isn't going to be like '1984.'"

While it is yet to be learned who in the Clinton camp is responsible for the Obama video there seems not to be the same interest to discover the author of the copy cat version.

Mr. de Vellis resigned his job on Wednesday with Blue State Digital, and I wouldn’t put it pass the Clintons to pick him up on their Campaign.

After all he does specialize in their kind of propaganda. And you have to admit it was brilliant and groundbreaking work!

1984!

Democrat front runners are now accusing one another of being fascists. In two cleaverly edited t.v. ads that Apple Computer made to introduce the MacIntosh, Senator Clinton supporters and Senator Obama supporters have used the images of Big Brother via George Orwell’s classic 1984 to suggest that the other is a fascist.

Classic! I've been trying to warning you of the impeding Democratic Liberal Neo-Fascist movement one in which Democrats when in office will began to legislate Dracoian totalitarian laws all meant to transform America into the blithe that Europe has become.

Now thanks to Al Gore's invention, the Internet, we can all imagine what it would be like to have Big Sister Clinton and Big Brother Obama droning to the masses of zombie like Democrat followers in the made for Internet clips of Hillary and Barak, 1984.

Some creative geniuses have put the MacIntosh to the task of showing you life with a Democratic President either Hillary or Obama. Let me add that it doesn’t matter who the Democrats offer up as their presidential candidate because it is the party that has been coopted by the fringe radical Liberal neo-fascists who intend to force a neo-progressive agenda of government control of thought, speech and human action on Americans.

One of these video clips shows Senator Clinton ever the pabulum-spewing neo-fascist and the other shows Senator Obama as a silly cap wearing light-weight neo-fascist whose only appeal is that he is a Democrat. The makers of these clips have invoked the word fascist upon one another though the magic of video editing without even mentioning the word. Thereby defining the Democrat party, their own party, as Fascists!

To which I agree. In the Democratic party there is plenty of fascism to go around no matter who the front runner is.

It is indeed nice that Democrats notice their own trending toward fascism! Maybe they can prevent the other Democrat drones from electing either one of these fascist Dictators to power. Maybe they will rid their party of the Moveon.org, George Soros fascist elements that will be the ruination of our Country.

Here’s hoping!

Whom do you believe?

Is it a matter of perception or is it a matter of bias? I’ve come across two polls of the Iraqi people one which Iraqis say that their lives are better now that Saddam as been deposed and one poll which indicates that the Iraqi people feel that their lives are worst since the United States lead invasion.

In an article written in USA Today by Susan Page and Omar Salih it is reported that very dire conditions permeates the United States efforts to change Iraq.

The USA Today article cites a poll sponsored by them, ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corp., and ARD, a German TV network. This poll is reported to be face-to-face interviews with 2,212 Iraqis. What it reports is that life in Iraq is unraveling and on the whole worst than when Saddam was President. Jobs gone and schools closed. Marriages delayed and children mourned. Pretty dreadful yes?

But contrasting that bleak scenario is an article printed in the United Kingdom Times written by Marie Colvin who cites a poll by Opinion Research Business, a respected British market research company that funded its own survey of 5,019 Iraqis over the age of 18.

This poll found that most Iraqis believe that life is better for them now than under Saddam and yes there are hardships but they are optimistic that with the United States’ help their lives will see immeasurable improvement!

This poll also states that contrary to what is being told to most Westerners there is no civil war in Iraqi!

What is indeed interesting is the radical Liberal left effort and enormous amount of energy spent demonizing the Fox News Network as being biased for Conservatives. Yet Conservatives see ABC News as part of a Liberal cabal. One in which most mainstream broadcast stations, most major print news media, USA Today being one, and most cable news are apart of.

On the other hand no political group has identified the United Kingdom Times and the Opinion Research Business Corporation as having an agenda regarding American politics, however the left certainly will target them after this poll is published!

So again it is a matter of whom do you believe? After all that Americans have seen of their media in the last eight years, it’s refusal to print the Muhammad Cartoons, and it’s blatant partisan efforts to affect U.S. elections it would be hard for fair minded Americans to take the USA Today poll at face value.

That is the reality which all American media faces when fact finding and reporting the news is replace by their own agenda driven reporting which would rather see hopelessness than accomplishment because of purely partisan biased goals.

I’m thinking that the Opinion Research Business Corporation poll is worthy of our attention, the USA Today poll…um not so much!

Democrats Cut and Run from News Debates

"Any candidate of either party who cannot answer direct, simple, even tough questions from any journalist runs a real risk of losing the voters."-- Roger Ailes, Chairman Fox News

Cut and Run tactics mixed with Fascist control and you have the new Democratic Party.

Afraid that they will not have the cover of their normal mainstream media allies, NBC, CBS, ABC, and their cable media cohorts; Democrats take Representive John Murtha's advise to heart by redeploying it's Presidential candidates from the Iraq of American media, Fox news.

Yes Democrats show us exactly what they'd do if they were in charge of protecting America. When Democrats are involved in conflict that they perceive they can't control they simply cut and run.

Fox a network that prides itself on “fair and balanced” reporting is view by Liberals as a mouth piece for Conservatism. Imagine fair and balanced is viewed as negative to Liberals? So does that mean that only views that sustain Liberal world view and ideology are a positive force for good in the world?

Think about how biased and closed minded that sounds! Isn't being biased and closed minded what Liberals normally accuse Conservatives of being? Well now Liberals are the ones demonstrating those characteristics.

Nevada Democratic Party officials said on Friday they were canceling a presidential debate co-sponsored by Fox News, following a joke chairman Roger Ailes made about Democratic candidate Barack Obama.

The joke by Ailes came during a speech to the Radio and Television News Directors Foundation First Amendment Dinner on Thursday night and -- while playing on similarity between Obama's name and Osama Bin Laden -- appears to be directed more at President Bush than senator Obama but that don't matter to biased closed-minded Liberals.

"It's true that Barack Obama is on the move," Ailes said during the speech. "I don't know if it's true that President Bush called Musharraf and said 'Why can't we catch this guy?'

My only hope is that the total irony of this is not lost on any of us. First Mr. Ailes was speaking and receiving an award at a First Amendment Dinner, for my Liberal readers that's a dinner recognizing works in freedom of speech a constitutional guaranteed right.

Second Mr. Ailes told a joke. What is with Liberals and jokes? Since John Kerry told his joke about President Bush every Conservative or perceived Conservative that tells a joke has to do ten our Fathers, ten hail Marys, recite the act of contrition and get down on their knees and self flagellate before the mainstream media.


Let's be clear this is nothing more than an attempt by Presidential hopeful John Edwards and top Fascist Democrat strategist to control information. The plan is, if they can demonize Fox News then no Liberal will listen to any other source than Moveon.org or it's affiliates ABC,CBS,NBC, MSNBC, CNN,and other main stream media groups that does the bidding of the far left socialist Fascists.

Democrat strategy is about controlling debate. You remember how Democrats tore down the Bush administration about hurricane Katrina don't you? Well when the Republican majority said okay lets investigate what when wrong regarding Katrina.

Because Democrats can't control the debate they boycotted any efforts to form a select-committee to investigate, even though House Republicans structured the new panel along the same lines as other select committees that investigated issues such as Iran-Contra, the Kennedy assassination, and Pearl Harbor, including breakdowns that reflect the existing partisan ratios in Congress.

Since 1946, the House used this select committee model 41 times to investigate a host of issues, usually while Democrats controlled the majority. I'm telling you if Democrats can't propagandize it's cut and run from any debate for them.


This is radical fringe leftist politics. It seemed to work well in the 2006 mid-term elections that swept the Republican majority out of Congress so now radicals who control the Democrat party, Nevada State Democratic Party Chairman Tom Collins and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are using a full court press to ensure that Democrats are protected from any point of view that is not their own.

What does this all mean? It's about defining and controlling the debate. I have been reporting on a disturbing trend of Fascist tendencies in the Liberal movement.

Liberals tend to attempt to control thought, speech and action ergo all of the fake hate speech legislation promoted by Liberals and Liberal attempts to demonize any one who thinks or speaks out of line with current political correct standards crafted by Liberals in order to usher in the social change which they envision.

A change from a Democratic Constitutional Republic into a mob-rule mind controlled Democracy one which people are controlled by mass media and government which will be working for a powerful oligarchy of wealthy social political Liberal Fascists.


Fox news is not the demon here but anyone who would attempt to keep journalist from reporting, is the threat to constitutional guarantee of freedom the press.

Just think if the White house announced that it wasn't going to allow news organizations into the press corps which it felt were hostile to the President. If you think that would be wrong then you can not in good conscious fairly support Democrats pulling out of any debate that is partial sponsored by a news organizing that they do not like.

The cut and run tactics which Democrats are employing in regards to these Presidential debates are the exact oppose of the American idea of freedom of the press and should not be tolerated by open-mind free men and women anywhere.

But then cut and run is what Democrats do best when they can't control the debate!

Valerie Plame in Wonderland

I haven’t seen so much fantasy since Alice followed the white rabbit down the rabbit hole. Valerie Plame is on Capitol Hill and all fantasy has broken out! Congressional Democrats madder than the Mad Hatter are holding hearings featuring Plame the so-called outed CIA operative. According to Plame senior officials at the White House and State Department "carelessly and recklessly" blew her cover to discredit her diplomat-husband. That is a bald-faced lie that has factually been disprove by years of Special Prosecutor investigation.

Mind you, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has spent many years and millions of dollars probing the White house like a colorectal surgeon using the force of the courts but, much to the mortification of the Conservative-hating Democrats, he found no evidence of wrong doing in the Whitehouse nor could he find anyone in the White house that could be charged will outing Valerie Plame.

Not the President, not the Vice President, not Karl Rove. Nobody! Yet the Dan Rather media and the “off with their heads” Democratic controlled Congress are still trying to go against all evidence and create a White house connection and Leak case in the minds of the American people.

This would be laughable if it wasn’t so obvious an attempt of purely politically motivated and figmentatory delusion in the minds of Democrats who are crazed with Conservative hatred, enough hatred to disregard all reality based facts in order to stage a Congressional mock trial of the Bush administration complete with the flame of the hate Bush outing conspiracy, Valerie Plame.

However in reality the facts are these, Richard Armitage outed Valerie Plame by mentioning her to Robert Novak this has all been factually confirmed.

Armitage a Colon Powell state department protégé who was an anti-Bush force in the government. (Lord knows there are plenty of them!) Which is why you haven’t heard Democrats scream for Armitage’s blood (and you won’t) because he is one of theirs!

What is so funny about this whole tea party is that the Democrats had this build up bubbling to the surface as how Valerie Plame’s outing was going to destroy the Bush White house.

So when the fact that it was Armitage who “Leaked” the name, rather than anyone in the White house, became apparent instead of acknowledging that fact, the corrupt left wing media and Democrats continued this charade of Plame outed and Congressional hearings with which to excoriate an all ready vindicated White house for something that it didn’t do.

Not only that, Valerie Plame’s name wasn’t even leaked, the term “leaked” was a pejorative only meant to enflame the Democrat left wing whackos, thus driving them all into a cartoon riot jihad against Conservatives. And it worked!

How do I know that Valerie Plame’s name wasn’t leaked as she is claiming on Capital Hill today? Because that would mean that Patrick Fitzgerald is the most incompetent Special Prosecutor in American History or he is a Bush loyalist who put the interest of his relationship with the Bush administration over the interest of the American people and the country since he spent so much time and money and did not indict Karl Rove! Come on, you gotta indict Karl Rove. If Plame’s name was leaked then Fitzgerald is complicit in the leak case because he didn’t indict on evidence (because there wasn’t any) that clearly linked the White house to the crime.

To be sure, Democrats will use these hearings as their own partisan indictment against the President for quote unquote, leaking the name of a covert secret agent in order to strike back at her husband Joseph Wilson IV for speaking against the war.

But on the other side of the look glass people of integrity will see this as another attempt to unfairly discredit President Bush by a partisan hateful Democratic controlled Congress, which always places politics above the good of this country.

What this hearing represents is one of many trips down the rabbit hole that Democrats will lead this country down and on the other side resides a magical kingdom of late rabbits, games of croquet and tea parties. None of which are real but for Democrats it’s not what’s real that matters, its how one feels makes it real.

And right how Democrats feel that someone in the White house is guilty of a whole bunch of things, so it must be real, right? We feel it or believe it so it’s real.

Yeah and humans are the cause of global warming, Republicans stole the 2000 and 2004 elections and the government caused the twin towers to fall!

Global Warming Cabal Issues Death Threats Against Foes

Shut up! If you don’t we’ll kill you! That is the latest argument in support of Global warming. I must say that I’m not surprised even the message boards can get violently toxic, toxic enough to warrant feelings of dread and alarm. It seems that the Neo-Fascist Liberals who support Global Warming don’t intend for their goose egg to be anything but golden.

As more credible scientist break away from the Globe Warming meme Liberals are becoming wildly desperate. Desperate enough to kill. Just think the noble green environmentalist with high brow arguments regarding water ratios, temperature variations, polar cap melting’s, polar bear endangerment, Celsius and Fahrenheit degrees of change over hundreds of years are reduced to shut up or we’ll kill you!

For instance Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.

One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming.

I always knew that Global warming supporters were smart. Yes threaten to kill your opposition should win the argument every time.

You don’t even need any lawyers for that, heck lawyers are wussies anyway and people are becoming resistant to their lies. Yeah you need some real muscle to win the Global Warming debate some heavy email death threats ought to do it.

Next time I’m in a debate with any Global Warming Jihadists (GWJ) I’m going to be careful. I won’t make any cartoons about Al Gore or flush his book,Earth in the Balance, down the toilet.

And I’m definitely open to letting Global Warming Jihadists win arguments now since I know that human life as no value to them.

Hey what if we made it known that terrorists don’t believe in Global warming I bet the GWJs would kill all terrorists! Imagine we win the war on terrorism!

Hey, it could happen!

Russia Controls Iran's Nuclear Future

Now we know why the little mad puppet Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can wag his little scrawny finger in the face of the world and threaten nuclear holocaust against everyone, Russia has been the hand in the back of this little mannequin. Russia is building Iran’s nuclear reactor.

Just think this whole threat to world peace could be resolved if Russia would stop helping Iran build it’s nuclear threat.

Ironically, Russia has stopped for the moment but why? Because Russia values world peace? Is it because Russia is a good and noble Country?
‘
No Russia who is the enabler for the Iranian President has stopped temporarily building because they didn’t get paid.

That’s right is all about the benjamins, all it took was for Iran not to show Russia the money and look mah, no Iranian Nuclear reactor.

This convoluted scenario is interesting because Russia is on the U.N. Security Council the same one that is negotiating or rather pleading with Iran to halt its nuclear ambitions and Russia openly supports Iran in the United Nations but if that wasn’t conflict of interest enough Russia is building the very nuclear reactor that the U.N. Security Council is supposed to be voting whether to sanction Iran for.

Such is what the United States has to put up with. The whole world has gone mad and they in turn blame the United States for their own insanity.

All of this clamor for war would be over tomorrow if Russia would tell Ahmadinejad, “We are not going to continue to build a nuclear reactor for you with which to threaten the world.” Russia does that and it’s over! No more hate and death to America, No more Islamic jihad, no more little bearded puppet acting as if he is in control of the strings.

No more I smell sulphur; I smell sulphur because without the threat of Iran Venezuela President Hugo Chavez suddenly loses his sense of smell.

The world should be putting tremendous pressure on Russia to discontinue building nuclear facilities in Iran. If Russia stopped building Iran’s nuclear reactor that act alone would bring peace and stability back to the Middle East.

Frankly it’s time for Russia, China, France, and Germany to stop exploiting the situation in the Middle East which is their indirect sideswipe at America.

If Middle Eastern terrorist are successful and America is defeated when America is gone none of them, Russia, China, France or Germany are as strong as America and a terrorist turn against them would not take long to defeat them too!

These countries are playing a dangerous game of one-upmanship against the U.S., a game which results will not benefit them as they intend if the U.S. is defeated by terrorism.

Russia must be convinced to stop aiding and abetting terrorist Iran, whether their motive is to make money or to indirectly come against the U.S. in revenge, for their cold war defeat, somehow Russia has to be convinced that their actions make the world less safe for everyone.