mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) "<i>Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to ev

April 27, 2006

We Support the Troops, Not the War

More & more.

UPDATE: Ian, "DonÂ’t you dare question their patriotism!" Indeed.

Posted by: Rusty at 01:13 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

April 25, 2006

First to Fall to Sharia? The Academy

Yes, I actually teach at a university. No, I will never reveal my identity.

Case in point, Detroit Free Press:

An Islamic student group at Michigan State University demanded Monday that university officials publicly reprimand a professor whose Feb. 28 e-mail called on Muslims who don't "like the values of the West" to leave the United States....
In addition to a reprimand, the student group wants the university to implement diversity training programs for faculty and a mandatory freshman seminar on hate and discrimination.

Case in point #2, Daniel Pipes in FrontPage:

Who would have thought that Belmont University of Nashville, Tennessee, would apply the Islamic law to its staff? But just that happened earlier this month.

Indeed. Hat tip to Robert Spencer.

April 19, 2006

The True Voice of the Left

What appears below is not the usual fare for this website. It is a reprint of the bile and abuse that conservative blogger Michelle Malkin has received following her reposting of a Students Against War press release that contained contact information for SAW head conspirators. SAW is the group that rioted against military recruiters at UC Santa Cruz.

Now the SAW fools are claiming that Michelle's repost of their press release is resulting in death threats. Of course, since they themselves first posted this information it's hard to see their complaint.

This is how the Left reacts when they become too unhinged to maintain the veneer of civilization. If you're easily offended by gutter language, don't read any further: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:56 PM | Comments (29) | Add Comment
Post contains 481 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Simply charming!

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 20, 2006 12:10 AM (3smJS)

2 That must be some of that lefty "nuanced" thinking I keep hearing about.

Posted by: nuthin2seehere at April 20, 2006 12:28 AM (blNMI)

3 Man, have you got WAY to much time on your hands. Does your mommy know that you're playing on her computer?

Posted by: Lonevoice at April 20, 2006 01:09 AM (QnxoD)

4 Because of how evil the amerinazis have made America, Jesus Christ has removed His blessing. Can't you tell? http://www.deanberryministries.org/index3.h*ml

Posted by: DEAN BERRY -- REAL AMERICAN at April 20, 2006 02:14 AM (h/YSB)

5 dean berry - NO YOU AREN'T A REAL AMERICAN, BECAUSE IT WAS EUROPEANS WHO CREATED DEATHCAMPS AND USED ZYCLON B, AND YOUR HINT THAT YOU CONFUSE AMERICANS WITH THE NAZI'S OF GERMANY TELLS ME YOU ARE CONFUSED. SO LET ME CLEAR THINGS UP FOR YOU: IN AMERICA WE DO NOT PUT THE VERB AT THE END OF THE SENTENCE UNLIKE THE GERMANS IN AMERICA WE HAVE FREEDOM OF RELIGION, UNLIKE THE EUROPEANS IN AMERICA WE DO NOT HAVE DEATH CAMPS OR DEATH MARCHES LIKE THE FOLLOWERS OF COMMUNISM DID IN CAMBODIA (REMEMBER COMMUNISM IS EUROPEAN IN ORIGIN) IN AMERICA WE HAVE WENT TO EUROPES ASSISTANCE TO SAVE THEM FROM THE KAISER AND HITLER AND THE HEIRS OF VLADIMIR LENIN, BECAUSE THE EUROPEANS WERE SO HELPLESS. IN AMERICA WE CREATED MORE WEALTH IN 225 YEARS THAN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD COULD DO IN 3000 YEARS THUS BENIFITING AMERICAN CITIZENS AND WE ARE GENEROUS TO SHARE WITH OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD IN AMERICA WE HAVE A DYNAMIC ECONOMY RATHER THAN THE SLUGGISH EUROPEAN ECONOMY BECAUSE WE ARE NOT SOCIALIST (look at what happened with the berlin wall, the west berliners were living in luxury while over the wall in soviet east berlin the citizens could only look at the superior life everyone on the other side of the wall enjoyed)

Posted by: I GET DRUNK WITH TED KENNEDY at April 20, 2006 04:11 AM (Uvtly)

6 Why must some people on the left be obsessed with her genitalia?

Posted by: Leovinus at April 20, 2006 05:36 AM (I42Iw)

7 "If you had a conscious..." Some real mental giants there. I guess that's opposed to having an UNconscious. Are these people in college? I noticed none of them misspelled the C word. Leovinus, it seems many on the left, when in a snit, resort to very UN-PC epithets all the time. They simply cannot fathom how a minority person wouldn't be on their side so since said minority person doesn't toe the line that they think minorities should, they call them by the derogatory names they normally rail against others doing. You see, if a conservative calls someone stupid or ignorant, in the eyes of a lefty they're a misogynist, xenophobe or racist. But the double standard does not allow for the reverse. As far as the death threats go, I don't know what to say. None of them ever reprint them to for others to see. And of course, if that has happened, that's wrong too. The problem there is that they willfully claim their own whereas we quickly reject the nut cases.

Posted by: Oyster at April 20, 2006 06:02 AM (YudAC)

8 I guess this is exactly what Michelle talks about when she describes them as "unhinged." What remarkably unclever people.

Posted by: Asgerd at April 20, 2006 06:53 AM (w4Fe9)

9 That is disgusting. Not only are these people not very articulate, but they're obvioulsly bigots too. But then that's all the left really has.. invective, vitriol, and a deep intolerance for anyone with views different than their own.

Posted by: Richard at April 20, 2006 07:43 AM (7KF8r)

10 I donÂ’t support for a moment the language of abuse, sexism, and racism that Malkin was subjected to. Having been on the receiving end of some of that from some on the right, I think it hurts us all, regardless of the source. But IÂ’m frankly shocked at you, Bluto, for not having sympathy for those who have been threatened with death as a result of their personal info being posted at MalkinÂ’s site. Several weeks ago, you declined to provide any specifics of a bar fight you were engaged in back in 1975, for fear that to do so on your blog would lead to some in your small town identifying you, and thus exposing you to Al Qaeda and its supporters, who had threatened you with death on some other website. I donÂ’t believe that the death threats these people have received are any less credible than that. (I donÂ’t believe either of you is in any danger, but since you thought YOU were in danger, that Al Qaeda would identify you, out of all the right wing bloggers, it is at LEAST as credible that some right wing fringe nut job would commit violence against these lefties). Why donÂ’t you have sympathy for people, like you, who take extremely unlikely death threats very seriously? No one should face a death threat for political activism in this country, just as no one should be abused like Malkin was. You should read some of the unbelievable hate mail that Andrew Sullivan gets from left and right. People on the right in particular write at length about how they long for his AIDS death. Nice.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 07:44 AM (uT71O)

11 They simply cannot fathom how a minority person wouldn't be on their side Liberals are terrified of minorities escaping the Democrat plantation. It would mean political extinction for the Dems.

Posted by: dcb at April 20, 2006 07:47 AM (8e/V4)

12 jd, as Bluto has already stated, since the SAW folks themselves first posted this information it's hard to see their complaint. When people like SAW publicly post their contact info, it means they're not trying to hide their identity. Savvy? And you don't get people like Michelle Malkin to do you any favors by calling her a slanty-eyed cunt. Maybe they should have asked nicely.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 07:55 AM (8e/V4)

13 jd, the SAW idiots posted their own info. Michelle simply reposted their "press release". In response, the Left has threatened Michelle's children, and posted directions, with map, to her house. There is also the question of the remarkable similarity in the grammar and sentence construction of the alleged email "death threats" that SAW has reproduced, sans headers, on their site. As is your wont, you mischaraterize and tell outright lies about past comments. That is why I seldom engage you, and, frankly, hold you somewhat in contempt; only somewhat, because your prevarications seem to stem more from mental deficiency than conscious intent to deceive.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 20, 2006 07:57 AM (RHG+K)

14 I agree that they were foolish for posting their personal info anywhere, but you have to admit, on the blogosphere, the location matters, too. Some websites get 10 hits a day, others several hundred thousand. My main point is, why isn't Bluto sympathetic to their fears, when they so closely mirror his own? There have been right wing killers in this country, domestic terrorists, whether they have shot abortion providers, gay activists, bombed clinics and gay clubs, attacked moderate Cubans, etc, just as there have been animal rights activists who use terrorism, etc. I also think that local right or left wingers are far more likely than Al Qaeda terrorists to take actions short of murder--like egging houses, vandalizing cars, which Malkin's publicity also exposes these folks to) Also, Jesusland--you are assuming that every person who asked for their info to be removed was abusive. I very much doubt that to be the case. I think some of the insulters were angry that she didn't remove it after being asked.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:04 AM (uT71O)

15 SAW are these the same collage educated crap heads who have those stupid 70s antiwar bumper stickers on their cars i understand where UC Santa Cruz has gotten some retaliation over their blocking military recruters their leader a lowlife bit of pond scum CHARLES PETERSON was suspended and theres talk of cutting off US SANTA CRUZES money

Posted by: sandpiper at April 20, 2006 08:10 AM (nMpEK)

16 >>>I think some of the insulters were angry that she didn't remove it after being asked. I'm sure you'd like to think that. But Malkin has been taking this kind of abuse for years. The fact that the Left is populated by angry haters isn't really even news.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:10 AM (8e/V4)

17 If I misrepresented your past comments on the death threats you received, and your using them to refuse to talk about an incident more than thirty years ago, then I apologize. To avoid future misunderstandings, please specify what I'm getting wrong. I'm aware of some mental deficiencies but not as applicable to this case. I don't know that similarity in grammar/language in the death threats mean they aren't real. Again, why don't you have some sympathy for people who are in the same boat you found yourself in? Do death threats only matter when they threaten rightwingers? And isn't it a little simplistic to say "The LEFT" posted Malkin's information? I could just as simply say "The Right" destroyed an airliner when Orlando Busch used a missile to shoot down a civilian plane. Judging right or left by the actions of its fringers is a poor debating tactic that besmirches those who engage in it.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:14 AM (uT71O)

18 >>>Judging right or left by the actions of its fringers is a poor debating tactic that besmirches those who engage in it. We on the Right dissavow our lunatics. But on the Left, the lunatics have taken over the insane asylum. That's the difference.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:22 AM (8e/V4)

19 Carlos--I don't know if I agree that the Left hates more than the right. There seems to be a lot of hate on both sides. Certainly, in the Clinton years, the hate was more on the right, at least that's the way it seemed to me. What is alarming is the level of hatred infesting American politics at all levels. It's very different from the 70s, or even the 60s at their worst, I think. It is tough to imagine our elected officials being as friendly to each other as John Kennedy and Barry Goldwater were in the Senate, or Hubert Humphrey and Dick Russell, or Ev Dirksen and LBJ or Tip O'Neil and Gerald Ford. Politics has become very bitter, very partisan, very personal, and very much about destroying the opposition. They aren't just wrong, they are EVIL LYING BASTARD IDIOT FASCISTS with mental deficiencies. I think we all should be concerned about that, whether we are left, right or center. It's very bad for the country. Bitter discourse tends to precede revolutionary upheaval.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:23 AM (uT71O)

20 Commenting specifically on the leftists' communication skills, who knew there were keyboards in the sewer?

Posted by: Mike at April 20, 2006 08:27 AM (XeoHY)

21 I don't think the right has disavowed Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or other obvious spewers of hate. John McCain is going to speak at Jerry Falwell's college. Falwell blamed 9-11 on gays and abortionists and feminists. He blamed 20 murders on Clinton. Pat Robertson has been disavowed by some, but many have not, and he called for placing a nuke in the State Dept and assassinating a foreign leader. You have your haters, the left has theirs. I don't think you are right to say that one side has disavowed its haters, while the other has not. If our haters our Sheehan, Moore, McKinney, they are no less "disavowed" than Coulter, Falwell, and Robertson on your side.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:28 AM (uT71O)

22 >>>I don't think the right has disavowed Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or other obvious spewers of hate. Show me where Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh have threatened to sew up Hilary Clinton's cunt with barbed wire, then you've got a point. Otherwise, the comparison is specious.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:33 AM (8e/V4)

23 >>Ann Coulter Our hard Right spewers aren't anti-American traitors like hard Leftists are. That's why we don't have to dissavow them.

Posted by: dcb at April 20, 2006 08:38 AM (8e/V4)

24 jd's defense of these lunatics is prima facie evidence that the Left sanctions, protects, and even nurtures hatred to serve its ends. His inability to point to equivalent behavior from the Right must be a source of great frustration to him. As a young college student, perhaps jd will yet outgrow his need to justify the excesses of his political brethren, and even embrace a rational political philosophy as his brain begins to mature.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 20, 2006 08:48 AM (RHG+K)

25 She posted the info to shine light on leftist, anti-war activities. These degenerates are the ones who are descending into crude obscenities. Michelle will always stand up for what she believes in, no matter what threats come her way.

Posted by: Andrew at April 20, 2006 08:58 AM (Q9gZ/)

26 A disavowal of hatred and violence ? Perhaps it is time to taker a look in the archives again. Does anyone remember any posts regretting what had been said during the early days of the kidnapping of the christian peacemakers ? I do not recall anyone chastisng the use of " a dull knife" on their throats.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 20, 2006 10:10 AM (TcoRJ)

27 john ryan, I remember clearly the dissavowal of and apologies for hyperbolic language used about the CPTs. Do you think Leftards will make similar apologies to Michelle Malkin? Hell would freeze over before that happenned. And on an unrelated topic, why is posting comments on this blog always so wacky? Half the time I get an error message saying commenting is suspended. What gives?

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:26 AM (8e/V4)

28 DPB--I NEVER defended the people who attacked Malkin. I did just the opposite. Why are you lying about that? And I think most people "on the left" would disavow someone who advocated sewing up Malkin's vagina, even as rhetoric. You are whipping up a hatred for a whole ideology, based on the extreme intemperate language of a few. I used Limbaugh, Coulter, etc, because you said the left was being led by the fringe. By that, I thought you meant the radical figures in the left: Moore, McKinney, etc. If you meant these specific commenters, then it is an even easier argument. They are NOT representative of the Democratic party, or the left generally. If you go to left/right blogs, you see very intemperate language, hateful language, depending on how extreme the webpage is. ON THIS BLOG COMMENTS SECTION, one poster has advocated the extermination of all Muslims and liberals. Killing them all. Asked for clarification, he repeated his desire for all of them to be killed, as threats to civilization. Only one poster even disagreed with him. Genocidal extermination--yeah, the left is the place of traitorous haters, exclusively. Note to DPB--by bringing up right wing haters, I'm not defending the people who attacked Malkin. I never have. I'm only restating that because you seem to think I did. Never did. Never would. Never will. Are we clear on that?

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 10:36 AM (aqTJB)

29 jd, can we at least put to rest the Leftwing myth of the "angry white male"? Not to mention all the other self-serving Leftwing myths about how loving they are, and how the Right is so "angry" and "hate filled". The Left is second to none in their hate-filled anger. Re Maxie's hate and anger, he's the exception on this blog, and others who have tried to go that route have been threatened with banning by Rusty & Company. Considering how hateful you Lefties like portraying this blog, you'd think it was populated by Maxies. It isn't.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:44 AM (8e/V4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 17, 2006

Pulitzer Gives Award For Treason

Jeemany Christmas

Forbes Via Mike Hampton at The Department of Home Land Stupidity :
The jurors awarded the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for national reporting Â“to James Risen and Eric Lichtblau of The New York Times for their carefully sourced stories on secret domestic eavesdropping that stirred a national debate on the boundary line between fighting terrorism and protecting civil liberty.Â” While the Times sat on the story for over a year and ultimately edited it due to national security concerns, many called the revelation of the programÂ’s existence a threat to national security. President Bush himself called its publication Â“a shameful act.Â”

Pullitzer Prize my....who are these "jurors" anyway?

Oh wait we have them right here on comments via Mike again., eh eh ah-hem....

Narda Zacchino, deputy editor, San Francisco Chronicle (Chair)
Mike Connelly, executive editor, Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Kenneth Paulson, editor, USA Today
Delia Rios, national correspondent, Newhouse News Service, Washington, DC
*George Rodrigue, vice president/managing editor, The Dallas Morning News
*past Pulitzer Prize winner

more...

Posted by: Howie at 08:30 PM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Narda Zacchino, deputy editor, San Francisco Chronicle (Chair) Mike Connelly, executive editor, Sarasota Herald-Tribune Kenneth Paulson, editor, USA Today Delia Rios, national correspondent, Newhouse News Service, Washington, DC *George Rodrigue, vice president/managing editor, The Dallas Morning News *past Pulitzer Prize winner

Posted by: Michael Hampton at April 17, 2006 08:46 PM (FVbj6)

2 Is there an echo in here? Is there an echo in here?

Posted by: West1 at April 18, 2006 01:35 AM (OkonL)

3 Um. Thats not treason.

Posted by: actus at April 18, 2006 02:40 AM (CqheE)

4 Libs hate monitoring of Al Queda contacts in the US.

Posted by: mrclark at April 18, 2006 06:42 AM (IMrft)

5 But I don't read any of these publications, and they are all going out of business. Ah, the beauty of it all.......

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 18, 2006 08:04 AM (gx67A)

6 I fail to see how this damages our security one iota. Like Al Qaeda suddenly says--wait, I'll stop phoning Ahmed in Arizona, for fear of the warrantless wiretapping, even though it was well known that the US had broad FISA wiretapping powers prior to 9-11, that were expanded by the Patriot Act. If the program is necessary, and exposure ends it, then you might have a case. So far, exposure hasn't ended it. All it has done is raise the question--why didn't the president ask Congress for this power? Or why didn't the president go through FISA? For my part, I'm glad that the NYT published this, and it is eminently worthy of a Pulitzer. The press must function as the watchdog on our liberties. As Hamilton said in the 8th federalist--"Safety from external danger is the most powerful director of national conduct. Even the ardent love of liberty will, after a time, give way to its dictates...will compel nations the most attached to liberty to resort for repose and security to institutions which have a tendency to destroy their civil and political rights. To be more safe, they at length become willing to run the risk of being less free..."

Posted by: jd at April 18, 2006 02:50 PM (aqTJB)

7 It wasn't known that there was an efficient program in place, or how that program operated. Now terrorists have been alerted to take extra precautions. That means that the first direct evidence you, jd, see of the damage done by the traitors at the Gray Lady will probably be the next major terror attack on this country. The NYT has a history of lying and treason; google Walter Duranty. We didn't need for the NYT to issue a direct warning to jihadi terrorists in order to help Risen sell books. This is like saying that publishing convoy sailing dates during WWII wouldn't have been treasonous because it was well known that convoys would be sailing. Perhaps if you took off your Democrat partisan hat and put on your American thinking cap the issue would be clearer for you, jd.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 18, 2006 05:26 PM (RHG+K)

8 Did anyone get arrested for droppping this dime? I know the Old York Times was looked at until the news died down. The MSM seem to be connected to the New World Order (NWO). I guess Mr. Bush did not go alone with something the NWO wanted, and there lies the reason perhaps. That U.N. tax of ten cents a barrel of oil for world peace has not happened. Why? I don't know folks, I'm just thinking out loud. Will the U.S. bypass the U.N. again? The NWO does not like countries acting alone. They are all part of the team, and Bush on at least one subject did not go along, and caused France, Germany, Russia to lose a lot of money. It has been a few years now, will they all make nice, and play for the same team? Terrorists, whom Iran loves to support, were alerted. Iran may become part of the Nuke club due to contracts. Contracts in Iran give the same above mention countries money. Just like Iraq. I'm just bringing up topics because I do not like the NWO, the U.N., and the MSM; Also, I am at work and have to much time to think.

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 18, 2006 08:28 PM (D2g/j)

9 Before 9-11, any attentive person knew that over 17K warrants had been issued under FISA, and after 9-11 this was expanded and made even more user friendly. What did Al Qaeda learn from the NYT disclosure? That there were more warrants. We didn't learn how this program "operates" did we? I've seen speculation about data mining, but no usuable intel. Nothing remotely comparable to troop ship sailing time, which is just inflammatory rhetoric. All Al Qaeda learned from the NYT disclosure is that the president was wiretapping without Congress' knowledge, in direct contradiction to Congress' intent as expressed in law, and without a warrant, as required under the 4th amendment. Maybe if you took off your Republican partisan helmet, and put on your freedom-cherishing, liberty-loving American hat, maybe you'd see this correctly. JD

Posted by: jd at April 18, 2006 09:49 PM (uT71O)

10 Look jd, I understand that the MSM serves a purpose. But they've assigned themselves various titles like 'objective', 'unbiased' and 'equitable'. Instead, they play word games and use improper terms like 'domestic wiretapping'. They imply more than they say by acts of ommission, misleading and sometimes employing flat out falsifications. If we need watcdogs like this then we wouldn't need watchdogs like blogs to keep an eye on the MSM. So far we have had many indications that there are those in Congress, the FBI, the CIA, the DIA and every other acronym out there that no one can be trusted to keep certain national security issues secret. It's absolutely no surprise that those members of Congress who were involved were few. We've never had an enemy quite like this. I would think it calls for stronger or more secretive measures. The NYT writers, Risen and Lichtblau, had an awful lot more information than was printed and it took the NYT a year, a year!, to decide that they might have to edit the story. You say that "Before 9-11, any attentive person knew that over 17K warrants had been issued under FISA, and after 9-11 this was expanded and made even more user friendly." If this is the case, then why was the story so worthy of a Pulitzer? Hell, any attentive person knew. Right? The NYT is in the sensationalism business. Listening in on phone calls made to terrorists is nothing new or exciting. But put the label 'domestic wiretapping' on it, provide an air of indignation and make the story reminiscent of a past President's transgressions and POW! you've got a story. This whole thing is horsesh*t. Prove to me it hasn't been done by every President during times of war AND peace, but in this case - it's the evil Bush regime. Meh.

Posted by: Oyster at April 19, 2006 04:56 AM (YudAC)

11 Oyster--the 17K warrants were FISA warrants. FISA was established in 1978 in response to two things--the rampant abuse of wiretaps by the FBI and by presidents, Dem and Repub, in the 35 years studied by the Church commission, AND the need to have a fast, sub-4th amendment procedure to monitor spies and, an afterthought, terrorists. FISA set up a rapid approval process, in which a federal judge was permanently in Washington (on a rotating basis) to approve these warrants. It was so easy to get one that prior to 2001, only one had been turned down! And while the turnaround time was 24 hrs for approval, the FBI and AG could, if they felt it necessary, conduct the wiretap in advance for 72 hours while waiting for approval. So no waiting was necessary. This IS a real issue because the Constitution forbids searches without a warrant. I'm someone who believes that the Constitution means what it says (yes, I'm against Roe). Why did the president need to go around FISA? Why did the president not ask COngress for a new law (he would have gotten it. Hell, he'd get it today. Just ask. That's what checks and balances are all about). Yes, in wartime, presidents have taken broad powers. Lincoln closed newspapers, etc. But this is a war that will last our lifetimes and beyond. We must not have an executive out of control. And it IS domestic wiretapping--in the sense that I only care about it when one of the people being monitored is in this country. The president's right to surveill abroad is not checked by any constitutional limit. His power to do so at home is--or should be. We would be safer if we didn't have a constitution. We would have less crime if the police could search any home, any time they wanted to. We'd be a lot safer if the cops could confiscate everyone's guns. But because of the constitution, they can't. Thank God.

Posted by: jd at April 19, 2006 07:39 AM (uT71O)

12 And they also gave the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE to a known terrorists leader YASSIR ARAFAT and our fomer jerk in the whitehouse JIMMY CARTER

Posted by: sandpiper at April 19, 2006 08:31 AM (bzZNq)

13 I agree giving it to Arafat was a huge mistake. And of course, they also gave it to former terrorist Menachem Begin, right? The Irgun wasn't planting flowers, it was planting bombs. Bombs that killed innocent and guilty alike. Read some of Jablonsky's own words to know how deeply the underground embraced the slaughter of civilians as a necessary strategy in achieving nationhood. One could say that Begin deserved it for choosing peace after a lifetime of war. That would also depend on how one sees the settlements, Sabra and Shatila, and the ugly Lebanon war as a whole. Michael Deaver threatened to resign if Reagan didn't stop the shelling of civilians in Beirut by the Israelis. RR picked up the phone, called Begin, shouted at him, and thirty minutes later, halfway around the world, the guns that had killed so many innocents suddenly were silenced. It's a riveting moment in Deaver's biography but it also raises the question-Begin gets the peace prize, and then does this?

Posted by: jd at April 19, 2006 08:42 AM (uT71O)

14 jd, the arguments I've heard are not about being able surveille for 72 hours while waiting for approval, nor that it only generally takes 24 hours to gain approval. These are things that can't be argued. The issue is that the process of getting to that point where the wait is so short and so favorable and so streamlined is cumbersome and demanding. Understandably so, but only to a degree. Even if it was so good and so efficient it was also obstructed by others in disallowing communication between organizations - one who might apply for the FISA warrant and the other who might not. But even so, you're operating under the impression that what was being done was illegal. There are far smarter people than you or I, constitutional scholars and lawyers, who can't agree on the lawfulness or constitutionality of the program. The arguments from both sides are quite good, but we only hear the arguments that the media agrees with unless we're willing to dig for information ourselves. Personally, I'd err on the side of our safety. However, that's my personal opinion.

Posted by: Oyster at April 19, 2006 08:49 AM (xmFw3)

15 Oh, and for Carter, who has been justly criticized on a number of points, I think the peace prize was mostly about Camp David, as well as his postpresidency work on disease and disorder. What he has done with the guinea worm is truly amazing. Compare his post presidency activities with those of any other president, except perhaps Hoover, and they have been remarkably selfless. Habitat for Humanity? Election monitoring? While many presidents simply retire, or travel the world making millions, this guy, love or hate his presidency, has done a world of good. Also--Camp David was his finest hour. He brought a lasting (if cold) peace between Egypt and Israel, nations that had fought major wars in 47-8, 56, 67, and 73, along with numerous border fights. Nobel prizes have been given for a lot less. the world is a better place because of Camp David. Even Carter's opponents acknowledged that.

Posted by: jd at April 19, 2006 08:49 AM (uT71O)

16 Fore!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 19, 2006 09:13 AM (FCC6c)

17 Oyster--good points. The process for getting the warrant needed to be streamlined--and it was, by the Patriot Act revisions. If further change was needed, why not do it the legal way--by asking Congress? Moussaoui's case showed that there were problems with the interp of FISA by FBI/Justice lawyers (they turned down the field office request for a FISA warrant to look in his computers--it MIGHT have stopped 9-11)--not the federal judge. We still don't know who did that--they should have been fired. But we haven't held anyone accountable for 9-11 failures or Iraq intel failures. Maybe we never will. But the difficulty of agencies communicating was CREATED by the president's warrantless wiretapping. The FISA court, when told of the illegal (ok, questionably legal) wiretapping, said, hey, you can't have any of that crap in our courtroom, because we are following the law. So no evidence obtained without a warrant can be used to get a warrant. This does create difficulties, I agree--but the difficulties were created by the president's decision to, at best, dodge the law. Again, we would all be safer, against terrorism and against crime, if we didn't have that pesky constitution. If we strip searched everyone within 10 miles of the president, we could almost guarantee we'd never have another assassination. Thank God we don't. Balancing liberty and security is never easy--and should never be done by one branch, without the knowledge and usually the consent of the others. That's the way the constitution works.

Posted by: jd at April 19, 2006 10:13 AM (aqTJB)

18 Give him enough rope .... Fore!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 19, 2006 11:01 AM (FCC6c)

19 They dont gove prizes or awards for those who have earned them they only give them to the ones who show how left-wing they can be after all they gave the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE to terrorist leader YASSIR ARAFAT and to that idiot JIMMY CARTER and they gave a oscar to that idiot MICHEAL MOORE for his junk film BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE and they ignore the real good films to award trash like CHICAGO,AMERICAN BUETY,SIDEWAYS,and MILLOIN DOLLAR BABY

Posted by: sandpiper at April 20, 2006 02:47 PM (4v/PL)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 14, 2006

Surely Not

IÂ’m speechless. At the risk of making people feel unsafe I recommend people read the Dune series if you wonder what human culture could devolve into if Islamic ideals alone shape our future.

Allied Defense Fund :COLUMBUS, Ohio Â— Officials at the Ohio State University are investigating an OSU Mansfield librarian for Â“sexual harassmentÂ” after he recommended four conservative books for a freshman reading program. ADF has demanded that OSU cease its frivolous investigation, yet the university is pressing forward, claiming that it takes the charges Â“seriously.Â”
Â“Universities are one of the most hostile places for Christians and conservatives in America,Â” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David French, who heads ADFÂ’s Center for Academic Freedom. Â“It is shameful that OSU would investigate a Christian librarian for simply recommending books that are at odds with the prevailing politics of the university.Â”

Ace of Spades HQ adds

Given the fact that these charges come from adult f*&!ing women claiming to feel "unsafe" based on book recommendations, I retract all skepticism. This is unbelievable.

Eugene Volokh reports that these women were upset that one of the books, Â“The marketing of EvilÂ” may be anti-gay. I suspect these women may be Â“Bad GayÂ”.

Northern Kentucky University professor Sally Jacobsen tears the "Cemetery of Innocents" sign on Wednesday evening.

Sheesh these Â“tolerantÂ” liberals arenÂ’t very tolerant of others opinions and hard work. What's the word for that oh yeah hypocrit. And yes I would file charges too if all my hard work was ripped up. She wonÂ’t need the abortion she is fighting for because well look at her. Going to be tough to get some man toÂ…Â….never mind, itÂ’s Good Friday.

Posted by: Howie at 03:23 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This shit is out of control. We must start hanging liberals soon.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 14, 2006 06:01 PM (0yYS2)

2 I followed this through four different links and I still can't find a connection between conservative reading material and sexual harassment. I am truly confused. How do they do it? How the hell do they justify half the crap they come up with? It's mind boggling. "...claiming that it takes the charges "seriously."" They can't be serious! Can they?

Posted by: Oyster at April 14, 2006 07:31 PM (YudAC)

3 I think this stuff comes from a your-not-the-boss-of-me mentality. It's like these people got older but never grew up. They're still rebelling against their parents. But their parents are probably dead! We have a whole generation of aging boomers who are still fighting authority. It's actually pretty funny because they just get sooooo pissed off. LOL.

Posted by: Richard at April 14, 2006 07:32 PM (7KF8r)

4 Gee! Not to offend anyone but look how fat those people are wrecking the right to life crosses! We sure don't need those kind of people throwing their weight around! If there is an upside maybe they burned off a few calories in doing so! And, I think I will cancel my registration for classes at Northern Kentucky University! What a gaggle of Fat Hicks!

Posted by: Hailus at April 14, 2006 09:06 PM (FCC6c)

5 Sorry I should have been a little more sensitive and said a gaggle of calorically challenged hicks! These must be people who live without love and force-feed themselves out of anguish! Feel sorry for them in a way. But not too much! A ghastly thought occured to me. Which side might benefit exercising their freedom of speech by placing aborted fetuses ( or toys, for the faint of heart and the lawful ) at each cross?

Posted by: Hailus at April 14, 2006 10:19 PM (FCC6c)

6 Yep! That would no doubt bring the issue to a head! Yup!

Posted by: Hailus at April 14, 2006 10:23 PM (FCC6c)

7 Hailus, you're an idiot, so please shut up and move on, because nobody here wants to waste time reading your incoherent drivel.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 15, 2006 06:48 AM (0yYS2)

8 Improbulus Maximus, if you are threatened by my wisdom then I suggest you skip over my discourses or go to another blog where everyone agrees with you. Maybe I touched a nerve talking about fat people or maybe you are of the kind who has nothing better to do than pump yourself up by deflating others. That goes for Oyster too!

Posted by: Hailus at April 15, 2006 11:28 AM (FCC6c)

9 Fat people? What's that got to do with me? I'm 185 lbs of fairly solid muscle. And not that I mind deflating idiots, I just normally prefer to do it with a rifle or K-Bar.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 15, 2006 02:46 PM (0yYS2)

10 Stupid is as stupid does! I weighed 185 3 years ago. Now I'm maintaining 160 lbs. so there! If you are shorter than 5' 11" then you are fat just like I was! Max, your violent shoot anyone who doesn't agree with you puts you on the same level as the enemy we are fighting...

Posted by: Hailus at April 15, 2006 04:01 PM (FCC6c)

11 I am officially changing my handle to Last word Larry instead of Hailus. It has a nice ring to it. I hope that flys and I don't get booted! I hereby repent from my trolling, spoofing ways! Nothin' but the truth as I see it!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 15, 2006 05:13 PM (FCC6c)

12 Now it's not a little extra girl that's a problem hallius er uh larry. It's those mean steamy sweaty ones with the pissed off jowles and permanent red cheeks carved into an immutable frowning scowl coming at you with a skillet! Usually but not always with red hair and if it is red be extra scared. If lady who's a bit over the norm and still cute might be just the ticket. Might rock your world you never know. Hot chicks don't have to try quite so hard. Live a little learn a little. Now I will say in my opinion the lady in the post probably doesn't qualify in personality or cuteness to grant her a pardon on the well you know. Good luck on that, How about New Leaf Larry. Naw whatever.

Posted by: Howie at April 15, 2006 08:25 PM (D3+20)

13 Not to mention the relentless pounding of the sweaty fat globules up and down and on and on with increasing fervor! Thanks, but no thanks. I think I'll stick with Last word Larry for now!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 15, 2006 09:10 PM (FCC6c)

14 Never mind me I'm just screwing over larry so he has to type more.

Posted by: Howie at April 16, 2006 07:44 PM (p/kW4)

15 Not to worry! Hard to compete with me. I got all day everyday since my job was outsourced. That's why I have an advantage overall except for the illegal immigrants and drug dealers to get in the last word. But then again most of those 2 groups of people are computer illiterate anyway and can't speak english. That's why I am that I am Last word Larry! Trouble is I am hooked on this silly blogging sure as any drug and I spend all day everyday scrolling up and down and long into the night searching for fresh input or responses to my drabble when I should get a life and a job!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 16, 2006 09:27 PM (FCC6c)

16 160 lbs? How tall are you, about 5'5"?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 17, 2006 05:45 AM (0yYS2)

17 Welcome to the hooked on blogging club larry so. We have two openings here for energetic computer nuts probably more. Or jhey direct that energy and start a blog. Heck I'll even give you one free linky linky.

Posted by: Howie at April 17, 2006 07:50 AM (D3+20)

18 Nice trick Maximus. If I told you I was 5' 10" and a half it would be easier for you to pick me out of the crowd and line me up in the scope of your rifle. Anyhow I lost 25 lbs. by exercise, changing to a healthier diet with less cholestoral and consequently my blood pressure and hypertension, heartburn and constant tissue inflammation went away! Try it. It might help. Little or no dairy for me, thanks! Been there and done that and barely lived to talk about it!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 17, 2006 01:59 PM (FCC6c)

19 Howie: If it pays better than what I'm making now ( $00.00 ) I might be interested!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 17, 2006 02:05 PM (FCC6c)

20 It does pay not all that good but benefits are damn good. Puts food on the tabble. And you can make money blogging i've made 20 bucks in three months. Keep looking may there are jobs if you beat around for them. If you get really interested email me. Always some kind work in DP. right time of year to start mowing too. Old ladies need the help and you are your own boss.

Posted by: Howie at April 17, 2006 02:13 PM (vXSuL)

21 Oooooh! That is soooo tempting! To think it might be that easy to make more than the average American worker.

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 17, 2006 05:18 PM (FCC6c)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 10, 2006

Make Your Own Taco Day

Today is supposedly when millions of illegal Mexican squatters are being told to stay home from work and not buy anything to show the omnipotent power they have over the U.S. economy.

No word yet on whether illegal Chinese, Saudi, or Haitians (or any other nationality) have been invited to take part.

Racism has nothing to do with it. Since the illegals agitating for attention are Hispanic, then it's the illegal Hispanics who will get the attention. And the mocking that goes along with it.

Here where I live, some businesses, mainly Mexican restaurants, are closing for the day in solidarity with the insurgents. Therefore, if your situation is similar, I'm marking this as Make Your Own Taco Day.

Just trot down to your favorite still-open market, purchase the delicious fresh ingredients (no box crap allowed! That's too easy) and make your own scrumptious Mexican-style meal. If you want a nice frozen adult beverage to go with it, swap the tequila for rum and have a Daquiri instead of a Margarita.

Or, if you are just lousy in the kitchen, find an authentic Mexican restaurant that is open and offer them your patronage and hard earned cash.

Our current open-border policy is a bona fide national security threat. Anyone can sneak over our border, nobody's sitting there qualifying Mexicans over Muslims to creep in.

Seal the damned border, we can figure out what to do about those already here later.

And fly your American flag proudly today, if you aren't already.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:12 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

April 07, 2006

South Park Muhammed Cartoon Episode

This week's South Park featured a censored Muhammed cartoon. You can watch the relevant part of it below and an image of Muhammed I captured from it is to the right.

It is supposed to be part 1 of a 2 part series in which they promise to show a cartoon of Muhamme drinking tea with Peter Griffin, of Family Guy, which they buy from Mr. T. I pity the fool who dares censor next week's episode. At the very end of the show Trey Parker and Matt Stone literally dared Comedy Central to cenosr them

Best. South. Park. Ever. Period.

If you didn't see it, just don't miss the reruns of it. Send the kids to bed, and then watch it. You won't regret it.

I've been sort of out of the loop for the past week. ~~If any one has any images of Muhammed from this week's South Park, please let me know.~~ Professor Chaos forwards this link. You can actually watch the segment of the video below. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 12:59 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This is getting interesting! Wonder how the suits at Viacom will handle this?

Posted by: MCPO Airdale at April 07, 2006 03:52 PM (WOQ34)

2 Forget the suits, I want to know how the American people will handle it. My money is on burying their heads in the sand but we can still hope. I don't think that Comedy Central has the nuts to play it.

Posted by: Roy Bettencourt at April 07, 2006 04:23 PM (ApLW9)

3 So, what happens? Does Cartman leave, burn down the school, throw bombs at the Rhode Island embassy in South Park, and murder Catholic priests?

Posted by: The Gentle Cricket at April 07, 2006 04:38 PM (USZUJ)

4 If he stays in the Muslim mode, he does just that, Cricket.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 07, 2006 04:40 PM (rUyw4)

5 The video has been removed from YouTube for a terms of service violation.

Posted by: Ed Minchau at April 07, 2006 06:00 PM (pPVQ0)

6 This isn't really a big deal. South Park already aired images of Mohammed like 50 times in the David Blaine Episode called Super Best Friends.

Posted by: Hey at April 07, 2006 07:10 PM (ga6Sw)

7 amazing episode. taking shots at family guy, which I think is great regardless, and then starting more controversy with Mohammed. They deserved that Peabody Award.

Posted by: i love it at April 07, 2006 07:34 PM (yymB8)

8 Hey, I forgot about the Super Best Freinds episode. What was Muhammed's super power again? I remember Jesus had super carpentry skills and Joseph Smith had freezing breath, but I can't rememember Muhammed's.

Posted by: Rusty at April 08, 2006 08:30 AM (JQjhA)

9 He makes fire from his arms.

Posted by: Jens at April 08, 2006 01:34 PM (byt+0)

10 Have they blown up KENNY yet

Posted by: sandpiper at April 08, 2006 01:52 PM (qMAo+)

11 I watched this episode, and it was f***ing funny. But I felt like it wasn't mocking Muslims so much, as making fun of the reaction of America and other Western nations to the whole Denmark Muhammed cartoons. oh, and of course it took the piss out of family guy. Yeah, Muslims were portrayed as over reacting, but the real target was the pussy TV execs who pander to certain groups demands. http://celebrityreligion.typepad.com

Posted by: charlotte at April 09, 2006 08:27 PM (l8gSf)

12 I wonder if they will show Muhamhead (pigs piss upon him) chugging down "Allah's Swine Sperm Beer"?

Posted by: Pagan Piggy Goddess Allah at April 10, 2006 09:25 AM (q78EV)

13 They wimped out. They censored the cartoon just like they've pulled the Scientology episode from rotation. I know it's just a commedy network but sadly they are the only dissitant(sp?) voice on television (e.g. Daily Show) What we were taught in school about the bill of right and the fourth estate isn't so true anymore... Anyone who thinks this is about Muslims is wrong. This is about freedom of speech.

Posted by: Ken at April 12, 2006 09:26 PM (07yKX)

14 did YouTube pull the video?

Posted by: tyler at April 13, 2006 01:00 PM (RNtG2)

15 That's the great thing about South Park, they don't care if they offend anyone, Carlos Mencia is the same way. Comedy Central pussed out on this issue, but they did it worse with the whole Tom Cruise/Scatology, uh... I mean Scientology bit. These guys just say all of the things that most of us think but would get in trouble for saying. (Just look up the lyrics for The Clash's song "Know Your Rights")

Posted by: memphis761 at April 13, 2006 03:43 PM (D3+20)

16 yea, that was rediculous that they cencored it, and even with trey and matt so blatantly daring them not to! "if comedy central doesnt puss out" haha. well it was still a good episode even without seeing muhamed. the bart simpson charicter cracked me up! and the whole family guy thing was sweet!

Posted by: Brandyn at April 16, 2006 03:12 PM (NypUT)

17 This episode wasn't just about the muhammed cartoons, it was also about the scientology episode getting pulled. Stan actually says in the episode that if one episode (of family guy) gets pulled then it'll just make it easier the next time.This is what Comedy Central are doing to Southpark. They should of left the scientology episode, I mean you can't deny that is an evil orginisation. They just went for the muhammed Cartoon to prove a point. I think Comedy central played right into Trey & Matts hands personally

Posted by: Gareth at April 17, 2006 07:35 PM (YbeBt)

18 i just want to reiterate the Super best friends episode where Muhammed shot fire out of his hands trying to stop evil statue lincoln

Posted by: dizzle at April 19, 2006 03:21 PM (/W5u5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 05, 2006

Cindy Sheehan Speak to SF HS Students Friday

California Conservative tips us to CindyÂ’s new gig.

SF Examiner SheehanÂ’s visit was arranged by students in the schoolÂ’s Revolution Youth group, an after-school clubÂ… ..When parent Matt Mitguard, who has two children at Lowell, heard about the visit, he contacted Cheng to express concernÂ…

Well yeah.

Posted by: Howie at 09:03 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Revolution Youth group is an after-school club? Only in such places as San Francisco and Seattle do high school children have parents stupid enough to endorse this kind of behavior. You could just build a fence around SF and there would be the asylum. What a fricking bunch of moonbat lunatics!

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 05, 2006 09:15 PM (rUyw4)

2 Comrade, you know not which you speak. We have many such groups in Havana, so, no, it is not just San Francisco and Seattle. Viva la revoluci*cough cough cough hack spit* cion. Excuse, please.

Posted by: jesusland fidel at April 05, 2006 09:44 PM (/qy9A)

3 A lot of people nowadays feel the need to preach about 'revolution' whenever they can. Yet they never have any specifics about what's supposed to happen after they get their revolution - when the work really begins.

Posted by: Graeme at April 06, 2006 06:34 AM (CFQ2m)

4 'Zactly, Graeme.

Posted by: Oyster at April 06, 2006 08:22 AM (uZPWy)

5 A good place for her to live right there in HANOI ON THE BAY

Posted by: sandpiper at April 06, 2006 08:24 AM (e/auS)

6 Graeme, The real problem we have here is if these people had a "revolution" and were successful, who would do any work? Who in this group would know how to keep the city utilities going, such as electricity and water? These people are just plain stupid. They know nothing and can do nothing. They expect things to be done just because they say, do it, and have no idea how the real world works. What a bunch of idiots.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 06, 2006 09:42 AM (rUyw4)

7 I graduated from that school last year. There are TONS of bias teachers in that school its unbelievable! :[

Posted by: Billy Faeth at April 06, 2006 01:59 PM (KR0ga)

8 Welcome to California. Check out one of the candidates for governor: http://janicejordan.org

Posted by: ken at April 06, 2006 05:39 PM (hFZJx)

9 Billy, how did you keep your sanity?

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 06, 2006 06:50 PM (rUyw4)

10 Sheehan is one ugly cow. Someone pleeeeesssse put that cow out to pasture.

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 06, 2006 07:55 PM (D2g/j)

11 WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams

Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 09:23 PM (dMWB/)

12 If these people had a "revolution" and were successful, who would do any work? First you hold a bunch of Revolutionary Meetings, elect some Revolutionary-Steering-Committees, and some Sub-Committee on Revolutionary Prid. Just give everybody a Committee-Level Managerial Job, it's socialist paternalism the way SF has always been. And it's San Francisco, they have resources - why else declare the whole City a "City-of-Refuge," free from the enforcement of federal immigration laws. It'a fly-a trap (and often smells that way) - they round up all the Illegal Aliens in their Amnesty Shelters, and put THEM to work....

Posted by: -keith in silicon valley at April 07, 2006 03:35 PM (pmP8H)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

106kb generated in CPU 0.6781, elapsed 6.003 seconds.
124 queries taking 5.8568 seconds, 389 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 2725
Files: 7
Bytes: 34.6M
CPU Time: 1:17
Queries: 310544

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76633

Feeds

April 27, 2006

April 25, 2006

April 19, 2006

April 17, 2006

April 14, 2006

April 10, 2006

April 07, 2006

April 05, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds