All good things must come to an end

With the landmark hundred days behind us, there are faint glimmers of real hope and change in media coverage of President Sockpuppet. Calvin Woodward fact checks for AP.

"That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

It actually was him - and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years - who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.

Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school Wednesday in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead.

At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone.

His assertion that his proposed budget "will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating.

He promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings.

He goes on to pillory claims on the deficit, health care and Social Security. Read the rest at the link above...it will brighten up your day.

He who forgets history...

Let us never be condemned to repeat episodes such as this. From The American Patriot's Almanac.

The events unfolded half a world away, but the last days of April 1975 were dark ones in American history. The United States had withdrawn its forces from Southeast Asia, leaving the Communist North Vietnamese army to overrun South Vietnam. On April 29, as North Vietnamese troops encircled Saigon, American officials began a helicopter evacuation to get thousands of U.S. citizens, South Vietnamese allies, and others out of the capital city. On April 30, South Vietnam surrendered.

Just days earlier, a similar though smaller-scale evacuation had taken place in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, as forces of the Communist Khmer Rouge moved in on that capital. As U.S. officials fled the country, the American ambassador asked Prince Sirik Matak if he would like to leave. Matak's response is difficult for Americans to read:

I thank you very sincerely for your letter and your offer to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion. As for you, and in particular for your great country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You have refused us your protection, and we can do nothing about it. You leave, and my wish is that you and your country will find happiness under this sky. But, mark it well, that if I shall die here on the spot and in my country that I love, it is no matter, because we are all born and must die. I have only committed this mistake of believing in you.

When the Khmer Rouge seized Phnom Penh, they shot Matak in the stomach, Unattended, it took him three days to did. During the Khmer Rouge's four-year reign of terror, some 1.5 million people died from execution, starvation, and forced labor.

I fear that we teeter far too close to toppling into such a situation again. Iraq, Israel, Venezuela, Pakistan - millions of oppressed people, their lives made better, even if only marginally in some cases, by the strength of the United States of America. Not by the words, apologies, bows or handshakes - by the strength. If we give up our strength, it is not only our own nation which will pay the toll.

100 Days: Looking back

Glenn Beck gives us his highlights of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration.



And this is Hannity's recap.



Exceptionally well done. Do I have any liberal readers? I would be most interested in hearing your comments on these videos. Can you really defend this man?

Chrysler files For Bankruptcy! Why am I smiling?


In 1958, I was operating a tiny advertising agency in Kansas City, mostly helping local radio advertisers who needed more service than the local radio stations could or would provide.


Also in Kansas City at the time was a small Plymouth auto dealership named Northcutt Plymouth. Northcutt was struggling, for reasons I do not recall, and Chrysler took over the operation of the dealership. They placed an old pro Kansas City auto retailer named Jack Williams in charge and named the dealership after him. Jack needed help with his radio advertising, and I got the job.


It was a tough account. Jack was a stern taskmaster. He insisted on a sales meeting every Monday morning, during which I, and his entire sales staff, were berated. He always wanted a completely new idea for the following weekend. That meant I had to come up with an idea, then write and produce the commercials and have them on the air by Wednesday.


Jack Williams Plymouth was no more successful than Northcutt Plymouth and Jack suggested to Chrysler that they close the dealership. I no longer remember the problem, but I can give you a clue. I bought a new Plymouth station wagon from Jack. It was okay, but its big V-8 engine required premium (leaded) gasoline and got a whopping eight miles per gallon. No misprint... 8 mpg!

When the dealership closed its doors, I submitted my final bill which, of course, included the amount owed the radio stations. I've forgotten the total, but it was a few thousand... a big chunk for me at the time. Chrysler said they would not pay the bill.

I immediately filed suit in a local court and the judge ordered Chrysler to pay. Chrysler said they would not pay. They were a Michigan Corporation over which the Missouri court had no jurisdiction. I called my attorney and said we are going to Michigan.

My attorney was more than my lawyer, he was my friend. He explained that I would have to hire a Michigan attorney who was licensed to practice before the Michigan court. On the other hand, Chrysler has lots of lawyers on their payroll. When my case came up in a Michigan court, one of them would appear and tell the judge they were very, very busy and simply had not had time to prepare for the case. Would he please reschedule?

The judge would consider that Chrysler, a huge local employer, was reasonably asking for more time. Anyway, who was this nobody with the claim? From where? Kansas City? Request to reschedule granted.

I would then pay my Michigan lawyer for his time, get back on the airplane and go home. At some future date, it would all be repeated. And it could be repeated over and over. So, my lawyer advised, don't keep pumping good money after bad. Take your lumps and move on. I did.

I did not file for bankruptcy, I just sucked it up, paid the radio stations for the Jack Williams advertising, and kept going.

Today I hear some people questioning the creditors who have forced Chrysler into Chapter 11. Let me assure you, if I were one of those creditors, I would have done the same. They provided Chrysler with money, products or services in good faith that they would be paid. Now Chrysler, and Obama, said they should forget it - in the best interest of the greater economy? Forget you, Mr. President. Its time for Chrysler and their U.A.W. buddies to suck it up.

Another conspirator is born.

A picture begins to emerge. The left had a huge plan for taking over the country. Why? The age-old desire for money and political power.
First they conned themselves into control of the Democrat Party... not always the smartest people in the world when it comes to business and government, but largely honest, hard-working Americans.
Then they needed a personality as the face of that Party. They found Obama, the perfect anti Bush, and using sly cunning and all the old promises of goodies for votes, swept him into the White House. He hasn't a clue beyond his "spread the wealth because black people have a reason to hate" Frank Marshall Davis philosphy. But no matter, he helped them into the positions of power. Now they stroke his ego to keep him in line as they obscure and confuse and pursue their goals.
So, here we are and what is our hope? Unlike the unending parade of despots that marched across history, this bunch is up against 300 million people who, unlike citizens of old who knew only subservience, are born and bred on individual liberty. Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, all have that same independent streak deep in their DNA.
It may begin in November, 2010. Or 2012. But just like December 8, 1941, or September 12, 2001, a day is coming when Americans will again unite and fight together.
And, perhaps this time, we will be more inclined to remember the lesson that our precious freedom must never be taken for granted - that no government may be fully trusted, but must be forced to daily toe the line... the line we draw.
I, too, am becoming a conspiracy theorist, and that is the conspiracy in which I believe.

100 Days and I'm turning into a conspiracy theorist

I find it terribly sad that the current administration is so sneaky and underhanded that they are turning me, a normally sane and rational individual, into someone no better than the 9/11 conspiracy theorists that I used to find so ridiculous.

Lately I find all sorts of thoughts going through my head that I never would have dreamed even possible. Every "coincidence" makes me wonder if it's part of the master plan. President Sockpuppet seems like the Charlie McCarthy to George Soros' Edgar Bergen. I find myself believing more every day that the people currently in power in this country have a complex, written plan for destroying everything about America that I hold dear.

Last fall I read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. Alinsky, the darling of the left, made no bones about his goals, or the means he believed would achieve those goals. Nothing is out of bounds, or, as he put it, the end justifies the means. No matter what. It didn't matter if people were hurt, if the methods were unethical or dishonest...only that the end being sought was seen as valid. The agenda of the left is in direct opposition to every principle upon which America was founded. Instead of freedom and personal responsibility, they seek a nanny state with massive government that meddles in every facet of the citizen's life. Instead of free markets and competition, they seek equality for all, regardless of individual effort or ability.

With these things in mind, I look at the recent changes in our country, and I "see" things that shouldn't be there. Like the New York flyover, disjointed events take on a sinister quality. Glenn Beck said something similar yesterday, referring to it, as I recall, as a feeling in his gut that things just aren't right. So many things that just don't make sense. So many YouTube videos that capture our leaders making private statements that completely contradict their public vows. So much that makes me believe that we are being manipulated and misled.

When the president has the power to fire corporate CEO's and set earnings limits for executives of supposedly private companies, that president begins to look more like a dictator than the leader of the free world. When congressmen report receiving hundreds more calls against a stimulus bill than for it, yet it still passes, those representatives begin to look more like powerful people with personal agendas than elected advocates of the people. When we hear from several different high ranking officials in an administration (Secretary of State Clinton, Rahm Emanual and Obama himself, to be specific) that you "never waste a crisis," and crisis follows crisis so rapidly that we don't have time to catch our breath, I can't help but wonder if at least some of these crises aren't manufactured for political advantage.

The video I posted of Illinois' Representative Jan Schakowsky was so disturbing - the hatred in her manner, the crazed, hyperactive tone, the quote, "This is not a principled fight. This is a strategy for getting there and I believe we will," referring to a single payer health care system. This is textbook Alinsky. This is a woman who cares not about the will of the majority, or the good of the country. This is a woman driven by her own ideas of what is right, who believes there is no room for argument. Her way or the highway. Period.

She is not alone. I do not believe it is an exaggeration to state that the majority of elected Democrats in Congress feel exactly the same way. They have a goal and they don't care who they have to throw under the bus to achieve that goal.

So now I get to the really horrible, crazy mad insane thoughts that keep worming around in my head. How do you gain overwhelming public support for government run healthcare? What could possibly convince millions that everyone in the country must have access to healthcare? Perhaps the threat of massive numbers of deaths? Don't misunderstand, I don't believe that our government started this flu epidemic. But it troubles me a great deal that the thought would even creep into my mind. Never before have I had so little trust in government. Never before have I felt so threatened by those in power. There is such a fundamental breakdown in the relationship between we, the people, and they, the politicians, that I see no way of mending it.

Perhaps the real truth is just that I am slow...behind the majority. Maybe what I'm feeling now is what others felt when George W. Bush was president. Maybe. But something just doesn't feel right.

Ralph Peters must be on the FBI's most wanted list

At the very least, he's near the top of the list of right wing radicals that DHS is so concerned about. Peters' latest scathing discussion of all that is wrong and bad in the White House is stellar.

AFTER a mere 100 days, the "Obama Doctrine" for our foreign and security policies has emerged. And it's terrifying.

The combination of dizzying naivete, dislike of our allies, disdain for our military, distrust of our intelligence services and distaste for our own country promises the worst foreign policy of our lifetimes.

That includes President Jimmy Carter's abysmal record of failure.

He goes on to enumerate the core tenets of the doctrine...and he's dead right. Read it all.

Tea Parties hit the big time

Apparently we're not quite as invisible and unnoticed as Robert Gibbs would have us believe.



July 4, here we come!

The GOP is dead! Long live the GOP!

As Arlen Specter switches parties, Susan Estrich eulogizes the Republicans and James Carville predicts that Democrats will rule Washington for 40 years, Rasmussen presents some contradictory evidence.

For just the second time in more than five years of daily or weekly tracking, Republicans now lead Democrats in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 41% would vote for their district’s Republican candidate while 38% would choose the Democrat. Thirty-one percent (31%) of conservative Democrats said they would vote for their district’s Republican candidate.

Only time will tell. If they can't find some better candidates than Arlen Specter, and don't stop trying to outspend the Democrats, the GOP will, indeed, be dead - and they will have earned their fate.

Another industry hurt by Congrssional stupidity...

Remember the luxury boat boondoggle of a few years ago? Congress, angered over the fact that some people were actually buying very expensive personal boats - yachts, if you will - created a huge tax on the expensive boats. Nobody paid the tax, they just quit buying the boats. The luxury boat industry, and all its hard-working employees, went under the bus.

More recently, Congress scared everyone out of buying private aircraft. If they could punish auto company CEOs for flying private planes, what's to say that any company which buys its own plane cannot be punished?

No big deal? Cessna, a popular manufacturer of private aircraft, now reports that it has laid off 44% of its work force.

C'mon, America... among our 300 million folks, can't we find a few smart ones to send to Congress?

More on that New York flyover

It has now come to light that the administration did have the foresight to understand that their photo op would create panic. And they threatened sanctions against anyone who let the cat out of the bag.

Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and Air Force One to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public.

In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out.

We're in a tough battle here. This is not unlike fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan - we're up against an enemy that refuses to play by the rules...any rules. Why would they want to create panic? They needed a distraction. The Messiah's bloated budget is on the agenda this week, and it includes the opening salvo of the attack on health care. If the media was picking apart the details of this ridiculous aerial stunt, and the public was alternating between laughing at the stupidity of the idiots in the White House and shaking their heads in disgust at the horror New Yorkers must have felt, no one would have time to complain about the budget to their Congressmen.

And it's been brilliantly successful. We've heard nothing about floods of calls or letters pouring into Washington. Between Obama's tricks and pandemic panic, who has time to worry about mundane details like a budget?

If we value our freedoms, it's time we learn how to multitask. This is what we're facing. Listen closely to what Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL...where else?) had to say earlier this month on the topic of health care.



Feeling a little ill? Trying to console yourself by thinking, "But Obama says he isn't planning on a single payer system!"? You didn't really believe that, did you?



There may be more than just this going on behind the smoke and mirrors. Some as yet unseen new form of fiscal torture specially designed for all of us by the Commander-In-Thief. These are very powerful people, with virtually unlimited monetary and personnel resources, and not a scrap of ethics between them. Wake up, America...wake up and fight, before there's nothing left worth fighting for.

Senator sells soul for perceived power

The news is everywhere...no need to link to any of the thousands of stories here. Senator Arlen Specter changed parties today. No longer is the least Republican of the Republicans in the Senate (with the possible exceptions of Maine's stellar examples of wishy-washy) a Republican In Name Only. Nope...he's finally living the dream...he's a Dimocrat! Huzzah!

The reason, of course, is because he's not ready to quit wielding power over the little people. He was trailing in the Republican primary polls by 20+ points and the handwriting was on the wall. The fine conservatives in Pennsylvania had no intention of sending the 80-year-old hypocrite back to the Senate (he'll be 80 next February). But, as a Dem, and having secured the promise of The Messiah to campaign for him, his prospects look much rosier. Pennsylvania has been trending bluer and bluer, and any Dem stands a pretty good chance of winning. Win, win for Senator Sellout...he's the new hero of the Democrat party, their likely 60th vote, and he has the support of Mr. Popularity himself. What could possibly go wrong?

Old Arlen says he'll maintain his independence and continue to vote his conscience, refusing to be a party line guy just like he always has. He may think he will, but he won't. Any time a vote comes up where he might be considering bucking the wishes of The One, Slow Joe Biden or Rahmbo will pick up the phone and remind Mr. Specter that his future is in their hands. For the next two years, minimum, they own him. He will not dare refuse to comply. He sold his soul for another six years of power, but lost any power he might have had in the process.

Sadly, Arlen Specter will go down in history as that pathetic old guy whose selfishness destroyed him, and quite possibly, the greatest nation on earth.

Just Words.

Recently I heard a young, female TV news anchor, realizing she had made a mistake, say "My bad". First time I had heard that expression and it took my brain a moment to wrap itself around the unfamiliar phrase.

Then there was the TV commercial for canned beans in which a talking dog recognizes that it has unfairly accused its owner of being an imposter and says "Sorry, Jay. My bad."

About the same time, on a TV news program, the panel was discussing yet another politician who had screwed up, but they called it "mea culpa". The generally accepted English translation of that Latin phrase is "through my fault" and represents a formal acknowledgement of personal fault or error. In everyday English: "My fault - I did it". But, those are words most politicians find it impossible to utter, so they use the old Latin term. Not only that, but they tend to say "a mea culpa" as though it were a noun. Like the mistake was something that slipped up from behind and bit him on the backside. That makes him more a victim and suggests it wasn't really his fault.

Saying bad things in someone else's language never sounds very bad.

It reminds me of being in the Philippines at the end of world War II. The Filipinos had taught English in their schools ever since the U.S. acquired the territory around the start of the last century, so all young Filipinos spoke English. But they were not taught vulgar American slang. We 17 & 18 year old enlisted men, (often as irresponsible as any teenage American boy) delighted in teaching them the most vulgar expressions, to which we assigned a more innocuous definition. We thought it hilarious to hear nice young people "talk dirty", with the most innocent smiles on their faces.

And there were the Japanese POWs. There were hundreds of thousands being held at American military facilities around the Pacific. The Japanese economy could not yet absorb several hundred thousand more unemployed young men, so we were "rationed" as to how many we could send home at a time.

If you are thinkling of heavily guarded prison encampments, forget it. The shooting war was over, Americans and Japanese were friends, and the 10,000 POWs held at the facility where I was stationed had free range of our base and performed much of the work. It was their choice - anything to break the boredom of just sitting around, waiting to go home.

Many of these former Japanese soldiers spoke rudimentary English, and again we eagerly taught them vulgar American slang. It was always good for a laugh, especially when they repeated the obscenities to an MP. A second laugh often followed when the MPs, weary of hearing insults they knew had originated with an anonymous G.I., rebuffed the Jap's intended friendly greeting and chased him away.

But, back to the present. I love "My bad" as expressed by our current generation of American youth. Not quite so edgy as "my fault", but more honest than mea culpa.

Now I just keep hoping I will make a mistake, so I can say "my bad"! ;-)

Holding Democrats Accountable

GOP.com has some very effective charts up. An example:



More here.

Help wanted: White House tutor

I haven't seen the classified ad yet, but one must be forthcoming. I'll give them a head start:

fore⋅sight  /ˈfɔrˌsaɪt, ˈfoʊr-/ [fawr-sahyt, fohr-] –noun
1. care or provision for the future; provident care; prudence.
2. the act or power of foreseeing; prevision; prescience.
3. an act of looking forward.
4. knowledge or insight gained by or as by looking forward; a view of the future.
5. Surveying.
a. a sight or reading taken on a forward point.
b. (in leveling) a rod reading on a point the elevation of which is to be determined.

This is a breathtaking example of the lack of the above.

Source: White House was updating AF One file photo

An administration official says a presidential Boeing 747 and a fighter jet flew low near ground zero in New York City Monday because the White House Military Office wanted to update its file photo of the president's plane near the Statue of Liberty.

This official said the White House Military Office told the Federal Aviation Administration that it periodically updates file photos of Air Force One near national landmarks, like the statute in New York harbor and the Grand Canyon.

The official requested anonymity to give more details than the official White House announcement that took the blame.

The incident on Monday caused a brief panic among workers, who weren't warned. They recalled the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Ya think?

A low flying plane over New York City, trailed by a couple of F-16 fighter jets would cause alarm? Who woulda thunk it?

Worst. President. Ever.

Update: Here's the video of the resulting hysteria.

Fox network still believes in capitalism

In a gutsy move, Fox announced today that it will not be sacrificing another hour of primetime revenues at the altar of The Messiah.

The Fox network is sticking with its regular schedule over President Barack Obama this week.

The network is turning down the president's request to show his prime-time news conference on Wednesday. The news conference marks Obama's 100th day in office. Instead of the president, Fox viewers will see an episode of the Tim Roth drama "Lie to Me."

It's the first time a broadcast network has refused Obama's request. This will be the third prime-time news conference in Obama's presidency. ABC, CBS and NBC are airing it.

There will be a political price for this decision, of course, but it's good to see that there are still Americans who believe in free enterprise.

Worst case scenario

Michael Scheuer puts things in perspective in an op-ed in the Washington Post. Do click over and read the whole thing. Mr. Scheuer is the former head of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit, and his understanding of this issue is impeccable.

Say It's Osama. What If He Won't Talk?

In surprisingly good English, the captive quietly answers: 'Yes, all thanks to God, I do know when the mujaheddin will, with God's permission, detonate a nuclear weapon in the United States, and I also know how many and in which cities." Startled, the CIA interrogators quickly demand more detail. Smiling his trademark shy smile, the captive says nothing. Reporting the interrogation's results to the White House, the CIA director can only shrug when the president asks: "What can we do to make Osama bin Laden talk?"

Americans should keep this worst-case scenario in mind as they watch the tragicomic spectacle taking place in the wake of the publication of the Justice Department's interrogation memos. It will help them recognize this episode of political theater as another major step in the bipartisan dismantling of America's defenses based on the requirements of presidential ideology. George W. Bush's democracy-spreading philosophy yielded the invasion of Iraq and set the United States at war with much of the Muslim world. Bush's worldview thereby produced an enemy that quickly outpaced the limited but proven threat-containing capacities of the major U.S. counterterrorism programs -- rendition, interrogation and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks.

Now, in a single week, President Obama has eliminated two-thirds of that successful-but-not-sufficient national defense troika because his personal ideology -- a fair gist of which is "If the world likes us more we are more secure" -- cannot tolerate harsh interrogation techniques, torture or coercive interviews, call them what you will.

[snip]

Americans should be clear on what Obama has done. In a breathtaking display of self-righteousness and intellectual arrogance, the president told Americans that his personal beliefs are more important than protecting their country, their homes and their families. The interrogation techniques in question, the president asserted, are a sign that Americans have lost their "moral compass," a compliment similar to Attorney General Eric Holder's identifying them as "moral cowards." Mulling Obama's claim, one can wonder what could be more moral for a president than doing all that is needed to defend America and its citizens? Or, asked another way, is it moral for the president of the United States to abandon intelligence tools that have saved the lives and property of Americans and their allies in favor of his own ideological beliefs?

[snip]

Americans and their country's security will be the losers. The Republicans do not have the votes to stop Obama, and the world will not be safer for America because the president abandons interrogations to please his party's left wing and the European pacifists it so admires. Both are incorrigibly anti-American, oppose the use of force in America's defense and -- like Obama -- naively believe that the West's Islamist foes can be sweet-talked into a future alive with the sound of kumbaya.

So if the above worst-case scenario ever comes to pass, Americans will have at least two things from which to take solace, even after the loss of major cities and tens of thousands of countrymen. First, they will know that their president believes that those losses are a small price to pay for stopping interrogations and making foreign peoples like us more. And second, they will see Osama bin Laden's shy smile turn into a calm and beautiful God-is-Great grin.

Just in case you missed it...

Here's Liz Cheney eating MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell alive. Just love that Cheney family!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Barney Frank in 2005: Housing isn't like dot-com

A housing bubble? No way! Prices may "ebb and flow" but housing won't collapse! What's all the fuss about? Clueless as usual.

Goss: I was there - so were you

They can try to say they weren't briefed. They can squirm and wiggle and try to weasel out of responsibility. But Porter Goss is having none of it.

A disturbing epidemic of amnesia seems to be plaguing my former colleagues on Capitol Hill. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, members of the committees charged with overseeing our nation's intelligence services had no higher priority than stopping al-Qaeda. In the fall of 2002, while I was chairman of the House intelligence committee, senior members of Congress were briefed on the CIA's "High Value Terrorist Program," including the development of "enhanced interrogation techniques" and what those techniques were. This was not a one-time briefing but an ongoing subject with lots of back and forth between those members and the briefers.

Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience.

Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

-- The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

-- We understood what the CIA was doing.

-- We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.

-- We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.

-- On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues. They did not vote to stop authorizing CIA funding. And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted. And shifted they have.

[snip]

Our enemies do not subscribe to the rules of the Marquis of Queensbury. "Name, rank and serial number" does not apply to non-state actors but is, regrettably, the only question this administration wants us to ask. Instead of taking risks, our intelligence officers will soon resort to wordsmithing cables to headquarters while opportunities to neutralize brutal radicals are lost.

The days of fortress America are gone. We are the world's superpower. We can sit on our hands or we can become engaged to improve global human conditions. The bottom line is that we cannot succeed unless we have good intelligence. Trading security for partisan political popularity will ensure that our secrets are not secret and that our intelligence is destined to fail us.

There's a good deal more, and it's well worth the click. Not only was Mr. Goss Director of the CIA (2004-2006), he was also chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (1997-2004). If anyone is in a position to know what really went on behind closed doors, he is. Kudos to him for his politically unpopular courage.

What does he really think?

Good old Burt Prelutsky! He is one writer who knows how to say it like it is. From his column today:

"I have long wondered how it is that something as asinine and clearly un-American as the Congressional Black Caucus can exist. I mean, as embarrassing as the rest of Congress is, these jackasses take the prize. The idea that members of the House should be separated on the basis of color, even on a voluntary basis, is undeniably racist."

Just in case you didn't get the point, he went on to call them "left-wing lunkheads" and "loonies".

Any questions?

The trouble with teleprompter dependency

Sometimes those pesky electronic gadgets don't work exactly as expected. When you're using them in a very public way, that can leave you looking like a bit of a dolt.

Another Expert Not Consulted

Retired Marine Corps Lt. Colonel Oliver North is what you get when a military expert is finally freed to talk... to express his opinion without the constraints imposed by his position as an on-duty military officer.

We all saw his steadiness during the Iran-Contra show-hearings. We witnessed the way his knowledge and his honesty revealed the 911 Commission Hearings to be a farce.

This past week he turned another bright light on the foolishness of Washington politicians. North predicted, accurately, I imagine, that the recently released memos will look very different when they are read by young Islamist hotheads on the Arab street.

When world-class forgers finish with them, they will tell a story, not of water-boarding (an experience endured by many of our own military personnel) but of truly horrendous torture, inflicted for things like the mere suspicion of being a Muslim. The fact that they were released as official U. S. Government documents, will make it so easy for them to be believed. The Obama administration says the info was already "out there". In part that is true... but it was out there as accusations, not an official acknowledgement.

I can readily imagine the laughter in top Al Qaeda circles as they discuss this wonderful gift from America's new president.

Because the picture in the last post is just too hideous...

Here's our lovely Mackenzie and her date, Tito, leaving for Prom tonight. Much easier on the eyes, don't you think?

Obama Worship (Barf alert!)

From paintings likening him to Jesus Christ to re-written lyrics to Jesus Christ Superstar, the left and other ignoramuses are pulling out all the stops for The Messiah's 100th day in office. Obviously, they still aren't paying attention. NewsBusters has the details...here are a few vomitous excerpts, if you can stomach them.

The 30" x 54" acrylic painting on canvas depicts President Obama appearing much like Jesus Christ on the Cross; atop his head, a crown of thorns. Behind him, the dark veil being lifted (or lowered) on the Presidential Seal. But is he revealing or concealing and is he being crucified or glorified?

D'Antuono insists that this piece is a mirror; reflecting the personal opinions and emotions of the viewer; that "The Truth" like beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. D'Antuono expects that individual interpretations will vary as widely as they do in the political arena. The work will be seen by one viewer at a time behind a voting booth-inspired public installation.

At least no one will risk being photographed actually looking at the hideous thing.

Matching the theme of "The Truth" painting is Joe Klein singing 100 day mark praises (while excoriating the "satanic" George W. Bush) of his beloved Barack about his recent Georgetown University speech in his current Time Magazine column:

The combination of candor and vision and the patient explanation of complex issues was Obama at his best -- and more than any other moment of his first 100 days in office, it summed up the purpose of his presidency: a radical change of course not just from his predecessor, not just from the 30-year Reagan era but also from the quick-fix, sugar-rush, attention-deficit society of the postmodern age.

...The most important thing we now know about Barack Obama, after nearly 100 days in office, is that he means to confront that way of life directly and profoundly, to exchange sand for rock if he can. Whether you agree with him or not -- whether you think he is too ambitious or just plain wrong -- his is as serious and challenging a presidency as we have had in quite some time . . .

Perhaps Obama's most dramatic departure from the recent past is his public presence: cool where George W. Bush seemed hot, fluent where Bush seemed tongue-tied, palliative rather than hortative. Bush would never admit a mistake, but Obama said the words plainly -- 'I made a mistake' -- when his appointment of Tom Daschle as health-care czar tanked, one of the few significant setbacks during his time in office.

So it's apparently perfectly swell to be a walking disaster area, as long as you're composed when you have to face the music. Good to know.

Perhaps Joe Klein or another Obama worshiper, Chris Matthews, should audition to sing I Don't Know Why Why I Love Him to the tune of I Don't Know How To Love Him from Jesus Christ Superstar to serenade "The Truth" painting when it is unveiled at Union Square on Wednesday.

I don't know why I love him,
My Barack, my Obama;
I've been charmed, yes really charmed,
By his trim physique, so slim and sleek--
I'm awed by his mystique.

I don't know why he's running,
I don't see any substance;
No real plan, flash in the pan,
And I've heard such empty words before
That when I close my eyes
He's just a bore.

But I like his face,
And I like his voice;
Makes my heartbeat race!
Makes me feel all moist!
I never thought I'd come to this:
Obama is my choice.

Don't you think it's rather shallow
I should vote for this fellow?
I'm the one who's always been
So pure, so pissed, so feminist;
I don't need men, oh no--
He scares me so.

But I like his face,
And I like his voice;
Makes my heartbeat race!
Makes me feel all moist!
I never thought I'd come to this:
Obama is my choice.

Yet, like in a romance novel,
I'm in love with a male model;
I've got to look! He signed my book!
My heart runs wild! I'll bear his child!
I want the world to know:
He's my "Big O"!
Obama, go!
I love you so!

Now I ask you....have you ever heard anything more pathetic in your entire life? Look me in the eye and tell me that we don't need some kind of intelligence/knowledge/living in the real world test before we allow these morons to vote! This is an important decision, folks...the very future of the world should not be determined by who is best able to stir the hormones or induce religious experiences. These people are truly criminally ignorant. If you know one, slap them upside the head for me, will ya?

Obamessiah Sucks...relatively speaking

NewsBusters reports on today's episode of Fox News Watch.

On Saturday’s Fox News Watch, conservative panelist Jim Pinkerton pointed out that, contrary to the impression given by the mainstream media, President Barack Obama’s approval rating, as measured by Gallup, is relatively low compared to his recent predecessors for the 100-day mark, and is even below where President George W. Bush was after his first 100 days. Pinkerton observed: "Judith Klnghoffer, writing for the History News Network, made the point that Obama actually ranks seventh of the last nine presidents in Gallup poll opinion ratings. So seventh out of nine isn't so good."

Judith Klinghoffer’s article, "Obama’s Polls Trail Those of W.; Gallup Covers it Up," [1] notes that Bush’s approval rating taken by Gallup stood at 62 percent after his first 100 days, while Obama’s currently stands at 56 percent.

[snip]

JON SCOTT: Day one, Barack Obama sworn in as our 44th President back in January. Now, just days away from the 100-day mark. All right, Jim, how are the media going to observe this 100th day?

JIM PINKERTON: Well, I mean, as President Obama has the benefit, he's the first black President to anything, so it's kind of exciting. Even people who don't like him are still sort of intrigued by him and his family and so on, But every now and then, you have to apply some sort of metrics to get some grip on where we are, and Judith Klnghoffer, writing for the History News Network, made the point that Obama actually ranks seventh of the last nine presidents in Gallup poll opinion ratings. So seventh out of nine isn’t so good.

...

SCOTT: And in the first term, George Bush had a 60 percent approval rating after his first 100 days-

PINKERTON: And Bush 41 as well, who I worked for way back when. And Laura Bush has a higher rating than Michelle Obama.

SCOTT: Is that going to get mentioned in the press?

PINKERTON: You just wouldn't know it from reading the mainstream media.

MARISA GUTHRIE, BROADCAST AND CABLE MAGAZINE: No, there was a story, there was a New York Times op-ed written by one of the directors at the Pew Center who said that Obama's ratings are mirroring George Bush's ratings in his second term.

PINKERTON: But, okay, but mirroring implies same whereas actually lower is lower.

Indeed.

I watch the Rasmussen Tracking Poll every day. The trend is slowly downward...every time "strongly approve" minus "strongly disapprove" gets down to two, something happens to cheer the masses and bump the margin back up to five, or even seven. But it hasn't been in the double digits since March, and will soon hit negative numbers for the first time, I'm sure. Think that'll make headlines? It will here, I promise!

Left-wingers realizing feeding the car is just plain crazy

Investor's Business Daily reports that California may be ready to "shuck corn ethanol."

California regulators have apparently discovered it ain't easy being green. The California Air Resources Board began two days of hearings in Sacramento on Thursday on a proposed Low Carbon Fuel Standard which considers the carbon intensity of fuels during a given fuel's entire life cycle.

The California Environmental Protection Agency apparently has concluded that corn ethanol would not help the state implement Executive Order S-1-07. The order, signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Jan. 18, 2007, mandated a 10% reduction in the carbon intensity of the state's fuels by 2020. Fuels deemed to have low carbon intensity earn credits toward that goal.

With 20-20 hindsight, the California EPA, by dropping ethanol for now as a cure-all for climate change, is doing the right thing for the wrong reason. "Ethanol is a good fuel, but how it is produced is problematic," Dimitri Stanich, public information officer for the California EPA, said in an interview with World Net Daily. "The corn ethanol industry has to figure out another way to process corn into ethanol that is not so corn-intensive."

Emphasis mine. That quote wins the award for the Lunatic Statement of the Week. Now they're supposed to make fuel out of...air?

100 Days, 100 Mistakes

Bookmark it...excellent reference material. From the New York Post.

1. "Obama criticized pork barrel spending in the form of 'earmarks,' urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress. 'Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability,' Obama said." -- McClatchy, 3/11

2. "There is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means and we're going to have to make some adjustments." -- Obama during the campaign.

3. This year's budget deficit: $1.5 trillion.

4. Asks his Cabinet to cut costs in their departments by $100 million -- a whopping .0027%!

5. "The White House says the president is unaware of the tea parties." -- ABC News, 4/15

6. "Mr. Obama is an accomplished orator but is becoming known in America as the 'teleprompt president' over his reliance on the machine when he gives a speech." -- Sky News, 3/18

7. In early February, the 2010 census was moved out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House, politicizing how federal aid is distributed and electoral districts are drawn.

8. Obama taps Nancy Killefer for a new administration job, First Chief Performance Officer -- to police government spending. But it surfaces that Killefer had performance issues of her own -- a tax lien was slapped on her DC home in 2005 for failure to pay unemployment compensation tax on household help. She withdrew.

9. Turkey tried to block the appointment of Anders Fogh Rasmussen as new NATO secretary general because he didn't properly punish the Danish cartoonist who caricatured Mohammed. France's Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany's Angela Merkel were outraged; Obama said he supported Turkey's induction into the European Union.

10. . . . and he never mentioned the Armenian genocide.

And they're just getting warmed up.

Just Doodlin'

I just read 3 of April's most recent entries and feel I must enter one of my own. If you think she might be a right-wing nutjob, wait until you read this...
I don't know if any of you remember a book/movie entitled "The Boys From Brazil" but it was about some German boys sent to Brazil to take over after the Nazi's had lost power in Germany. They were very deep cover Nazi plants. If anyone out there can't see the similarity between the Nazis and the Jihadists, except that the Nazis were far less violent, they just aren't paying attention. Obama, in his own book, slipped up and showed his true ties when he said, and I paraphrase, depending on which way the wind is blowing, I'd side with the Muslims. His favorite music is the evening call to prayer for the Muslims. Here is why I feel this way:
1. He has yet to show his original birth certificate.
2. His African grandmother claims she attended his birth and she was NOT in the USA at the time.
3. He has yet to explain how he was able to afford college.
4. He has refused to allow the colleges to release any information about his attendance.
5. His relationship to American terrorists and a radical preacher continue his education as a rabble rouser in the city of Chicago.
6. His questionable relationships with criminals further my belief that he is nothing more than a shady person as well.
7. His inability to distinguish right from wrong when it comes to what is good for this country is incredible.
I could go on, but who would read it? I could site various articles about him, but who believes it? We all can look back 4 years from now when we have NOTHING left of our country and say "how did we let this happen?"
If we don't, every one of us, get off our asses and participate in the only thing that will express our disgust with this administration, we will lose. We are not radicals that scream and shout and ruin other peoples property. We are conservative Americans that express our displeasure in a comparitively quiet way at TEA PARTIES. The final count isn't in but about 1 million quiet souls took to various locations around the USA on the 15th of April to demonstrate our displeasure with the current state of affairs concerning SPENDING. Taxes and our displeasure with those were a very small part of why I was there. I went to show the important people around me that I can't support this administration. I can't support our continuing over spending.
The idiot that represents POTUS at press conferences these days tried to spin the importance of reducing the proposed budget by $100,000,000.00, claiming how significant that was, when just the previous week he claimed that the $80,000,000,000.00 in pork added to the bailout bill was a tiny fraction of the overall bill and really rather insignificant. I can't believe the caring American public will put up with this kind of BS very much longer... Unfortunately, the Main Stream Media doesn't report the significance of statements like these. They gloss over the mistakes of judgement the O bow ma administration makes and put a spin on everything he does to make it palletible to the average Joe who doesn't bother to check anything out. That is going to change.
Boy, I didn't mean to go on like this. If you've read this far, God bless you. I'll close by saying this: I don't hate many things and I discourage my children from using the word "hate" in their everyday vocabulary, but, I hate what is happening to my country. JC

Misplaced priorities

It's no secret that I think that the Obama administration is showing signs of being the most incompetent, dishonest group of people ever to occupy the White House. But now I'm beginning to think that they are not only incompetent and dishonest, but also just plain stupid.

Does it make any sense whatsoever to alienate the CIA? Is there any possible good that can come of this?

In a letter from the Justice Department to a federal judge yesterday, the Obama administration announced that the Pentagon would turn over to the American Civil Liberties Union 44 photographs showing detainee abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq during the Bush administration.

[snip]

[S]ome experts say the move could have a chilling effect on the CIA even beyond President Obama's decision last week to release the so-called "torture memos."

Calling the ACLU push to release the photographs "prurient" and "reprehensible," Dr. Mark M. Lowenthal, former Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Analysis and Production, tells ABC News that the Obama administration should have taken the case all the way to the Supreme Court.

"They should have fought it all the way; if they lost, they lost," Lowenthal said. "There's nothing to be gained from it. There's no substantive reason why those photos have to be released."

Lowenthal said the president's moves in the last week have left many in the CIA dispirited, based on "the undercurrent I've been getting from colleagues still in the building, or colleagues who have left not that long ago."

"We ask these people to do extremely dangerous things, things they've been ordered to do by legal authorities, with the understanding that they will get top cover if something goes wrong," Lowenthal says. "They don't believe they have that cover anymore." Releasing the photographs "will make it much worse," he said.

Even though President Obama has announced that the Justice Department will not prosecute CIA officers who were operating within the four corners of what they'd been told was the law, Lowenthal says members of the CIA are worried. "They feel exposed already, and this is going to increase drumbeat for an investigation or a commission" to explore detainee treatment during the Bush years, he said. "It's going to make it much harder to resist, and they fear they're then going to be thrown over."

Maybe it's just me. Maybe I really am a right-wing radical nutjob. But it just seems to me that one of the top priorities of any administration, given the current level of extreme international threats, should be to keep its intelligence community happy and secure. How can this decision possibly further the cause of this country?

Coming on the heels of the decision to release (damning, country endangering portions of) the torture memos, and the discussions of prosecuting members of the previous administration, this strikes me as an almost suicidal move. The Messiah is removing all incentive for cooperation from group after group. The message is clear - we will order you to risk your life for your country, but we won't risk our political standing to cover you if there's any sign of trouble...you're on your own, sucka! There should be no surprise when those in service suddenly become much less productive.

"Covert" and "transparency" are two words that just don't mix. Any idiot should be able to figure that out.

And what would you have him do, Congressman?

David Obey (D-WI) is less than thrilled with the Apologist-in-Chief's Afghanistan strategy.

Democratic fears over President Barack Obama’s Afghan-Pakistan policy spilled into the open Thursday as House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey warned he is “very concerned that it is going to wind up with us stuck in a problem at nobody knows how to get out of.”

After nearly eight years of war, largely in Iraq, Obey said the United States risks becoming consumed by another eight years of conflict that would “devour” President Barack Obama’s ability to make progress elsewhere.

“We can’t approach problems as if we’re permanent President of the Optimist Club,” he said in what some saw as a dig at the White House. “We have got to look at realities.”

Exactly what would you propose, Congressman? The tone of your words makes it seem that you would prefer to see us walk away from Afghanistan, because victory is not "realistic." Have you consider the reality of that scenario, I wonder?

Pakistan could be just days away from being a failed state, overrun by al Qaeda and the Taliban. Pakistan - just another one of those "tiny countries"? Pakistan's population is over 175 million, more than half our own. Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons, just the kind of toys Osama bin Laden would love to commandeer. If we left Afghanistan now, it would guarantee the failure of both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Once in control of more than 200 million people, how long do you suppose it would take the enemy to recruit and train millions of young hotheads to form a massive army of murderers?

If we left the region, there would be nothing to deter Iran from invading Iraq and erasing our hard earned gains there. Once on the march, radical Islam will not slow down - rather, emboldened, they will sweep nation after nation until their vision of a global caliphate is fulfilled.

You want to look at realities, Congressman? That's reality. This is an existential struggle in which we find ourselves. We did not ask for it, we may not like it, but unless you want to see your wife in a burka, you better get your priorities straight. This is perhaps the only thing that Obama has gotten even half right since taking office. If you care a whit for your country, you will get behind him all the way.

My final word on torture

Waterboarding...is it or isn't it?

I DON'T CARE!

We are talking about the worst imaginable examples of humanity in existence today. These are men who would behead my precious little two year old grandson and laugh. They are animals, so indoctrinated in a perverted religion that they are utterly incapable of co-existing with reasonable people - and liberals worry about their "rights"? Give me a break.

Sometimes I forget that not everyone pays attention. You know how it goes...there are things that each of us know, and have known for a very long time - so long that we can no longer remember a time when we didn't know them. It is almost impossible for us to believe that there is anyone out there who does not also know these things. So it is for me with radical Islamists. I have studied these people on a daily basis since September 11, 2001, and just can't wrap my mind around the idea that there is anyone, especially any American, who isn't deeply aware of their ideals and goals. Obviously, there are millions. So, for the un-edified, a brief primer.

The practitioners of jihad believe, first and foremost, that their GOD has commanded them to kill all infidels and conquer the entire globe in HIS honor. They care not about the character or mission of their victims - only whether or not they are Muslim. And even some Muslims are not Muslim enough, and are targets as well.

Consider the increasing frequency of "honor killings" among Muslims. So perverted is their ideology that a father will kill his own daughter, KILL her, in some brutal, hideous way (stoning and beheading are favorites), for as little as smiling at a young man, because she has "dishonored" the family by not being a devout Muslim. "Devout" young Muslims are not allowed to date, or even socialize with the opposite sex. Allah demands 100% of their dedication, in the form of complex prayer rituals that must be practiced five times a day, "holy" books that are the only education many receive. They are brainwashed, from birth, to believe that non-Muslims (infidels) have no worth and no right to exist. They, quite literally, would just as soon kill us as look at us. There is no honor amongst jihadis, there are no targets that are considered off limits. There would never be a discussion about conferring any form of human rights on the prisoners of radical Islamists.

When these monsters were captured, they were actively trying to kill American soldiers. If they were released from their cells for even a moment, they would again try to kill American soldiers, and anyone else who happened to be in the area. They routinely fling "cocktails" of urine, semen, feces and any other substance they can find at their guards. Any object in their possession must be considered a potential weapon that can be sharpened to a point or used as a club to inflict as much pain as possible on the military personnel who are entrusted with their care. Would they treat their captives humanely? The bodies that have been recovered leave no doubt that they would not. Their prisoners, whether American military or members of a different sect of Islam, are genuinely tortured. These animals use electric drills on living humans. They cut off a man's penis and stuff it down his throat while he is still alive. They use any and every method of causing pain that they can devise - and they do this not to gain information to save their fellow citizens - they do this because it amuses them. Female prisoners are gang raped on a daily basis until they somehow manage to slip away into death as their only release. Get the picture?

The very idea that any rational human being should give a damn what happens to these savages is beyond bizarre. They should be treated as they would treat us were the roles reversed. Conferring any form of rights on these pieces of human dung should offend all thinking people to the very core of their beings. The thought of prosecuting officials from the previous administration who agonized over how best to protect three hundred million Americans from further attacks by these cowardly, malignant creatures is heresy.

For the record, hell, no, it's not torture.

KRYMB!

(Karl Rove, You Magnificent Bastard! for the uninitiated.)

For several days now I've been trying to talk myself into writing a synopsis of the ridiculous recent remarks of The Obamessiah abroad on his International Apology Tours. Trying, but not quite succeeding. Just too much life getting in the way of doing a little research.

Thus, I couldn't have been more pleased when I found this piece from Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal. Not only does it sum up the insanity, it does it with style and a great deal more credibility than I ever could. Do read the whole thing at the link.

The President's Apology Tour

Great leaders aren't defined by consensus.

President Barack Obama has finished the second leg of his international confession tour. In less than 100 days, he has apologized on three continents for what he views as the sins of America and his predecessors.

Mr. Obama told the French (the French!) that America "has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive" toward Europe. In Prague, he said America has "a moral responsibility to act" on arms control because only the U.S. had "used a nuclear weapon." In London, he said that decisions about the world financial system were no longer made by "just Roosevelt and Churchill sitting in a room with a brandy" -- as if that were a bad thing. And in Latin America, he said the U.S. had not "pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors" because we "failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas."

By confessing our nation's sins, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that Mr. Obama has "changed the image of America around the world" and made the U.S. "safer and stronger." As evidence, Mr. Gibbs pointed to the absence of protesters during the Summit of the Americas this past weekend.

That's now the test of success? Anti-American protesters are a remarkably unreliable indicator of a president's wisdom. Ronald Reagan drew hundreds of thousands of protesters by deploying Pershing and cruise missiles in Europe. Those missiles helped win the Cold War.

There is something ungracious in Mr. Obama criticizing his predecessors, including most recently John F. Kennedy. ("I'm grateful that President [Daniel] Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old," Mr. Obama said after the Nicaraguan delivered a 52-minute anti-American tirade that touched on the Bay of Pigs.) Mr. Obama acts as if no past president -- except maybe Abraham Lincoln -- possesses his wisdom.

Mr. Obama was asked in Europe if he believes in American exceptionalism. He said he did -- in the same way that "the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism." That's another way of saying, "No."

A Standing Ovation

Having just sobbed my way through Ann Coulter's new column, I'm feeling sentimental. Ann's mother just died, and her column is an incredibly moving tribute to her "number one fan." Despite my relatively short list of accomplishments, I, too, have a number one fan, but, unlike Ann Coulter, I don't want to write about him only when it's too late for him to read it. So, Dad, this one's for you.

I honestly cannot remember a time when you weren't there for me. Nor a time when you didn't understand even my most foolish mistakes, brushing them aside and seeing the best in me even in failure. You have always been my idol, my rock, my inspiration...the one I could never quite live up to.

I doubt that I actually remember, but after all the years of looking at baby pictures it seems like I do, sitting on your foot as you sat with your legs crossed, both of us reading a book. Best seat in the house!

I remember all the things you taught me as a child - how to ride a bike, climb a rope ladder, properly handle a rifle, tie flies. I remember you working, always working, remodeling houses, building a potty chair, chopping wood, caring for a garden. I've never known anyone in my entire life with your work ethic, and if there's one shortcoming in myself that has troubled me most, it's my lack of drive and sheer determination. I've always wished I had your self discipline and willpower.

I remember the smell of Jade East and Golden Something tobacco...was it Golden Woods? The name's slipped my mind, but not the sweet aroma of your pipe. I remember when you quit smoking, cold turkey, because you went in to a store to buy yourself a pack of cigarettes for the first time in years and simply refused to pay the price. I still don't know how you did that.

I cherish the memories of tramping through the woods with you, unfairly tricking squirrels into becoming our victims, and how you always let me be the one who got the shot. I remember the trip to the Rio Grande, and the mile hike that was so easy going down, but so nearly impossible coming back up. I remember throwing snowballs at the Red Lion Inn in Vail and scaling an ice covered hill to capture a wasps' nest for a quarter. I remember you saving the Dinty Moore Beef Stew for the night I was having dinner with you on that camping trip. Even in the sad times, you always put me first.

So many things I remember, and so many memories to cherish. More than anything else, I remember how loved you always made me feel. You were always so patient, so willing to teach. I know that you could have gotten the jobs done more quickly if I had just left you alone, but you always included me in your projects and explained what you were doing, how, and why. You, more than anyone else I have ever known, made me feel special and important - like you really couldn't get the job done without my help, or, at the very least, wouldn't enjoy it nearly as much. You will never know how much that meant to me - the one who was always a bit of an outsider and never quite felt like I belonged anywhere else. I always belonged with you.

You are my hero, Dad, and there simply are no words to express the depth of my love and gratitude. You instilled in me a deep and passionate love of country and freedom and a respect for the past and those who sacrificed all for our present. You taught me right and wrong, as much through deeds as words, and always inspired me to be more and better. Anthing good that I am, I am because of you.

Many have made more of an impact on the world, but none has meant more to me. You gave me the greatest gift any person could ever give - your unwavering love and support. That gift has made me the richest woman in the world. Thank you, Dad. I love you.

Community outreach efforts failing

All of the promises of better international relations are proving a bit difficult for The Messiah. Iran's lunatic in chief is disappointed in Dear Leader.

"I should give you, the new US administration, this advice. Mr Obama came to power with the slogan of 'change', meaning the American people like the rest of the world want a change in the colonialism policy," Ahmdinejad told crowds in a speech broadcast live from Varamin, a city south of Tehran.

"Therefore it would have been imperative for him to take part in the world's most important conference of racism and denounce racism, (confirming) that the US is pursuing a changed policy in confronting racism," he added.

"But to sit at his place and condemn my remarks is not helpful in solving the issues," he added, amid the habitual slogans of "death to America and death to Israel."

Not helpful. That's pretty much the Americans' assessment of Obama to date, as a matter of fact. Indeed, Ahmadi-Nejad was a bit kinder than I have been on occasion.

And Shmuley Boteach (love that name, btw!) wonders, in the Jerusalem Post, why Obama smiles at dictators.

The picture of the president of the United States smiling broadly as he met President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela startled me. Our president is a nice guy. Chavez is anything but.

The State Department maintains that Chávez has attacked democratic traditions and has put Venezuelan democracy on life support with unchecked concentration of power, political persecution, and intimidation. Foreign Affairs magazine says that Chávez is a power-hungry dictator with autocratic and megalomaniacal tendencies whose authoritarian vision and policies are a serious threat to his people. In testimony before the US Senate, the South American project director for the Center for Strategic International Studies said that Chavez's government engages in "arresting opposition leaders, torturing some members of the opposition (according to human rights organizations) and encouraging, if not directing, its squads of Bolivarian Circles to beat up members of Congress and intimidate voters-all with impunity."

In spite of a presidential term limit of six years, Chávez has suggested that he would like to remain in power for 25 years. Hmmm. An autocratic dictator who abuses human rights and undermines democracy being warmly embraced by the American president. There's something wrong with that picture.

Then there was the incident of President Barack Obama seeming to bow before King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 summit in London. The president's people denied it was a bow, but it certainly was a sign of great deference from the American president to the dictator of a country who just six weeks ago sentenced a 75-year-old woman to 40 lashes for having been secluded with her nephew after he delivered bread to her home. This is the same Abdullah whom, when asked why Saudi Arabia prohibits the public practice of religions other than Islam, said, "It is absurd to impose on an individual or a society rights that are alien to its beliefs or principles."

Obama is also pursuing a renewed relationship with Cuba, a country which engages in systemic human rights abuses, including torture, arbitrary imprisonment, unfair trials and extrajudicial executions. Censorship is so extensive that Cubans face five-year prison sentences for connecting to the Internet illegally. And not only is emigration illegal, but even discussing it carries a six-month prison sentence.

WATCHING ALL THIS, I was wondering what the new standards were. How oppressive must a leader be before we determine that he has not merited a hug by the democratic standard-bearer of the free world, the president of the United States? Yes, I get it. We have to speak to our enemies, and America has to push "reset" on its relationship with many of these countries. We should try and change them through charm. But who said the president himself, rather than a lower-level diplomat, must do so?

And if Obama feels that he has to be the one to greet a man like Chavez, must it be with the kind of ear-to-ear grin that one might show girl scouts selling cookies? It must surely be disheartening for those who suffer oppression in countries like Venezuela, Cuba and Saudi Arabia to see the American president backslapping their oppressors when these victims have always looked up to the United States as their champions.

In Turkey, Obama boldly declared that "the United States is not, and never will be, at war with Islam." But the person who was at war with Islam, Saddam Hussein, the man who killed nearly one million Muslims, was removed by a country which has already paid with the lives of 4,500 of its servicemen and women. The same is true of the Taliban, another group whom the Obama administration is considering talking to, who beat Muslim women in the streets of Afghanistan. Yet the president seems reluctant to publicly identify these real enemies of Islam.

LIKE MANY AMERICANS, I have been awed by our president's capacity to draw those who hate us near. He is a man of considerable charm and grace. But I have to admit that I am increasingly troubled by his seeming inability to call out rogue dictators.

[snip]

ALL THIS LEADS to one important question. Suppose Obama succeeds in building friendships with Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad and the Taliban. What then? Does America still get to feel that it stands for something? Will we still be the beacon of liberty and freedom to the rest of the world, or will we have sold out in the name of political expediency? And do any of us seriously believe that presidential friendship is going to get a megalomaniac like Hugo Chavez to ease up on the levers of power, or are we just feeding his ego by showing him he can be a tyrant and still have a beer with the president of the United States? Will the Iranians really stop enriching uranium through diplomacy rather than economic sanctions?

No, Shmuley, my friend, we will not still be the beacon of liberty and freedom. We will be just another weak, foolish, poorly managed socialistic nation that committed suicide on the sword of political correctness. Obama doesn't understand the role the United States has played in the world for over 200 years, and he cannot begin to grasp the critical importance of that role to oppressed nations.

In the world of community organizers it's all equivalent. There are no superior nations, no preferable forms of government. Freedom and liberty are just words to these people, ideas from a time gone by that no longer have any relevance in their enlightened universe. To the left, the American Dream amounts to no more than having a roof over one's head and sustenance. The source of these things is unimportant - the pride of accomplishment one feels having procured them irrelevant. They cannot empathize with the oppressed people of these nations who view the United States as the last best hope of the world, and are able to endure their miserable lives because they know that there is still one place on earth where the ability and dedication of the individual makes all things possible. Rather they see our great nation as selfish and make the mistake of assuming that other nations have less because we have much. This they perceive to be unfair, and reconcilable only by bringing us down to the global level, rather than encouraging the globe to come up to ours.

It is much easier to make apologies for our affluence than to convince other countries that they, too, can be strong and successful if they free their people and give them incentive to achieve. It is always easier to follow than to lead.

Another dictator refuses to unclench his fist

Oh, Barack, you silly little man! Have you not yet learned that there's a difference between talk and action? Fidel will happily explain.

Former Cuban President Fidel Castro said President Obama misinterpreted remarks by his brother and successor, Raul, and bristled at the suggestion that the island should free political prisoners or cut taxes on remittances from abroad as a goodwill gesture to the U.S.

Raul Castro touched off a whirlwind of speculation last week that the U.S. and Cuba could be headed toward a thaw in nearly a half-century of chilly relations. The speculation began when the Cuban president said leaders would be willing to sit down with their U.S. counterparts and discuss everything, including human rights, freedom of the press and expression, and political prisoners on the island.

Obama responded at the Summit of the Americas by saying Washington seeks a new beginning with Cuba, but he also said Sunday that Cuba should release some political prisoners and reduce official taxes on remittances sent to the island from the U.S.

That appeared to enrage Fidel Castro, 82, who wrote in an essay posted on a government website that Obama "without a doubt misinterpreted Raul's declarations."

The former president appeared to be throwing cold water on expectations for improved bilateral relations -- suggesting that Obama had no right to urge Cuba to make even small concessions. He also seemed to suggest too much was being made of Raul's comments about discussing everything with U.S. authorities.

"Affirming that the president of Cuba is ready to discuss any topic with the president of the United States expresses that he's not afraid to broach any subject," Fidel Castro wrote of his 77-year-old brother, who succeeded him 14 months ago.

"It's a sign of bravery and confidence in the principles of the revolution," he said.

"Nobody should assume that he was talking about pardoning those sentenced in March 2003 and sending all of them to the United States, if the country were willing to liberate the five Cuban anti-terrorist heroes," Castro wrote.

He was referring to 75 leading political opposition leaders who were rounded up and imprisoned six years ago. Some 54 of them remain behind bars, though Raul Castro suggested last year that Cuba would be willing to liberate some political prisoners if U.S. authorities would free five Cuban spies.

Castro compared the prisoners arrested in 2003 to exiles who attacked the island's southern coast during the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and said they were "at the service of a foreign power that threatens and blockades our country," referring to charges they conspired with Washington to destabilize the communist system.

The ex-president had previously expressed admiration for Obama, but this time Castro blasted the new U.S. president for showing signs of "superficiality."

He also defended Cuba's right to levy a 10% fee on every U.S. dollar sent to relatives on the island by Cuban-Americans, saying if the money arriving from abroad "is in dollars, all the more reason we should do it because it is the currency of the country that blockades us."

All top Cuban leaders routinely call the 47-year-old trade embargo against this country a blockade.

"Not all Cubans have family members overseas that send remittances," Castro said, adding that Cuba uses the revenue from fees on exchanging dollars to provide free health care, education and subsidized food to its population.

Hope! Change!

Unleash the Brownshirts!

Two hundred and fifty thousand strong (barely a quarter of the number of tax day tea partiers, whose number now stands at 909,571).

Calling on Americans to volunteer, President Barack Obama signed a $5.7 billion national service bill Tuesday that triples the size of the AmeriCorps service program over the next eight years and expands ways for students to earn money for college.

"We need your service, right now, in this moment in history. ... I'm asking you to stand up and play your part," said Obama, a former community organizer in Chicago. "I'm asking you to help change history's course."

[snip]

The legislation provides for gradually increasing the size of the Clinton-era AmeriCorps to 250,000 enrollees from its current 75,000. It outlines five broad categories where people can direct their service: helping the poor, improving education, encouraging energy efficiency, strengthening access to health care and assisting veterans.

AmeriCorps offers a range of volunteer opportunities including housing construction, youth outreach, disaster response and caring for the elderly. Most receive an annual stipend of slightly less than $12,000 for working 10 months to a year.

AmeriCorps has seen a recent surge in applications, according to the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees the program.

It all sounds so warm and fuzzy. Until they come for you.

Don't buy the distractions!

It's the stuff that doesn't make the headlines that we have to watch!

Yesterday Obama tried to impress us all with his hundred million dollar budget cut demand. For once, the media rightfully nailed that one as a load of crap, quickly pointing out that it was such a miniscule sliver of the total spending that it was completely ridiculous. Having failed in that attempt, they turned the subject to a longtime left-wing favorite: the possiblility of prosecuting former Bush administration officials for torture. Don't drink the Kool-Aid. It will never happen. It's just designed to make a lot of noise to distract from other issues.

The recent South American trip is one of those issues. Having legitimized both Chavez and Ortega, the administration now fears the backlash of his limp wristed international performance. Already Chavez is capitalizing on Obama's outreach program.

“I am coming back from Trinidad and Tobago, from the Americas Summit where, without a doubt, the position that Venezuela and its government has always defended, especially starting 10 years ago, of resistance, dignity, sovereignty and independence has obtained in Port of Spain, one of the biggest victories of our history,” Chavez said.

“It would seem that the changes that started in Venezuela in the last decade of the 20th century have begun to reach North America,” he added.

Chavez made the comments Sunday to a crowd gathered for the 199th Commemoration of the Independence Declaration of Venezuela.

“In one year we will be celebrating 200 years of ‘April 19,’ the day that ... initiated this revolution that is underway 200 years later at the forefront of the people of our America, at the forefront of change, at the forefront of a new world, at the forefront of a new century that will construct Bolivarian socialism,” said Chavez.

What was it you said about that handshake again, Obama? Oh, yeah...

“It’s unlikely that as a consequence of me shaking hands or having polite conversation with Mr. Chavez, we are endangering the strategic interest of the United States,” Obama told reporters.

“You would be would be hard pressed to paint a scenario in which the U.S. interests would be damaged as a consequence of us having a more constructive relationship with Venezuela,” he added.

I've got your scenario right here, dimwit.

Venezuelan opposition to the Chavez administration criticized President Obama on Sunday for warming up to Chavez before demonstrating concern about Venezuela’s democracy, apporrea.org, a Venezuelan news outlet reported.

“The president’s (Chavez) authoritarianism, which grows by the day, has to be discussed,” Milos Alcalay, former Venezuelan ambassador to the U.N., who resigned in 2004 due to differences with Chavez, told aporrea.org.

The U.S. needs to talk to “the opposition, church representatives and others, who are really concerned about the democracy in Venezuela,” added Alcalay.

According to the U.S. State Department and other official government sources, the Venezuelan government has been guilty of numerous human rights violations under Chavez's rule.

“Politicization of the judiciary and official harassment of the political opposition and the media characterized the human rights situation during the year,” said the State Department's Country Report on Human Rights in Venezuela for 2008 that was released last month.

The report credits the Chavez regime with unlawful killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, discrimination based on political grounds, widespread corruption at all levels of government, official intimidation and attacks on the independent media.

“According to HRW [Human Rights Watch], ‘Government officials have removed scores of detractors from the career civil service, purged dissidents employees from the national oil company, denied citizens access to social programs based on their political opinions, and denounced critics as subversives deserving of discriminatory treatment," says the State Department report.

A recent report by the Congressional Research Service also outlined human rights concerns in Chavez's Venezuela.

“Under the populist rule of President Hugo Chavez … Venezuela has undergone enormous political changes, with a new constitution and unicameral legislature, and a new name for the country, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela,” states a Feb. 5, 2009 CRS report.

“U.S. officials and human rights organizations have expressed concerns about the deterioration of democratic institutions,” the report adds, “and threats to freedom of expression under President Chavez, who has survived several attempts to remove him from power.”

Last February, Venuzuelan voters approved a constitutional amendment that eliminates presidential term limits, thus allowing Chavez to run the country for an unlimited succession of 6-year terms as long as he can win a majority of the vote in a Venezuelan election.

And now yet another cruel dictator can point to the buffoon in the White House as a friend. Michael Ramirez sums it up quite nicely.

Need more proof? Bloomberg has this:

Venezuelan opposition leader and Maracaibo Mayor Manuel Rosales, who was scheduled to appear in court yesterday on corruption charges, has left the country and is seeking political asylum in Peru.

The mayor is being “politically persecuted,” said his wife, Eveling Rosales, in comments broadcast by CNN’s Spanish- language channel. Manuel Rosales, 56, lost the 2006 presidential election to President Hugo Chavez.

“The fundamental problem is that there’s no credibility in the judicial system, which is a system that’s been completely politicized,” Leopoldo Lopez, a member of Rosales’s Un Nuevo Tiempo party and former mayor of the Caracas borough of Chacao, said in a telephone interview. “This is retaliation and selective repression.”

Opposition leaders say Rosales’s case stems from Chavez’s reaction to his opponents winning elections in the country’s biggest cities and states in November, when Rosales took the mayor’s office in Maracaibo, the country’s second-biggest city. In addition to Rosales, former Defense Minister Raul Baduel, who turned on Chavez in 2007, has been detained in connection with a corruption probe, prosecutors said.

Bad things happen when you oppose Dear Leader.

This is what happens when silly little boys play dress up. Is there anyone in government with the guts to tell this guy what a complete ass he's making of himself and how deeply he is damaging the interests of our country? If not, it's going to be a long, humiliating four years.