You have to love the irony of peace activists turning violent as they are doing at the Republican National Convention this week. These self proclaimed anarchists march through the streets, dressed in black throwing bottles, knocking over trash cans and shattering store windows. They remind me of a bunch of chickens: feathers on end, clucking excitedly. They look so proud and important. Yet they’re so stupid and cowardly.

This is really how you activists are going to change the world? By smashing store windows with hammers? They seem to think that they’re making this grand point about the minor crimes that they’re pulling off are getting harsher punishments than the major “crimes” of the War on Terror.

They’re trying to demonstrate that our government is out of control by the way police are handling them as demonstrators. Of course, from what I understand the guy who is directly in charge of the twin cities (that would be the mayor) is a Democrat but these people never let logic get in the way of their arguments.

Case and point: These people say they are fighting the modern day Nazi government as enshrined by George Bush which only proves how ignorant and uninformed they really are. If our current government was anything like Nazi Germany, these guys wouldn’t be marching in the streets. They would be rounded up and taken to concentration camps immediately. Ironically a good number of protestors describe themselves as Communists. The Nazis shot Communists on sight. The fact that these people are still walking around is proof of how wrong they are.

History is devoid of open protests against Hitler. Is there any wonder why? The Gestapo would arrest people who were dumb enough to talk about their grievances in the streets. If you complained about the treatment as Hitler’s police were dragging you away, they’d backhand you.

There certainly were no batteries of lawyers with operators standing by to fight for the “rights” of the “political prisoners”. Friends of the enemies of the state were often investigated themselves.

If there is anything going on in all of this that reminds me of the Nazis, it’s the protesters themselves. The National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP) liked shattering store windows too. One night they actually coordinated their efforts at shattering windows naming the event “Kristalnacht”. Another favorite tactic of the Nazis was trying to cause chaos by goading otherwise innocent people in to fighting them. Sound familiar? Activists on Monday stopped traffic as a part of their protest.

Hitler had a purpose for all of this: he was trying to manufacture incidents that would be twisted by his propaganda machine and create sympathy for his cause. Does this sound familiar?

Self titled Communist Amy Good of “Democracy Now!” and her producers Nicole Salazar and Sharif Abdel Kouddous were amongst the people rounded up. The left wing blogosphere is already going crazy with charges of a tyrannical government squashing the freedoms of press. It’s their right and duty to bring us the facts and stories about what is going on without interference from Government thugs and they’re hanging themselves on crosses in their attempt at martyrdom.

The only problem is that in none of the stories or blog posts can I find what they were charged with. The closest I can get is Goodman’s self righteous accusation that she was trying to help her producers (one of which was supposedly bleeding.)

Amy was officially charged with a misdemeanor. Her producers were charged with felonies – meaning they were doing something serious even though I can’t find out what that serious was. I guess getting the story out means getting the story about everyone else out. It’s okay if they want to spare us details about why they’re in trouble and just buy their line about out of control bogeymen because after all they have a long record getting the story straight.

Yeah right.

It is really funny too because media types were rounded up during the Democratic Convention but that isn’t worth discussing anywhere. In fact protestors during that convention were dragged to barbed wire cages in a warehouse on the far side of town. But that too isn’t worth talking about.

You libs are truly pathetic.

There is a lot of confusion amongst libs over the selection of Sarah Palin’s nomination of VP. The results run the gamete from outright shock to indignation. A lot of the criticisms have been downright mean and outrageous. It won’t surprise anyone to hear that I’m on some pretty extreme Conservative boards. But I’ve yet to see any stories or articles suggesting that Michelle Obama should stay home with her kids or hateful tirades about all the sex that Obama’s kids are having or suggestions that they’re doing illicit things or so on. (Just because BO’s kids are prepubescent and in private school, that doesn’t mean they don’t have access to drugs, sex and alcohol.)

McCain was a genius in selecting Palin because he’s successfully splitting the feminist/disgruntled Hillary supporters vote. Most libs are truly unaware of this fact simply because one of the first things a lot of their boards did when Obama was informally nominated was kick out everyone who disagreed with his coronation. Seeking the disgruntled Hillary voters on a liberal blog is like looking for a conservative professor at a University: it’s just not there. Even the press is ignoring the tidal wave of women mad that they’re getting passed over for a man. Stories about PUMA are hard to find at best.

I don’t understand how on one side liberals demand “free speech” and on the other their boards are amongst some of the most heavily censored. More ironic still are their demands for “truth” in political advertising after some of the wild rumors about Governor Palin’s youngest being the real mother of Trig. The media is even getting involved in this one. Remember all those loud, proud pledges the media made about keeping Chelsea Clinton out of it? Interesting how all those feel good statements don’t seem to apply anymore.

But in order to be a truly good leftist you have to lie to yourself on a fairly regular basis.

The feminists are an excellent example of this. A few months ago while Hillary was still a viable contender for Democrat nomination, anyone voting or speaking against her was automatically called a sexist. Me and others laid out points of disagreement with Mrs. Clinton on several issues. None of it mattered to feminists. We were all condemned as unreasonable sexist pigs.

Flash forward to today. Suddenly in their examination of Palin feminists can’t stop talking about the issues. I’m actually reading feminists themselves and their sympathizers openly wondering why Palin decided to go back to work rather than stay home with her four month old. The institution of motherhood, something they’ve spat on and looked down on for decades is suddenly all encompassing.

None of these things make them sexist, of course because…um…well…uh…they’re libs, they don’t to explain themselves to people like us.

Isn’t it funny that they accuse Sarah Palin of being anti-woman simply because she disagrees with them? This would also seem to fly in the face of the other left wing axiom of thinking for oneself. I guess “thinking for yourself” is lib-speak for “agreeing with everything we say and want”.

Palin herself is a member of Feminists For Life. In fact, she is so pro life that she is against the practice even in cases of rape and incest – a pretty extreme position even for a pro lifer. None of this independence has won her any quarter with “real” feminists. So much for women being able to do and think anything they want.

Instead the “real” feminists are looking to support a candidate who the establishment installed in the ultimate job pass over. “Real” feminists are supporting a candidate who (as far as I can tell, our media didn’t seem to think the story should be reported) was nominated by a secret vote in hotel rooms in Denver. What happened to all of those liberal calls for “sunshine” in our government? Bizarre that the media which loves giving away our military secrets didn’t demand to be let in. But I guess since it was done for “the people” it’s okay to ignore a few principles.

And despite all of these indignities, the “real” feminists still back the old boys. The wonders never cease. The same bunch pledging not to vote for the same “old white man” are now going to give their support to Biden. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

You have to love the American left. The hypocrisy goes to the very roots of its foundations. Barack Obama (BO) has stupidly attached getting the truth out to his latest campaign. He’s even opened up his website: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome.

The problem is his “truth” site is filled with misinformation and outright lies. I’ve already written about the supposed tape where Michelle Obama says “Whitey”. No such tape exists. The “Fight the Smears” site notes this, but the problem is that it credits Rush Limbaugh and other “right wing attack dogs” as the original spreader of the falsehood.

But Rush Limbaugh and his fellow right-wing attack-dogs have been spreading baseless rumors about a non-existent video tape showing Michelle Obama using a racial epithet. – Fight the Smears Website

The problem is this statement is an outright lie in and of itself. The original rumor of the “Whitey” tape was started by Democrat Bob Beckel on “Fox and Friends” on June 3, 2008: http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2008/06/bob_beckel_on_f.php. By the time Limbaugh reported it (and he stated at least six times while reporting it that it was a rumor) the story was old news. The fact that it was old news is exactly why Limbaugh brought it up.

But this isn’t even the most obnoxious outrage from the defend BO crowd. The latest form comes from their self righteous indignation over an ad linking the Messiah to homegrown terrorist Bill Ayres (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m89m0pC_bpY).

In light of this new, very effect ad the BO camp has accused John McCain of telling lies. The problem is that this ad was put out by John McCain but an independent group American Issues Project which by law can’t work with the McCain camp.

But getting things right isn’t a priority to BO and his supporters, stamping out people who dare question them is. There are still stories trickling out about how Hillary supporters are being chased out everywhere like on his website board. From what I hear, any statements supporting Mrs. Clinton or questioning BO are taken down immediately.

At the same time reports are coming in about anti-Semitic posts by self described Muslims are being left up (http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=16835). Aren’t BO and his supporters in favor of laws against “hate speech”?

And it only gets more pathetic. In the latest news the BO camp has issued a letter of complaint to the FEC that American Issues Project backer Harold Simmons is breaking the law. For the first time in American history our government is taking action against a private citizen for daring to talk about political issues in a political campaign. Even if he is found in violation of the law, this is outrageous. I thought the first amendment was meant to protect the rights of private citizens to say and print their thoughts in political campaigns.

When you begin considering some of the other things that the American left has in their hopper for near future (when hopefully a sympathetic President will be in the White House) the consequences of what’s going on becomes truly frightening. Nancy Pelosi is seriously considering reviving the so called “Fairness Doctrine” which unsurprisingly will be used almost exclusively against people she and her friends disagree with. Moreover there is a rumor that there will be an attempt to enforce it on the internet as well.

And guess who will be running/overseeing these new unaccountable, irresponsible, completely untouchable departments and agencies? The same people who (even as they’re trying to get the “truth” out) screw up the facts themselves. When you add in an out of control, unaccountable court system that is also stacked with liberals and you’re looking at a new North Korea in the making.

Free speech and press are rights that are endowed to us by our creator. These rights are protected in our Constitution. The founders knew this when they wrote the document. They also knew what happens when people in power begin making encroachments on the freedoms of the people (no matter how benign those encroachments may sound.)

The usurping of free speech and press has already begun. It started out as limits on so called “hate speech”. And now it’s moving in as “truth in advertising”. But as BO supporters are showing us, the truth can be highly subjective depending on how you define all your terms. Shouldn’t they at least get the little stuff right if they’re going to complain about everyone else getting it wrong?

I told you so. Last Dec when Chavez lost his Referendum to change the Venezuelan Constitution, I told you that at some point he’d just give himself everything he wanted.

In comes the know-it-all elites, waving their Ivy League degrees and diplomatic experience so filled with their own self importance to tell me how wrong I was. I got tons of email from these people and was ripped on their self important boards.

But a couple of weeks ago, I was proven right. When rejected by the people (as libs often are) leftists often grant themselves powers by fiat and Chavez is no exception. That’s why the left in this country cares so much about the courts. The people are often too stupid to understand what is good for them or at least this is what liberal philosophy teaches.

Chavez’s power grab is a very disturbing development in international politics, especially when you couple it with other things that we know are going on and the rumors of things that are probably going on.

We know that Chavez has made several treaties with Russia, a nation whose leaders want to restart the Cold War and have begun invading their neighbors in an attempt to do so. We know that Chavez is nationalizing businesses in Venezuela as fast as he can. We know that he’s building/built at least one AK-47 factory. We know that Chavez is/has made treaties with like minded aggressive South American states. We know that Chavez is meddling in the politics of El Salvador. We know that there are ties between Venezuela and FARC rebels operating in Columbia. We know that Chavez wants to set up a “NATO” like organization that would be exclusive to Central and South America. We know that Chavez’s rhetoric consists of rants against the “white man” and how “white men” are responsible for every evil in the world today. And there are very troubling rumors about Chavez aiding and assisting known terrorist organizations like al Queda, going so far as to set up training camps in the jungles. With Chavez’s interest in Mexican politics, you can’t help but wonder if he’s meddling in that nation as well.

When looking at all of this stuff, one can’t help but think of Mussolini’s Italy on the eve of World War II.

Mark my words now, Chavez will never give up his position running Venezuela unless he is killed or captured by a foreign power. Personally I believe that Chavez will simply enact another law by fiat in the final days of his tenure making himself “President” for life. But if he doesn’t, he’ll install someone in the Presidency who’ll do and say everything Chavez wants.

Chavez is a dictator. As he just demonstrated, voting returns that he doesn’t like are ignored. His party controls the legislature in Venezuela and they pretty much rubber stamp everything he wants much like Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini’s legislatures gave them pretty much everything they wanted.

Oppositional leaders and speakers in Venezuela are doing so at their own, very great risk: just like in every other tyrannical dictatorship. I don’t know if Chavez has set up the concentration camps that were the signature of Stalin and Hitler, but again I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he had them.

The most pathetic part of Hugo Chavez is how easily we could beat him. Not with military force or surgical strikes, but by using the power of capitalism. Socialist states have to keep grabbing parts of the private sector because they can’t afford the costs of running everything. You see this in every socialist state no matter where it is: from Europe to China.

Right now, Chavez is paying for everything using oil money. When American oil companies said they don’t control the price, they were telling the truth. When the price goes up, Chavez gets richer. If our Congress would get off their butts and let American oil companies find and develop the industry in this country, the price would drop and Chavez would go broke. We could beat him without ever firing a shot.

So the libs in this country are aiding Chavez in more ways than one by sharing their philosophy with him. How sad and pathetic is that?

There is an evil wind blowing out of Caracas. I fear it’s only going to get worse (much worse) before it gets any better.

I’m perplexed by the idea of an author being angry that you email them about something they wrote. I can understand if they’re mad at your argument, but to be upset at the simple fact that you took the time and energy and passion to read and respond to their piece? It makes no sense to me. Shouldn’t they be happy that you actually took the time to study their column?

Personally I like getting email. That said some ninety percent of the letters I get could be called “hate mail” but I enjoy it anyway. At least I know they read my article. And to think that I inspired them to think about it and write me back leaves me feeling like I’ve done my job. Yes I’ve gotten a few really scary, threatening letters over the years. But outside of that I don’t have a problem with people who disagree. I would certainly never suggest that they should be silenced simply because they don’t see eye to eye with me.

This goes hand in hand with something else: I always leave my email addy for people to write. Even if my email address wasn’t included, I still wouldn’t be mad if someone tracked it down to write. Over the years I’ve emailed a few people who acted like I called their house at dinner time while they were eating with their family. Why take it so personal? If your email is anything like mine you get about thirty junk letters a day. It’s no big deal – you just check the box and hit delete and it’s gone. End of problem.

If you’re writing something that is going to inspire passion in people, get ready for them to respond. It just comes with the territory. Isn’t it just a touch obnoxious that someone thinks they can write something and then acts like there shouldn’t be any rebuttals or responses? Everyone has a right to free speech/press, not just authors writing for popular publications.

This goes hand in hand with something else – I never put anything in my credit line that I consider sacred. There is a reason that I try to include a partial list of works and cursory summary of what I do. I’m proud of my record. I also always try to include links to other writing samples and other stuff I’ve done. People are invited and welcome to judge for themselves.

It’s bizarre to me that someone would write a credit line and get mad that a reader went to study. If you don’t want it to be known why did you write it?

Yes I have an agenda – everyone does. Yes I have passions – again everyone does. In my particular case it is a bit starker since my interests lead me to write blogs like this one. What do you think I’m going to say when I read stories about the Government considering regulating bloggers?

I also work in film and radio. What do you think I’m going to say about free speech/press issues? What do you expect me to say about the “Fairness Doctrine” and other attempts to regulate speech on the airwaves? I look at these things as my bread and butter and you’re dang tooting that I’m going to care when someone comes in and suggests silencing me for whatever the holier than thou reason they’re espousing.

But these biases don’t necessarily disqualify me from being a good source on the issues. And bias doesn’t necessarily disqualify anyone else – either inside or outside of a particular subject. And this is essentially what the First Amendment’s speech and press protections are about. It’s the basis of our republic and it’s okay to use irrational thoughts and feelings to come to political opinions.

The beautiful part is that the internet has made the flow of ideas even smoother still. A short ten years ago snail mail letters and intrusive phone calls were the only way to talk to authors. Today messages can be typed out and sent in minutes. This is a good thing.

You shouldn’t condemn people who take the time to read what you’ve laid out and you shouldn’t take it as a put down that people, even ones who disagree take the time to write. You should wear it as a badge of honor.

The old saying goes: “Don’t count your friends by who’s with you when you’re up. Count them by who’s with you when you’re down.”

The nation of Georgia is beginning to discover just how few friends it really has. Its Russian neighbor has almost seized the entire territory in less than a week. Its only real crime that the tiny nation committed is simply to exist.

The official reason is that Russia given is that they are protecting its citizens in the regions of Ossetia and Abhkazskaya. But from the numbers of dead civilians and other collateral damage, it doesn’t look like Russia is all that interested in protecting anyone. One must also factor in that (militarily speaking) it didn’t take Georgia long to capitulate to Russian demands and retreat from Ossetia…which lead to more outrageous Russian demands.

The Russians could pulverize the Georgians easily. The tiny republic offers no threat to their northern neighbors – not even in the form of terrorism.

So why is this going on? It’s because Russia’s leader is a diabolical lunatic. Vladimir Putin has stated publicly that he wants a return to the Cold War. Quick show of hands: who wants to return to that? A time when fear was rampant and two major powers were locked in constant struggle?

But the guy is ex-KGB and he’s been saber rattling for years and doing other unsavory things for years. And it’s the stuff we don’t know that should be scaring us. Anyone remember Alexander Litvinenko? Alexander was also ex KGB and went to London to warn the Brits that Putin was insane. Alexander made the mistake of dining at a hotel café and ingested just enough radioactive materials to kill someone of his size and weight.

News reports coming in from the front claim that the US is “surprised” by the speed and advanced tactics of the Russian military. This should scare everyone because if it’s true, then we truly do have no idea what is going on in Eastern Europe. And with troubles in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and other unsettled regions we probably should.

But that aside from what I understand Georgia has tried to make itself friendly to the West largely because it has a hostile power on its border. It sent troops to help out in Iraq as a part of that goodwill measure. It tried to enter NATO within the past couple of years or so. The membership was declined at the behest of the usual suspects: France and Germany, two “allies” that are sending nuclear weapon material to Iran even as Iran is threatening to nuke everyone around it. Don’t forget that France was also nice enough to trade with Iraq in violation of the UN embargo.

The ironic part is that France and Germany declined Georgia’s membership because they didn’t want tension with Russia. That really worked well didn’t it?

So now we’re left with Russia testing the resolve of the World at large. The Russian army could easily storm Georgia and take it over. What Putin wants to know is whether or not we’ll sit back and let him. The guy is ex Soviet intelligence. You’d better believe that he’s done his homework. I’m sure he’s well aware of a US election coming up. (Any guesses as to whom he’s rooting for?) His attack is late in the year. It’s possible that he’s trying to get the old Russian Generals January and February on his team. I’m even willing to bet that launching the attack on the opening day of the Olympics isn’t a coincidence.  

I believe in diplomacy. I believe that we can get fair trades with the Britain and handle shipping disputes with Japan and many other things. But diplomacy hinges on both sides wanting an agreement. It’s not going to work if one side isn’t going to bend or be reasonable. This is why diplomacy has failed in the Middle East, failed on Iran, failed on al Queda and basically with every other dictatorial tyrant to come down the pike. Militarily time isn’t usually something you have enough of. And dictators are masters of using idiot diplomats to give themselves more time.

What has to be the most depressing thing of all though is the thought that Russians are closer to their friends than Westerners are. Iran can make all the bombs it wants to and the Russians are at every diplomatic table stonewalling on the Iranian behalf, coming to the aid of Venezuela and taking up for terrorists the world over.

Meanwhile Western powers will sell you out for a small cup of coffee from Starbucks. Our liberal elite bloats with self importance of sitting down and talking with lunatics and warmongers as innocent people suffer. It’s truly sickening.

This is insane. Since when is telling the truth about someone stumping in a political campaign considered “out of bounds”? It’s a rhetorical question. We all know when the facts are to be ignored if they make left-wingers look bad. 

Case and point: Barack Obama’s globe trotting non-campaign trip. Actually, it was a campaign trip for the purposes of tax exempts and photo ops, but it was a non campaign trip.

The part of his trip that is getting him in so much trouble right now is the German leg. After making a glorious and monumental campaign speech, Obama decided not to visit with wounded troops at a military hospital. The key word here is “he”. The media has tried to twist and turn it so that it’s the Pentagon’s fault. But anyone paying attention knows the truth.

The Obama campaign’s version of the story is that the Pentagon knew Barack was going to the military hospital three weeks before the fateful day. Thus they were surprised when uponst touching down on German soil the Pentagon told them the media wouldn’t be allowed to accompany him. He would only be allowed to take a handful of aides in with him. Denied his fawning entourage, Obama decided to go shopping instead. There is a sweet irony in the fact that the man who wants to socialize everything is complaining about poor government service, but I digress.

The Pentagon’s statement said that military policy dictated that they can’t get involved in political campaigns.

And it’s probably a good thing for Democrats that the military doesn’t. If it did, it probably would have let Barry on to the base in Afghanistan only so they could officially kick him in the butt and arrest the media horde following him as enemy combatants. After all, Liberal Democrats like the ones that support Barry are the ones responsible for the laws closing military bases overseas. During the Florida 2000 fiasco, it was Liberal Democrats working tirelessly to throw out the military vote. And when Gore didn’t win, it was Liberal Democrats who proposed legislation that would close voting booths on domestic military bases.

Other left wing ideas include making military personnel subject to international courts. They pushed for enemy combatants to have “rights” making the military’s job harder. While enemy combatants will get millionaire Harvard and Yale graduates to defend them, the best our soldiers accused of doing wrong can hope for are tired, overworked government lawyers.

Worst still is the left wing media thugs that followed the Obama camp overseas. We’re talking about some of the exact same people who reported the Haditha “Massacre” as if it was true (it wasn’t.) They run stories about soldiers flushing pages of the Koran down the toilet. That wasn’t true either. They also happily make stars out of “whistleblowers” who report on military “tragedies” such as Jesse Macbeth. Turns out Macbeth was a liar – not that the media has apologized.

In light of all of this, I wouldn’t have let reporters in either. Who knows what footage, pictures, quotes or sound bites they would have taken out of context? Just like everything else the “unbiased” media presents it would have colored by how it makes their side of the argument look. Thus suddenly the trip is no longer a campaign tour.

I have always liked to judge people by their own standards. That said, a lot of people don’t live by their own high benchmarks and libs like Obama and his friends are no exception. Leftists have been screaming about Bush’s “Big Oil” friends making our energy policy for over seven years. With this in mind, I have to say that I’m a little nervous about having Barry’s Code Pink friends making our foreign/military policies.

Code Pink are the antiwar activists who think that our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq right now should be arrested and tried in world courts for the “illegal” war, despite an act of Congress authorizing action. These are the same people who carry signs saying things like “We support our troops that kill their commanding officers” and “honor” vets coming home by spitting on them.

These people compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam – which is really funny when you stop and think that McCain not only fought in Nam, but he was captured and tortured there. You’d think McCain would be the libs number one guy. It’s funny cause skin color isn’t supposed to matter (unless it’s black.) But that’s another column in and of itself.

Our media is such an embarrassment. I can’t figure out what is more nauseating watching them gush and drool over Obama or listening to their miserable excuses about how they’re not really gushing and drooling over Obama.

Recently the New York Times refused a column from John McCain answering an earlier column from Obama. The Times defended its decision by saying it often requires rewrites from its writers, Yeah – I’m sure Obama rewrote his column half a dozen times before it was accepted.

But the worst was watching the media chase Obama around the globe like drunken groupies at an Eminem concert. Truth be told, I’ll bet a sizeable number of people outside the United States have no idea who the President of the United States is or even that there is an election in a few months. Heck – a startlingly high number of people walking down the street in New York can name the current President of the United States.

Arguably one of the most insulting things the King in waiting did while globe trotting was refusing to speak too or even go see the troops. There are reports trickling out of Afghanistan from average soldiers about how rude Obama was while visiting. Towards the end of his trip, he cancelled a trip to see wounded soldiers in Germany when the Pentagon told him that the media would have to stay home. I guess there is a rule somewhere that the military isn’t supposed to be involved in political stunts. When told that his convoy of cheap floozies and yes men would have to wait outside, he backed out. Naturally his said envoys tried several different ways of writing the story to make the military sound unreasonable.

Really strange coming from a bunch of people who as late as a few months ago were telling us that The War on Terror shouldn’t be used as a campaign issue. In typical left wing fashion, what they really meant was “The War on Terror shouldn’t be used as a campaign issue if it makes us look bad.” This is probably why the New York Times wouldn’t report on things like the national Iraqi elections, but I digress.

The other truly insulting thing Obama did was use his trip to the Wailing Wall as a stump. We know it was a stump because he took the media with him. If the Israelis refused to let reporters take pictures, he would have stayed home. This trip was insulting because the Wall is a Jewish holy site and Obama is a guy with ties to the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan. This is really repulsive when you stop and think about it. And it’s completely hypocritical when you consider that a good number of Obama supporters are hostile to religion in any form and political showboating in churches. Once again when they condemn these things, they’re only talking about when people they disagree with.

Naturally our media doesn’t see anything wrong with these things. They’re still taking pictures of him so he looks like he has a halo. They still write about him as if Obama is the Messiah. Gag. It reminds me of a High School Newspaper writing about the star football player. His trip in Germany resulted in many different reports of exactly how many were in the audience. Guess which one our media used? (I’ll give you a hint, it was the highest.)

But I’m not alone in my non-mystification by Obamania either. Israel National News.com published an open letter to the Messiah telling him to “just go home.” Even Al Jazeera openly wonders if the trip was “tripe”. You know it’s bad when the number one cover for Islamic terrorists think you’re pathetic. Maybe it’s because Obama gives the appearance of being his own religion. England’s Times online wrote a mocking piece written as if Obama was the chosen one.

I’m not up on my Christian lore, but isn’t there a prophecy about a false Christ coming preaching salvation and good will and peace and getting along but he’s actually an agent of the Devil? In a way, wasn’t his trip to the Wailing Wall a building of a temple of sorts (only this one is to himself)? And this antichrist was supposed to be in opposition to the Jews as well. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Obama want Israel to hand itself over to its Islamic enemies? No wait, he wants the Jewish population living in the Fertile Crescent region to not be there anymore. (I never used the word “war”.)

He must have slept through the Revelation teaching in church. It is pathetic when you stop and think about it, but not surprising either.

Oh geez, here it comes. A Junior High school student in Oxnard, Calif named Lawrence King who was fifteen years old was shot last Feb by a fellow classmate. Most people I know are startled and shocked to hear that, but there is another factor to this case. Namely young King was openly gay.

Despite the stunned response of myself and others I can already hear activists making their signs and writing their speeches. I can already foresee the red, angry faces of the Homosexual Rights spokespeople pointing their fingers in the camera on evening talk shows and blaming people like myself for “Homophobia” as if I endorse the killing of innocent people not like me.

Frankly I’ve had it with this charge, the media slant and all the other usual garbage that swirls around a case like this one.

A quick Google search brings up about three or four stories about Lawrence King. As with all of these PC cases, each of the stories has different (sometimes contradictory) details about what happened. Not that I’m accusing the media of bias or anything, but it is interesting to note that all the stories give the perp’s full name – something most media outlets usually hesitate to do based on the perp’s young age.

But that aside, it is interesting to note that all the stories say that King was shot, but none of the stories go into detail over why the alleged perp did what he did. The best answer I could find was King asked this boy to be his Valentine. But if that said Valentine was as over the top as the rest of King’s actions, I could see how someone could feel uncomfortable. Unfortunately instead of giving further details, all of the stories go on to talk about the struggle of gays for “equality” in our society, how there is still rampant “homophobia” at every level and so on.

I think that’s very offensive. Most normal people don’t walk around hunting for people who look and talk different to shoot and kill. So if the perp is otherwise normal, there has to be more to the case. Too bad our media doesn’t think we should be privy to the details.

What we can gleam from the case is that King was very flamboyant – apparently he often dressed as a woman, would talk in a high pitched voice, would openly ogle his male classmates and even chase them around. I guess when his classmates asked him to stop, King would follow them in to the locker room where he would stare and make comments like “You’re hot.”

At this point I have several questions that no one will answer due to the PC demographic young King fit in to. Firstly don’t his actions constitute sexual harassment? If he was chasing around his female classmates in such a fashion wouldn’t he be disciplined? We’ve all heard the story of the first grader getting sued for kissing his female classmate and whereas that is a gross over reaction, it sounds like King was definitely pushing the envelope on this one.

The second question is about the school dress code. I’m guessing that even in a state as left wing as California there is a limit as to what you can wear to school. In fact, in one of the stories I read a cursory interview with the teachers revealed that several of them thought King was stretching the dress code. Thus I’m guessing no one said anything because of his protected status as a member of a “minority” group.

It is quite the irony to think that Gay Activists campaigning for “equal rights” would raise a stink when asked to follow the same reasonable rules about how to dress and not harassing the people around them. It could be concluded that they don’t really want to be “equal” at all, since they want to ignore restrictions they don’t like without consequence.

But that’s not even the most offensive part of this story to me. The thing that really grinds about this is the reaction of the principal who blamed guns and the lack of social programs for kids. I’m sorry but when I was in school part of the principal’s job was enforcing the rules and maintaining discipline in the hallways and classrooms. I’m willing to bet that with a little digging I’d discover that there were a lot of problems festering in this situation that were ignored. So basically we’re supposed to set up another bunch of government workers who won’t do their jobs either.

No one is happy about this. A young person was shot. There were weapons in the classroom. There might be a couple of people out there relishing the end of another homosexual but most people (yes, even amongst conservatives) are horrified by this. King’s actions no matter how over the top some might think they are, are not justification for his murder.

And kids can be extremely mean. I’m sure everyone has some stories of being ostracized as a teen for whatever reason: wrong skin color, wrong gender, wrong religion, wrong social clique. The idea that such problems only happen to one group of people is outrageous and offensive. But not nearly as offensive as the assertion that most Americans favor a slaughter of homosexuals – that is “heterophobia”.

Monday of this week was the 210^th anniversary of the Sedition Act. One part of the Act stated that it would be illegal for "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the US government. This made it awful convenient for the people in charge to silence their opposition. It was one of the first Congressional attacks on Free Speech and Press in our republic.

But what was controversial in 1798 gets a lukewarm reception in 2008. For one of the first times in our history, politicians (largely from the Left Wing) are not only asserting that they can regulate speech but that it is good to do so. Everything from the “Fairness Doctrine” to “Campaign Finance Reform” is acceptable by libs in the modern day.

But as awful as all these things are, there is something much worse going on. Namely leftists will openly and proudly tell you that they plan on silencing their political enemies. “The Fairness Doctrine” originally applied to any broadcast using public airwaves. As envisioned in 2008, it will only target radio. Campus speech codes are solely to protect minority students.

And the insane arguments in favor of these things often focus on the “greater good”. Drawings of the Prophet Mohammed are to be banned lest Muslims riot (absolving Muslim of any responsibility when they riot.) The Fairness Doctrine is supposed to be an attempt to bring “balance” to issues on public airwaves. Campus speech codes are to protect easily offended minorities.

But “greater good” arguments don’t change that it is fact that these things are all illegal under the Constitution.

“Congress shall make no law…. abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”

-First Amendment, US Constitution

Unless there is a Constitutional amendment put in place, these laws should be thrown out.

This is usually where libs take on their holier than thou glow as they look down uponst me and lecture that they’re all in favor of free speech, but this and that don’t qualify because you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. This always leaves me wondering how someone so smart can’t see the difference between someone saying something they know is false, will cause a panic and leaves no time to verify versus a discussion of issues of the day. I would expect great intellectual think tanks to know the difference between the two. Since libs say they can’t, the only conclusions I can come too is their either stupid, crazy or know that they’re full of crap, but are lying to everyone so as to silence their rivals.

Unfortunately though, there are enough of these people asserting their stupidity that it is starting to take root in some places. And predictably, what started out as attempts to bring “civility”, “fairness” and “sensitivity” to debate is starting to reach an insane level as it always does. Dallas County Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield recently called his county’s Central Collections Office a “black hole” to the umbrage of his (black) Fellow Commissioner John Wiley Price. (I can’t believe someone in the year 2008 doesn’t know what a black hole is.) An even more recent example is the next cover of the ‘New Yorker’ magazine featuring Obama the Muslim. The outrage was fast and furious.

Naturally there are no similar protections for Conservative politicians or issues. It’s okay to throw Oreo cookies at Michael Steele. It’s okay for ‘Rolling Stone’ to make a cover of John McCain in a tiny cage being tortured by Viet Cong.

The rules never apply to libs themselves. That’s why TV and college professors won’t be covered by the Fairness Doctrine, even though they also use public property to transmit their messages. And thus the double standards abound. Suggesting that Obama is a Muslim is out of bounds, racist, offensive and libelous. Suggesting that Bush not only knew of, but helped destroy the twin towers on 9-11 is not only patriotic but worth investigating (despite zero evidence).

Bringing “civility” or “balance” to the arena of public ideas isn’t the government’s business. The founders knew this and that’s why they implemented the first amendment. Censorship and speech laws are too easy for political leaders to abuse and in the places where they implemented their rules, the abuse is already leaking out.

If you give these people your freedom, they’ll take it – and they’ll be smiling when they do.

I don’t believe in Global Warming. I’m not a scientist, but that’s okay cause most pushing Global Warming aren’t using science to back up their claims. Instead they use “consensus” to reinforce their arguments. This means that rather than using scientific methods like observation and testing they’re using votes of their peers.

That’s fine. If their “consensus” is good enough, then I figure the “consensus” of me and my friends is good enough to point out the weaknesses of their lame ideas. On a side note a lot of these people are professors at Universities and Colleges. I wonder if they would accept research papers based on the “consensus” of the students working together. I’m guessing not.

Lack of Evidence

The media loves to report on every higher than average temperature anywhere on the global and begin lecturing us on a hotter Earth. One of the problems is that for every hotter than normal temperature, there is one that is cooler.

The Spring of 2008 (this last Spring) was one of the coolest on record for North America. The Russians predicted this cooling a few years ago but it was largely ignored by the “open minded” thinkers in the West until it happened. Then those same think tanks ran to their climate models and quickly reprogrammed in a cooling streak.

I’m sorry, but I thought a model was supposed to allow us to predict what will happen next. If a model can’t let us predict or measure, what good is it? Why keep using it? From what I understand, there are multiple models and they’re all wrong. This is truly perplexing you’d think that they’d only need one model if it had any credibility.

Strange Claims

There is a “consensus” claim that deserts will grow, the sea levels will rise, there will be a lack of fresh water and the salinity of the oceans will go down thanks to the influx of melting ice caps.

Let’s look at these things one a time:

Assume the Earth heats causing the ice at the poles to melt. That will increase the amount of fresh water. But heat causes evaporation, which causes the atmosphere to become saturated, which causes rain. So why would you believe that deserts are going to expand? What you’re doing is confusing two things that are cemented together in a lot of people’s minds: namely a heat wave and a drought. It is possible to have hot temperatures and normal rain. Conversely it is possible to have a drought and normal temperatures. Case and point Antarctica is a desert.

I would expect real people of science to already know this. So why do I have to point it out?

The sea levels will rise. I don’t believe this claim. Water is unusual in the fact that it expands when it gets cold. This is why it floats. It also means that it takes up more space when in solid form. Now consider that when you see an iceberg, you’re looking at a tiny percentage of the actual ice there. So if the ice should suddenly melt to water, it will take up LESS space. The North Pole is nothing more than a giant chunk of floating ice. If it suddenly melted the whole piece would take up less space. So simple common sense would dictate that odds are the ocean level would probably stay the same.

Again I would expect scientists to already be thinking about this, but I haven’t seen any of them discussing it. Why was it left out?

Claim: Lack of fresh water. Why? Those icebergs are just pieces of fresh water. Again the heat will cause evaporation, which causes rain, which logically will result in growing lakes and ponds as well as swelling rivers and creeks.

Finally the salinity of the ocean will change. Well I’d agree that it might change at the poles – it will equalize. The polar oceans tend to be saltier than the ocean at the equator. This is because salt lowers the freezing point. That’s why so many people dump salt on their sidewalks in the winter time. But I doubt that this is what Global Warming scientists were talking about when they talk about the saltiness of the oceans. Like most other things, their logic doesn’t pan out here either.

Strange Reactions

You’d think that any scientist would be happy to answer these basic questions. But not the Econuts. Oh no.  In places where they reign, they’re diligently working to pass laws against the “global warming deniers” to prevent them from talking, writing or asking questions like those above. I think it shows insecurity in their theory. Their tendency to declare anyone questioning them to be nothing more than either deluded or a tool of big oil only reinforces this belief in my mind.

They’re opposed to CO2 right? Then why heap praise on people like Prince Harry who have converted their cars to run on wine? His car is still burping out big clouds of CO2. In fact, any time you light a fire at all you’re creating CO2. So the real enemy isn’t “big oil” it’s fire. And yet several of their heavier handed regulations target “big oil”.

If CO2 is such a problem and vehicles are the primary criminals responsible for such things, why do Econut leaders like Al Gore continue to fly around in private jets and ride around in limos at exotic resorts where they sit in air conditioning and discuss how everyone else is polluting the planet? Because they buy “carbon credits”? What are “carbon credits”? And (assuming that Global Warming is such a problem) why is it good enough to just zero themselves out? If they really cared wouldn’t they stay home, eat peanut butter sandwiches with the windows open to stay cool AND STILL buy their “carbon credits” thus actually combating Global Warming?  

Yeah you’re right, the POLITICIAN Al Gore would never lie to us. He just wouldn’t tell us the whole truth like that the company selling him his “carbon credits” (Generation Investment Management) is run by him.

I also fail to see how gun control, gay marriage, raising taxes, socializing medicine and other miserable ideas are going to stave off Global Warming. None of the above cut back the amount of CO2 that is produced. I do notice that all the above are the left wing platform in a nutshell, which makes me really suspicious about the real motives of the people pushing this stuff.

Conclusion

I can already hear the flood of emails I’m going to get from Econut supporters accusing me of racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, being a tool of big oil, being a tool of the Bush administration and several other things that do nothing to address or change my insightful observations. It’s just an attempt to assassinate my character.

Did I say that we should pollute the globe? Did I say we should dump our garbage in the ocean and hunt all the animals of the Earth to extinction? Did I say we shouldn’t conserve energy or look for other forms of energy? Did I say we should be wasteful? No. I didn’t.

Lastly – Did I say that Global Warming isn’t happening? No. I said that there is no evidence of it because there isn’t. I said I don’t believe it is happening. I’m open to new information, but I’m not willing to listen to fear mongering propaganda. Which is all the Econuts have.

Still wonder how the inquisition got so out of control? We're witnessing the modern day equal right now.

Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom decided that violent foreigners who will use any means at their disposal and have declared war on us are to be given all the rights and protections under our Constitution. It is a really strange decision coming from a bunch of justices who routinely look to international law for their inspiration. I do believe that the international law libs have been screaming about for the past few years (namely the Geneva Convention) are very clear on how trials are to be handled: with military tribunals.

The nice thing about a military court is that since it’s done in private away from prying eyes, classified information isn’t leaked out to everyone. The problem with this of course is that left wing pundits, idiot activists, know it all liberal journalists and pompous left wing politicians won’t get their tv time, photo ops and self important speeches. Even worse are the pilfering raiders who dare call themselves lawyers who are covering for the animals at places like Gitmo. Most of these people are upper income hailing from Ivy league schools like Harvard and Columbia. (It’s insulting enough that Yale won’t allow the ROTC on their campi, do their grads have to defend the enemy as too?)

Why doesn’t that make more people angry? Just think of these liberal lawyers riding around in their limos and dining on steak and lobster with those holier than thou halos around their heads are actively going out of their way to defend a bunch of human debris that are sworn to destroy our government and the Constitution that created it. Where are these people when 98% of us need a lawyer? Why do we get stuck with the tired, overworked, squealing little guy who got his license after spending 10 years in night school? Even private schools greedily gobble up every government grant offered. That means that we (the people) helped pay for the educations of these rats. It’s nice to think that the thanks we get is a giant kick to the jimmy.

Do these people realize that we’re at war? The Court is doing something unprecedented: its usurping the authority of the Executive branch to run wars. If this is being read correctly, all the dangerous people we’ve captured up to this point can now be released on technicalities. I doubt these people were read their rights when they were captured. I doubt the military went and got court warrants to enter the bunkers and other places these people were hiding when we got them. These things take time to get. Time is something you don’t necessarily have on a battlefield. Are our troops now going to have to be retrained to handle evidence and make reports about “crime scenes”? Can military personnel now be dragged in to court to testify one way or the other? Is our military now subject to laws against police brutality and other things? Is this a joke?

But all that aside, aren’t there a bunch of laws about the military not being used as a police force? I think there are. And I’m willing to bet that if I looked them up I’d discover said laws proudly written and put together by the same smirking bunch of liberal dinosaur politicians that still populate our government.

Okay fine. The sacks of vomit they’re defending are covered under our Constitution and to be treated as other American criminals. Now that we’ve established this, I say we immediately confiscate their pray mats, their Qurans and all other religious materials that were bought and paid for by taxpayer money. Liberal courts have been telling us for years that there is a “separation of church and state”. That means tax money is not to be used for such things. If we wouldn’t do it for American prisoners, why do it for these guys?

The next thing I want to point out is that we can hold these guys without habeas corpus under our Constitution:

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

-US Constitution, article 1, section 9

If the Constitution applies to these people, then they are definitely in a state of rebellion. That aside though, one can definitely make the case that the public safety does warrant it. Of the people we have let out of jail, an alarming number of them have returned home to commit new acts of terrorism and violence.

Moreover, if the rights of the Constitution apply to these people so do the restrictions:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

-US Constitution Article 3, Section 9

A good chunk of these people are openly confessing that they hate us, don’t recognize our government and want to destroy us. Clearly they are acting in a Treasonous manner. Personally I think a good number of lefties themselves are “…adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” starting with the Supreme Court itself!

The worst part of all of this is that the enemy is watching. In the words of bin Laden himself:

They left after some resistance from powerless, poor, unarmed people whose only weapon is the belief in Allah the Almighty, and who do not fear the fabricated American media lies. We learned from those who fought there, that they were surprised to see the low spiritual morale of the American fighters in comparison with the Russian fighters. The Americans ran away from those fighters who fought and killed them, while the latter were still there.

-Osama bin Laden, 1997 CNN interview

Unfortunately for us, they’re smarter than our intellectual elites making up our government and our academia. They know how to manipulate and play our media, our politicians and our court systems. And all of the above are just begging to be used by these people.

This is truly sickening. But we’re now living a world that is completely topsy turvey. You can’t go in to an airport without a body cavity search. Meanwhile the people who brought us these overaggressive searches can’t be touched. “Cowboy” diplomacy is being replaced with spineless, French elitist diplomacy. In a time when we should be standing up to these people, we’re laying down to die and it’s reinforcing their resolve.

These third world thugs don’t have to beat us. We’ll do it for them. How embarrassing.

This is truly pathetic. From now till the election any tough question leveled at Barack Obama will be responded to with screams of “racism”? Well it’s par for the course.

Oh but don’t take my word for it. Go look at about 10k liberal blogs backing Obama against Clinton. Why vote for Hillary? Because not voting for her makes you a sexist. Why vote for Obama? Because not voting for him makes you a racist. I guess libs care more about the plight of blacks than the plight of women. So ladies – to the back of the equality bus please.

Ninety five percent of the lefties I’ve argued with call me a racist for not supporting Barack. Conversely ninety five percent of the lefties I’ve argued with can’t tell me what Obama stands for. All they see is his dark skin tone and they get all gushy. I thought a “racist” was someone who judged people solely based on their color. So who’s the racist here? I know why I’m opposed to Obama and it has nothing to do with how he looks.

Obama loves to portray himself as the son of a poor single mother…a single mother who lived in Hawaii a place most Americans only visit in their dreams. Okay Hawaii has one of the highest costs of living in the US, I’m with you. I would believe that most people in the aloha state are working their butts off to make ends meet. But a few years later she moved back. Okay – I guess I’m still (somewhat) willing to believe the ‘Oh woah is me’ act…except that Obama went to a PRIVATE SCHOOL there.

Again most Americans can only dream of sending their kids to private school. Even if they have the Congressional connections to get the paperwork to send their kids to a place for a better education, most Americans can’t afford it. I can only guess how outrageous the cost of private school in Hawaii is.

He went to college at Harvard and Columbia. How many poor kids can claim attendance at these places? I’ve known people who were really sharp on the uptake and wanted to go to such places. But they couldn’t afford it even stacked to the gills with student loans and scholarships. Likewise his wife went to Princeton and Harvard.

What’s next – Steven Spielburg’s niece going to come out and lecture us about how tough it was growing up on the mean streets of Beverly Hills?

Now if you listen to the Obamas, black people can’t do what they’ve done in America today. And they’re going to be joined by the usual band of suspects: Oprah Winfrey, Spike Lee and before it’s over many, many others who’ll join the chorus of lecturing us about what a rotten place America is because people like them are getting screwed and have been screwed.

We’ve all felt ostracized at some point in our lives because we were the wrong race, the wrong sex, the wrong religion, the wrong political party and so on. To sit here and argue that it’s exclusive to only one race, religion or sex is so far off it is offensive. To argue that one single group got it worse than all the others is likewise offensive. During the early 1900’s laws all across America attempted to destroy German culture. You couldn’t even speak German publicly in a lot of places. Likewise the Indian tribes were forced off their lands. Likewise the Irish suffered from horrible discrimination during the 1800’s.

Yet people like the Obamas only want to talk about how they were shafted. It’s amazing to me. “God Damn America”, screaming about “white privilege” and other prejudiced stereotypes aren’t racist? But asking Barack a question he’s not ready to answer *is* racist? And the people who claim to be the smartest amongst us can’t follow that simple chain of logic? How stupid is that?

He claims that he didn’t hear any of this while sitting in his church for TWENTY years. This is the guy who wants to go talk to our enemies. Is he going to listen to their answers? Or is he just going assume that they don’t mean it when they tell him they want us all dead? His wife was paying attention to all of those sermons. What’s he going to say to our enemies anyway? “Please don’t kill us.”? “Please don’t build nuclear bombs.”? We’ve been saying these things to people who don’t like us for 50+ years now. It hasn’t worked. They’re still working on nukes. They’re still drawing up plans to murder us. The idea that this is a change of any kind is naïve.  

One last thing: Barack comes from a long line of slave owning plantation overseers on his father’s side. Will Spike Lee demand forty acres and a mule from Obama? Will people like Spike Lee even point out Obama’s slave owning background? I didn’t think so.