Monday, June 26, 2006

Yet another example of BDS

Rob at Say Anything points out the following:
You know what's funny? The same people who support a tax system that requires me to report every penny I earn every year as well as many of the places where I spend my money are suddenly up in arms over an intelligence program that tracks financial transactions in order to catch terrorists.

Just so we're clear, here's the liberal position:

  • Tracking your money so that the government can get a "fair" share: good.

  • Tracking your money to catch terrorists: baaaadddd.

Why this double standard? My guess is because it was Bush's idea, and they hate Bush.

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Someone Else's Thought For The Day

Jonathan Wilde at Catallarchy wrote:

And if they’re simultaneously showing a lower-back tattoo… well, there’s no bigger turnoff. Except maybe smoking. Besides, tattoos lost their rebelliousness a long time ago. These days, they’re about as edgy as minivans.

Tatoos are not only visually ugly but they also strike me as a sign of a reversion to a less civilized mode of behavior.

Needless to say I find this to be a turn off.

Saturday, June 24, 2006

A Message

Certain enemies of Mankind are whining about the rightful actions of free people:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has begun filing complaints with the FBI about comments on this blog and others (not front page posts). I know this because I’ve spoken with two different agents recently about LGF comments that were reported to the FBI by CAIR.

Just thought you might like to know too. The Islamists are starting to go after the blogosphere, using the tools provided by our own society.

I have a message for CAIR and any other anti-human filth who wish to subjugate us:



What are your questions on this block of instruction?

A Link

Let's go for a ride with Helga!

(Do not do this at home.)

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Karl Marx Should Watch His Language

Doctor Walter Williams has dug up some interesting quotes from the uberparasit himself:

". . . it is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother had not interbred with a nigger. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The obtrusiveness of the fellow is also nigger-like."

My... how progressive!

Monday, June 19, 2006

And Now...

Peter Collier and David Horowitz on the Party of Treason:

It is hard not to conclude that the Democrats want America to be defeated in Iraq and that it is not only their electoral opportunism but their worldview that demands it.


Friday, June 16, 2006

Thought for the Day

Someone who declares that hatred of evil is evil may not be an evil being himself, but that is certainly the way to bet.

Thursday, June 15, 2006

So Anyway...

... I go offline for the better part of two weeks and the Zarkman gets nailed by "Team Satan." (Not that I mind of course, being a former team member myself.)

I do note that Denial also appears to be a river in Hell.

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Logic and Liberals don't often mix...

Take a look at two responses to a post on my blog concerning Islamofacist terrorist Al-Zarqawi shuffling off this mortal coil by way of a pair of US 500 pound bombs.

The first response, predictably one of the standard leftist talking points:
I cheered this news; hope it means we can leave Iraq sooner instead of later.

The same poster later makes the following comment (again, right from the far left list of talking points):
...he was only responsible for about 6 percent of the attacks (defense department figures) and some other piece of shit will take his place soon

Which is it? Either Al-Zarqawi is a major terrorist bad-ass and his death with bring Islamofacist activity in Iraq to a much lower level, thus allowing a sooner withdrawal of US troops or he's minor player only "responsible for about 6 percent of the attacks."

You can't have it both ways and claim to be using rational thought.

Monday, June 12, 2006

The MSM/DNC view

Pretty much one in the same, as Hugh Hewitt points out, using MSM coverage of the death of Zarqawi as an example:
It isn't sad. It is predictable.

MSM has been trained by Democratic Party cues to view every development in the war through the lens of the political war on the Bush Adminsitration.

News is never "good," but "long overdue." Excellent political developments are mere flip-turns en route to another length of anti-Bush diatribe.

Here's the key analysis you won't here on MSM today: Had we not invaded Iraq, Zarqawi would not be dead today, but rather ensconced in some Baghdad safe house or larger encampment plotting more savagery. Had we not invaded Iraq, Saddam's decision menu today would be how much or little assistance to give Zarqawi, followed by the allocation of bribes to his various U.N. oil-for-food stooges, followed by succession planning with his mad-as-hatter sons.

HT to Ed Driscoll

Sunday, June 11, 2006

Inside the mind of the Barking Moonbat...

I know it is a scary place, but James Lileks takes us there.
You're an enlightened world citizen. Your T-shirt says "9/11 was an inside job." You're pretty sure we're living in a fascist state, that President Bush taps the Dixie Chicks' phones, Christian abortion clinic bombers outnumber jihadis, and the war on "terror" is a distraction from the real threats: carbon emissions and Pat Robertson. Then you learn that 17 people were arrested in a terrorist bomb plot. How do you process the information? Let's take it step by step.

Gosh, that's horrible, you think. But no -- that's what they WANT you to feel. Recall the prime directive: Question Authority (unless he's a college professor). The plotters must have been impoverished olive farmers radicalized by the removal of Saddam Hussein. Why, if someone came in and toppled your president, you'd go to their country and ... well, you'd thank them. Unless they did it for the wrong reasons! Then you'd blow something up. Like an SUV dealership. At night. Anyway, you understand; you care a lot about Iraqis these days. You think about Iraq more than China, to be honest, but it's not as if you'll scrape off your "Free Tibet" bumper sticker -- unless it's to make room for "Free Darfur." Or "Hands Off Darfur," depending.

Wait a minute: The "terrorists" were Canadian? You can understand someone blowing up trains in Spain and London. They sent troops to an illegal war cooked up by neocons who want to kill brown people for Exxon and Jesus, or something. You can understand, reluctantly, blowing up teens in an Israeli pizza parlor, because the Jews took the West Bank from the sovereign, ancient nation of Palestine. (How can a liberal socialist country behave so poorly? The world is full of mysteries.) But Canada? Isn't Michael Moore from Canada? You can get medical marijuana from married gay doctors in Canada, and no one has guns. You console yourself: Maybe they were really planning to attack the U.S.
You worry this will push Haditha off the front page. It's very important that everyone concentrate on the atrocities committed by U.S. troops every day. (It's such a relief not to have to pretend to support the troops anymore.) Anyway, nothing happened. Nothing blew up. If the suspects were planning something, they didn't do it, and this proves we can handle this as a law enforcement matter. Even though the police are racists.

Your head hurts.

You have a friend in Toronto. She's cool. It would kill her if these arrests were made possible by NSA eavesdropping.

Read the whole thing.

Friday, June 09, 2006

California Election News

In was a key race in the democrats plan to paint the Republicans as the "Party of Corruption", Republican Brian Bilbray defeated democrat Francine Busby.

This was a congressional race to replace former Rep. Cunningham, a Republican who is going to due time for taking bribes.

Voters in San Diego decided that they were not going to buy the DNC spin.
Perhaps they remembered that the democrats are just as, and probably more corrupt than the Republicans.

Monday, June 05, 2006

Responding the to spin machine...

The NY Times is back to running puff pieces on John Kerry, the absentee Senator from the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts. Blackfive points out that this attempt to fix Kerry's miliary record is in preparation for another run at the Presidency.

Thomas Lipscomb responds to the puff piece with common sense and actual facts.
Here are some highlights:
Kate Zernike's story on the front page of the Memorial Day Sunday New York Times, "Kerry Pressing Swift Boat Case Long After Loss," is an unfortunate reminder of the Times's embarrassingly poor coverage of Kerry in the face of the Swift Boat Veterans' for Truth charges in the 2004 election. Now as then, the Times acts as if the issues involved were between Kerry's latest representations of his record and the "unsubstantiated" charges of the Swift Boat group. The Times used the term "unsubstantiated" more than twenty times during its election coverage and continues to make no discernable effort to examine any of the charges in detail.

But there was plenty of evidence in the work of other news organizations that some of the charges, and the Kerry military records themselves, were worth examining seriously. I found numerous problems with Kerry's records on his website in my own reporting for the Chicago Sun-Times: a Silver Star with a V for valor listed that the Navy stated it had never awarded in the history of the US Navy, three separate medal citations with some heavy revisions in Kerry's favor signed by former Navy Secretary John Lehman who denied ever signing them, to name two.
But the facts on this are already on the record and no matter what Kerry "researchers" may come up with they should be addressed by any reporter attempting a review of the dispute. Admiral Roy Hoffman may have been head of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, but he was also in command of all the Swift Boat operations in Vietnam, directly under the commander of all sea operations in Vietnam, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt.

Any tasking for insertions of special operations troops across borders by sea, whether Seals, CIA, Army Special Forces or Vietnamese troops like CIDG had to come through his command. Hoffman stated he was never asked to handle missions for the CIA. "They had their own teams for that. And none of my Coastal Commands ever inserted any troops of this kind into Cambodia. We had some operations we ran north that I am not at liberty to discuss."
Tedd Peck, accompanied Kerry's PCF 44 on his PCF 57 from Cam Ranh down to their new assignment at An Thoi where they arrived on December 8, 1968. Peck served there with Kerry until he was wounded and med-evaced out on January 29, 1969. Douglas Brinkley states that "Kerry liked Peck." So what does Peck have to say about secret missions out of An Thoi to Cambodia? "There never was one. And I never saw a Navy Seal at An Thoi the whole time I served there with Kerry"

What does it take to wake up a good reporter that there are some issues here besides one junior lieutenant's latest assertions on the basis, once again, of totally undisclosed records? It isn't simply a matter of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth "lies." The facts recited by Kerry make no military sense, fly in direct opposition to authoritative testimony, and are yet to be backed by any records anyone has seen. And Kerry keeps changing his story.
Zernike makes much of the support of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth "backed by Republican donors and consultants," which indeed it was. But she shows no interest in who is backing "the Patriot Project" challenging the Swift Vets claims "formed by Kerry supporters" since February 2005 that is the occasion for her story.
In any case, it is time for some tough reporting to evaluate the Kerry's claims as listed in Zernike's article. I will be following up with several other key incidents which appear to be widely at variance with these claims. These will include what appears to be the current state of the evidence about the "skimmer" operation Kerry has decided to put in play again and the greatest newspaper coverup in modern history.