Publius' Forum

By Warner Todd Huston

"Unless we in the West adapt more quickly than do canny Islamic terrorists in this constantly evolving war, cease our internecine fighting and stop forgetting what we've learned about our enemies---there will be disasters to come far worse than Sept. 11."
-Victor Davis Hanson

I can only imagine that many Americans don't really believe that we are at war with Islamofascism because they have not been hurt badly enough by the enemy to desire to answer the call to arms. Many Americans refuse even to admit that the threat we face in militant Islam is a fascist styled movement in the first place. Many don't see the damage already done or the damage that could be done in the future... the near future at that.

Unfortunately, we are faced with a serious flaw in human nature and that is explanation in and of itself as to why we just cannot yet get serious about this war. Rarely does man take steps to avoid catastrophe whether on an individual or societal basis, be they clashes of civilizations or natural disasters the effect of which could have been made less severe with but some few sensible policies.

While man rarely takes the steps needed to avert disaster, after a disaster there are all kinds of steps taken to prevent future recurrences of whatever that disaster might be -- it is then that finger pointing becomes epidemic. History shows that there are all kinds of instances where the dots lined up to disaster when we look into the past with our 20/20 hindsight employed. We plainly see, for instance, Hitler's lead up to WWII and all the obvious warnings that called out to the world, a call to which few paid any heed.

As many have pointed out, today we face 1938 all over again in that the world refuses to listen to the clarion call to war being made by the Hitler(s) of the 21st century. And, even after we lost nearly 3,000 every-day citizens in the World Trade Center destruction of 9/11/01, we have Americans doubting if we are, indeed, at war.

What will it take to make them take seriously our enemy's desires to make war on us? Many refuse even to listen to the overt claims of belligerence by our avowed enemies and the actions that back that sentiment up.

Perhaps only pressure from our fellow citizens will awaken those who are floating through life without a care in the world?

Perhaps it falls to us, those who realize we really face the same kind of world-wide danger faced by the generation of WWII, it falls to we, the descendants of Churchill and FDR, to urge our neighbors and countrymen to face this challenge. We cannot let up on our call to arms, to alert our fellows to the danger we all face.

That means that Islamists must be made as much an enemy as the "Hun", the "Jap", the "Nazi", whatever we called the enemy in the past, that was threatening the world.

Today, the enemy is Islam... yet not Islam. And therein lies another thing preventing many to understand this war. Being children of the reformation and enlightenment thinkers of the 1700's and before, the west -- America in particular -- is loath to denigrate an individual’s religion, so any condemnation of Islam in total makes us squirm. Of course, that is a good propensity, but in this case it is misguided to a dangerous degree.

Certainly we can allow Muslims their belief without desiring to kill them all. But, Islam today is not merely a religion, but is being used as the basis for government in every Islamic nation and this is what we fight. Westerners successfully separated church and state long ago, but Islam has accelerated the mixture.

We’ve faced this before. Many mistake Nazism for a simple system of government. But Hitler did not sell Nazism as a simple alternative to communism or capitalism. He sold it as a religion, a deep belief in the superiority of the German people. He sold it as if the Germans had a divine right to lead. The Japanese, with their Shintoism and ancestor worship, did the same thing. Japanese Imperialism was not just a “government” but a religiously ingrained belief in their divine rights as Asians.

So, any claims of attacking "Islam" makes a westerner shrink in discomfort, but it is a notion we must warm to or we will find ourselves oppressed, murdered, and impoverished by fascist Islam.

Now, what do we do?

Like in WWII, the only way to win this war Islam has brought upon us is to kill millions of them quite regardless of their individual "guilt". Sadly, that means lots of women, lots of babies, and lots of old men must die.

It isn't that we revel in their deaths. We certainly mourn it. It truly makes us angry. But they have brought this war and we must end it -- and if we don't everything we are and have is threatened with extinction by Islamists. Just as we killed millions of Japanese and Germans to end that threat we must kill millions of Islamists.

It truly is us versus them.

There ARE no "innocent" Islamists. We cannot allow the thought of "innocence" to invade our resolve. In this way, billions and a far-flung future of Muslims that might live in peace, observing their religion peacefully, will be free of the current dominance of Islamofascist horror and oppression.

So, if we must call them fascists, then we should do so. We must destroy this link between government and Islamism, attacking it until it becomes anathema to posterity for Muslims. The sooner this happens the better off posterity will be.

Let the leftists of the future write their tsk-tsking books 100 years hence on how horrible these days are, let them blindly excoriate our finishing this fight like our ivory tower historians do the use of the "A" Bomb at the tail end of WWII. But let them write their misreading of history in the comfort of a time when Islam is as dead as a guiding force for world wide terror as Nazism and Shintoism now is.

For that matter, let it be as dead as Christianity closely intermingled with government is now dead. After all, a thousand years ago Christianity was a worldwide threat to peace and the oppression that religion caused forced the west to shuck religion away from our forms of government. The only way for Islam to become peaceful is for so many Muslims to die now that the idea of using Islam as a governing ideal within government is anathema to Muslims forever more. Muslims must feel so injured by their former belief in Islam that they could never make themselves associate it with government again. Just like Nazism and Shintoism are now shunned, in that same way let Islam so be shunned.

I didn't start with this opinion years ago. When 9/11 happened, I thought that this was just the action of a few radical Muslim nuts. But it is not so. The actions of Islamofascists are a direct and logical extension of Islam. Just as Communism must, in the end, lead to collapse, Islam as a part of government must lead to worldwide war.

Islam is anti-capitalist, anti-modern, anti-freedom, anti-individualist, anti-human rights... it is AGAINST every single thing we stand for in the west and against every ideal that has brought real peace and prosperity to so many billions of mankind.

We must stop them from coming to our shores. We must stop their charities and organizations -- like CAIR -- from raising money or even existing in the west. We must make it very difficult for their Mosques to stay open. We must revoke all student visas for peoples who live in Muslim nations and profess a belief in Islam. We need to step up surveillance on Muslims in the west. They should be looked upon with suspicion for our own protection. Islam must be isolated and contained.

I am saddened that I have had to come to this conclusion. I'd much rather it had been true that only a few Muslims felt the hatred for everything western that they do. It would have been so much less distressing if it were true that there are only a few bad apples in Islam. I would have loved to live and let live.

But, they have revealed themselves over and over again, to be enemies to the world. Oppressors who wish to destroy everyone in their path. Warpers of religion, usurpers of truth, murderers, thieves, inhuman animals.

Let their blood flow in the streets like great rivers as penance for their evils.

This message must be drummed from sea to shining sea and in every part of Europe -- which is far more at risk than the USA, by the way -- or we will surely lose this war, diminish ourselves, and end the era of freedoms and liberties that so many have died to assure. And we will do it with a whimper unless we stand up and say NO, Islam IS the enemy.

Let us hope they do not write those history books 100 years from now asking why we sat idly by and did nothing as Islamic fascism spread throughout the world?

It’s time to fight.

-By Warner Todd Huston

A few days ago I wrote about a bill introduced by Senator Tom Coburn to make Federal Funding awards Public on the internet (Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act - S. 2590) being placed on hold by an unknown Senator.

Today it has been revealed that the "secret Senator" is Ted Stevens (R, Alaska). The claim from Stevens' office is that he has "concerns" about the bill so he requested the hold ... and he DIDN'T do it in secret.

"Sen. Stevens has a series of concerns and questions about the bill. He wants a cost benefit analysis to make sure it doesn't create an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy and not meet its purpose," (Stevens spokesman) Saunders said.

"This wasn't in any way secretive," Saunders said. "We're baffled as to why it's been called a secret hold."

That claim does not hold to the truth, however as many of us on the internet have been calling for the head of whatever senator did this for well over a week and no mention was ever made of who this "secret Senator" was until now.
Read more »

-By Joel A. Arends, US Army

Let me introduce myself. My name is Joel Arends and from 2003 – 2005 I served in Baghdad, Iraq with the 1st Cav Division as an Infantry Platoon Leader and eventually as Company Commander. I have read your site and am impressed with it. Since returning from Iraq I have also been performing the same type of mission which you have been executing through your website and other activities. I have been speaking at college campuses and service organizations about the successes our troops have accomplished in Iraq. I have also been working with a group called Families United Mission, of which I notice you are listed as an ally, to get the word out about supporting our troops and the mission. (www.familiesunitedmission.com)

To that end, I am planning a trip to Iraq through the DOD embed journalist program for the last part of August before law school starts. (Dates are flexible) I am in the initial planning stage and still gauging support at this point. My intent is to link up with a South Dakota National Guard Unit that has lost four guys and is due to demob in October. I would be providing daily stories to any national media, local media here in the Sioux Falls, SD area, blogging and live phone interviews, etc... I am also contemplating taking a cameraman from a local t.v. station who is interested. I will also be hooking up with a MITT team which I trained, after returning from Iraq, while working with the 91st at Ft. Carson. They have been training Iraqi soldiers and their progress is worth getting the word out about.

In all, the editorial content of my stories would focus on how successful these units have been in achieving their respective missions from the perspective of a combat vet who left country 16 months ago. Wade Zirkle from Vets for Freedom (see www.vetsforfreedom.org) and I recently spoke about his trip to Iraq and he gave me some good feedback which I am incorporating into my plan.

I want your help in two ways. I am seeking access to national conservative broadcast outlets and financing. I am seeking access to people who can hook me up with nationwide radio programs such as Laura Ingraham, G. Gordon Liddy, Hugh Hewitt, etc..., broadcasters who would be interested in interviewing me while I am there and linking to blog content. I would also do local radio in your area if you have outlets who want to hear about positive progress happening in Iraq. The trip will be no longer than two weeks and focused on getting the word out through friendly media organizations.

I am also asking if WarChick.com or any other groups or private donors you have access to would be willing to provide financial and logistical support for a mission like this. Zirkle's budget was around 2-3k per person, of which 90% was for airfare. If I took another person I am estimating I would need 5k. Your support would not have to be incredibly large. I am working to leverage contributions from similar organizations such as yours who have similar missions: supporting the troops and their mission.

My thoughts are that the mainstream media has their reporting with their perspective, now it's time for our side to send reports back home from our people with our perspective.

Thanks for your time and let me know your thoughts on this.

Joel A. Arends

jaarends@hotmail.com or joel.arends@us.army.mil

-By Warner Todd Huston

According to the London Free Press, Americans visiting Canada is on the downward trend.

"A drop in American visitors to the lowest level ever recorded is being cushioned by more Canadians staying at home, London-area businesses and tourism officials say."

I say GOOD. Canada has been increasingly becoming American haters in their politics, entertainment, and news reporting. All the while they have become one of our biggest security problems with that giant, unprotected border we share.

After that big bust of Canadian terrorists a few months back, it became clearer just how lax the Canadians are where it concerns terrorism.

But, the incompetency of their security services aside, it is things like the following that many Americans are just sick and tired of hearing about...

Ontario university mocks Bush in new campaign

"A small northern Ontario university has sparked controversy by launching an edgy new recruitment campaign that mocks U.S. President George Bush and his Ivy League alma mater.

...Last month, simplyaudiobooks.ca, an audio book rental service, plastered posters and billboards around Toronto featuring a photograph of Bush and the words: 'Don't Read Enough? Rent 10,000 books on tape/CD.'"

Americans should stay home and keep their money home, too. French wine has been losing millions since 9/11/01 and I hope the boycott continues to devastate their economy and we should tell Canada to jump in any one of their many lakes.

There is so much to see and do right here in the states, and in the US held territories. there just isn't any real REASON to go to a foreign country and spend our money. Spend US money at HOME!

- By Vince Johnson

It is now "scientifically" official! Pluto is no longer a planet. Two paragraphs in the August 2006 issue of New Scientist Magazine provide a very concise explanation:

"Pluto is now only a dwarf planet, one of three in the solar system. The fate of Pluto was determined on Thursday (August 24, 2006) by a vote among members of the International Astronomical Union in Prague."

"They approved an initial resolution that requires a planet to dominate its neighborhood by clearing orbiting material out of its path. Dwarf planets, on the other hand, are large enough for gravity to make them round, but not big enough to clear out their orbits."

If my interpretation is correct, this could refer to a lot of celestial debris occupying the same orbit as Pluto. Since Pluto is not big enough to pull this material out of orbit, members of the International Astronomical Union decided to downgrade Pluto from "planet" to the status of "dwarf planet."................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

The New York Times' article Choosing a ‘God Squad,’ When the Mind Has Faded is a perfect example of the editorial position of a newspaper misleading with a headline.

When headlines like this are chosen, one wonders what exactly is going through the mind of the headline writer (most should know that headline writers are often different people than the authors of the article). Regardless, though, the headlines reflect the policy and position of the paper, which may or may not be the same as that of the article's author.

This example of a headline that does not really fit the article comes to us from the August 29th edition of the New York Times topping what is billed as an "essay" about the efficacy or sense of giving dialysis, paid for by the tax payer, to a patient with brain damage.

Now, the headline would make one assume that a battle between religion and healthcare is the subject of the piece, but that is not really the case. The essay itself questions the sense of providing expensive procedures to people who Doctors determine really have no chance of getting better. The author, Doctor Barron H. Lerner, questions the practice of dialysis as it currently stands.

"When patients went into kidney failure, dialysis was reflexively instituted. The fact that some of the patients had advanced Alzheimer’s disease, some other type of brain damage or a terminal disease received insufficient scrutiny.

Of course, aggressive care is hardly limited to dialysis. Throughout the United States, other potentially lifesaving technologies, like respirators and cancer chemotherapy, have been overused."

But Dr. Lerner makes no concerted attempt to bring religious views into question. The closest the essay gets to discussing principles outside of strict medical diagnosis is the following:

"But the fear of lawsuits continues to worry many nephrologists who believe that it is safer to provide dialysis. And there remains that old American unwillingness to let people die, even when it is surely their time."

Perhaps an oblique reference to religious practices of the sanctity of life, but hardly a direct attack on religion.

Now, certainly Dr. Lerner's position could be cast into the "culture of death" category that many religious believers have identified that represents the views of too many of our ethically challenged medical establishment. but, all those arguments would count as follow up to this piece and NOT as its subject matter.

However, the editorial opinion of the paper is what drove this headline to be written, quite regardless of the piece it precedes. The New York Times has long ago staked out an anti-religious editorial position especially where it concerns health care. And even though this essay is not about religion versus health care, the headline immediately takes the reader to that supposition by interjecting "God Squad" into the discussion at the outset.

Just one more tiny example of bias in the New York Times and how they insist on infusing everything they print with that bias. Health care, sports, travel... they may as well all be on the Op Ed pages.

-By Warner Todd Huston

Not since Dan Quayle or Spiro Agnew has there been a vice president that the MSM loved to hate so much. Now, the Chicago Tribune is even going so far as to pick apart vice president Cheney's verbal ticks and making fun, or even assigning perfidy to them.

In an article titled, Cheney's usage of `if you will' is `like' hedging, Tribune "cultural critic" Julia Keller, assumes that Cheney's over usage of the phrase "if you will" amounts to him verbally pausing while he thinks up another lie to tell the people, or at the very least amounts to the VP trying to sound smarter than he relly is.

Her piece is filled with jabs at the VP over a simple phrase ... the type of thing nearly everybody does everyday of their lives. I am sure if you think about your own language usage, you'd realize that you, too, have some phrase you use far too often. From the common "Umm", to "like", "You Know" (and its sister phrase, "you know what I mean"), to "cool" or "dude", many of us have such verbal ticks.

Apparently, Mz. Keller, though, feels it isn't right for the VP to have one. It makes him a fuddy-duddy, effete, or "fusty", according to her. She also calls the usage of the phrase "if you will" a "hedge".

Now, she doesn't come right out and say it, but it seems to me that she is trying to hint that she means the interpretation of the word "hedge" to be "lie".

Gregory Pullum, linguistics professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz and frequent contributor to the blog Language Log, has opined several times about "if you will," defining it as "a way to signal hedging about vocabulary choice -- a momentary uncertainty about whether the adjacent expression is exactly the right form of words or not."

Cheney, though, is not known for harboring uncertainties about anything, from foreign policy to phraseology. Thus there must be something else going on when he goes to the "if you will" well.

Well? Well, indeed? Keller ends her piece with the thought that Cheney's constant use of "if you will" amounts to his "hedging" because of his "options as a man in a suit are limited" and not because "it makes him sound smart and serious-minded".

In fact, Keller spends quite a bit of time reading a lack of "smarts" or serious mindedness into Cheney throughout her piece. All over a simple verbal tick.

I remember when Spiro Agnew was the favorite target of the News Media in a pre-Watergate Nixon administration. Spiro's most remembered phrase was "nattering nabobs of negativity". Perhaps Agnew's colorful phraseology was something it was easy and not too mean at which to poke, but it WAS, at least, colorful. Making fun of "if you will" as if it were a similar example of the over-the-top rhetoric as Agnew's "nattering nabobs of negativity", however, reeks of the picayunish attacks of small minded reporters that simply hate the VP.

I think I like Spiro's colorful epithets. And I would cast them all at the MSM, those "pusillanimous pussyfooters" of the fourth estate, obsequious Cheney haters all.

- By Frederick Meekins

For years, enemies of mankind such as Steve Irwin and Jeff Corwin have duped the American people into believing we have nothing to fear from allowing megafauna to trundle unimpeded across the face of the continent.

On these propaganda pieces disguised as informative educational programming, we are told that alligators and black bears wouldn't harm a hair on a human head.

However, three deaths at the mouths of ravenous reptiles and the report of a child being mauled to death by a black bear makes you stop and wonder if the wrong people weren't eaten for the sake of the gene pool.

The next time citizens hear of pleas by environmentalists to reintroduce extinct species, they would do well to think back to the tragedy befalling these individuals and their families............................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

It is a great line often used as a toss away by people who are interested in politics, I've used it myself a few times. When faced with a court ruling that seems absurd, or a politician that is proposing something that doesn't fit in the framework of our history and Constitution, it becomes easy to say that they know nothing of the Constitution.

Many times, that isn't as true as it is mere rhetoric with which one might beat an opponent about the head with. But, sometimes a politician will say something so blasted stupid that you just KNOW that the epithet fits them like a glove.

Such is true of a state senator from the State of Maryland, Lisa Gladden. A woman that has proven herself to be ignorant of the Constitution, not only of that in her own state but of the Federal government as well, along with other documents from our Founding era.

Currently, the Democrats in Maryland proposed a measure that directly violates their own state Constitution, according to the courts. They wanted to institute early voting days, arranged to occur before the general election day, yet the state Constitution directly and unequivocally states that state wide voting shall be held on one day a year only.

Anne Arundel County Circuit Judge Ronald Silkworth shot down the change the state's Democratic Party machine tried to make to the voting procedures, fortunately -- angering his Party, of course. This rebuke of their efforts by the judge caused our intrepid, lump-head in the state capitol to say:

"A constitution is a living, breathing document. If you always literally interpret the Constitution you get strange results, like 'all men are created equal,' so what do you do with the women?"

Not only is there nothing in the Constitution about "all men being created equal" (because that happens to be in the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution) but it is an indisputable fact that "men" was used as a description of mankind, all of humanity, not just humans of the male gender in the Founding era!

So, we have at least one REAL case of a woman so gut wrenchingly ignorant of history, law and the Constitution that we can correctly say she knows NOTHING about them all!

What a moron. But, someone VOTED for this moron, so the people get what they deserve.

-By Warner Todd Huston

This is an interesting little report from UPI. It seems that middle and upper middle class farmers in small villages throughout the European Union are… importing Polish wives.

"Well-to-do farmers, aged 25 to 40, from Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands and Spain, who would like to stay on their land, have a slim chance, if any, to marry girls from EU countries, the Polish Metro daily newspaper reported Monday."

You may wonder why this might be? Don't women in the EU want to be married? It seems the answer to that is "no". We have seen a precipitous drop in birth rates in the old European countries to the point where replacement the rate is in doubt and certainly no growth is occurring.

Births in the United States stands at replacement rate with 2.07 births per woman. Ireland is 1.87, New Zealand 1.79, Australia 1.76 ; Canada's at 1.5; Germany and Austria are at 1.3; Russia and Italy are at 1.2; Spain 1.1, that only about half replacement rate. According to Mark Steyn, "Spain's population is halving every generation. By 2050, Italy's population will have fallen by 22%, Bulgaria's by 36%, Estonia's by 52%. By 2050, there will be 100 million fewer Europeans, 100 million more Americans."

So, farmers in the EU cannot find women that want to have kids or that want to live in small villages and live that placid, rural farm life. Too many European women want that "Sex in the City" life of big cities, sexual freedom, and self-centered lifestyles. Living in a small farming village is not appealing to folks with that mentality.

Apparently European farmers imagine that Polish women are "more traditional" and have been looking to that country for mates.

"Polish girls and middle-aged women alike are conservative, not demanding and embrace traditional family life, and Frenchmen, Italians and Spaniards particularly want their would-be wives to be Roman Catholic, Belgrade's Beta news agency said.

Unlike many other Europeans, Polish women do not mind being farm wives, the Metro newspaper said."

Now this stands to reason, such as it is. After all, Poland is one of the most conservative countries in Europe. If one were to ask a European what the most Catholic country is one might equally get the answers of Ireland and Poland.

Further, Poland has been one of the few staunch supporters of the Bush Doctrine in Iraq and has repeatedly supplied troops to assist the coalition forces there. And Poland has, likewise, been very close to the United States, most likely in thanks for the USA's strong support of them during the waning days of communist totalitarianism and the US fascination with Solidarinosc and Lech Walesa.

But, looking closer into the story, one finds the sad fact that even Polish women are displaying a falling birth rate.

According to the BBC (admittedly an often biased source):

"But while birth rates have been falling steadily across the continent for decades, the fertility rate in Ireland is now 1.98, not too far off the population replacement level of 2.1. In Poland, it's just 1.23, among the bottom five in Europe. The country's population actually fell by almost half a million over the last six years. Estimates suggest there will be four million fewer Poles by 2030."

So, if EU farmers are turning to Polish women because they cannot find women in their own countries, yet even Poland is finding a rapidly falling birth rate, we must all be alarmed for the future ... and an immediate one at that ... of the strength of the countries in Europe.

As Mark Steyn recently said in his aforementioned Op Ed, "It's the Demography, Stupid ", he warns that "Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries."

Perhaps a bit alarmist, but certainly a perfectly acceptable extrapolation of trends should they continue along the lines they are now headed.

Now contrast that with the birth rate of Muslims in Europe.

"More are on the way. Today, the Muslim birth rate in Europe is three times higher than the non-Muslim one. If current trends continue, the Muslim population of Europe will nearly double by 2015, while the non-Muslim population will shrink by 3.5 percent."

With this single factor, we can see why European countries so often side with terrorists and against the US and Israel. It isn’t out of any stand on principles; it is out of pure fear, fear of that immigrant population turning against them.

Unfortunately, this European appeasement to curry favor from extremists will not garner them much by way of safety (and has not already) and many feel it won’t be long before there are enough Muslims to forcibly and materially alter European traditions and forms of governments.

In any case, we wish those EU farmers luck in love but we hope that they soon find women closer to home ready to bring the next generation of people into the world, none-the-less. And if they do not, their entire civilization is in doubt.

We have to apologize to some of you who did not get the feed for a few days. We are still adjusting and getting used to the new feed service.

I am hopeful that we are getting it fixed today.

Well, we took a few days off, but we are back on the job NOW!!

Thanks for checking back.

Publius

By Vince Johnson

I used to get extremely frustrated whenever I got bored. The cure was surprisingly simple. I started making a list of things to do in order to switch from boredom to something more stimulating. Here are some of the things on my list:

1. One of the things I've wanted to do for several years is write to NIKE about their slogan. "Just Do It!" I've wanted to ask them where they got the idea they have a right to tell me to "Just Do It?" I don't want to "Just Do It" and I don't have to "Just Do It." The word "it" will always remind me of NIKE, just like word "is" reminds me of Clinton. Neither one will tell what "it" and "is" stand for, so I'll stick with my Bass loafers, thank you.

2. Sometimes I take a famous slogan and think of ways to improve it. Like "Drivers Wanted!" for example. This slogan was used by Volkswagen. What they really meant was "Buyers Wanted!" If you don't believe me, stop by one of their showrooms. (Hmmm. Maybe NIKE should switch to "Do Be Do Be Do." Frank Sinatra did.)

3. How about this slogan? "Breakfast of Champions" Everybody knows this one. Wheaties of course. A lot of famous athletes have appeared on their boxes. Michael Jordan. Joe Dimaggio. Dizzy Dean. Tiger Woods. Etc. When I’m bored, I try to think of all the famous athletes we will NEVER see on a box of Wheaties: After thinking up Barry Bonds, Dennis Rodman, and Randy Moss, I move on..

4. During dinner conversations, finish all of your sentences with "in accordance with the prophecy!" I've never had enough brass to try that. So I think about sending this idea to Al Gore and George Bush. They both seem to get bored easily and they both make a lot of prophecies. This suggestion would be non-partisan. Wouldn't it?

5. Five days in advance, tell your friends you cannot attend their party because you're not in the mood. I don't know if I have enough brass to do that either, because no one asks me to their party five days in advance. Maybe I'll try it anyway. The imp in me gets a charge out of watching peoples jaw drop.

6. Park the car along the highway sometime. Put on some dark sunglasses and point a black hair dryer at passing traffic. Make a list of how many slow down. If a Trooper asks if you're having some sort of a problem, show him the list and offer to discuss the situation over a cup of coffee at Dunk'n Donuts. Sir!

7. Go to the local grocery store and check out the produce section. If approached by the manager, suggest that he pipe in sounds of thunder and the aroma of fresh rain just before the water sprays over all the veggies. Remind him that the idea works at some really cool supermarkets in Honolulu, so it ought to be worth a try. Be subtle. Don't push it. He’s probably read about this in one of the trade magazines.

8. Check out the dairy section and suggest he pipe in the sounds of cows mooing and the aroma of fresh cut hay. If he starts backing away, tell him to relax and think about his customers. They appreciate clever little surprises like hearing a cow moo and smelling the clean, natural odor of fresh cut hay when shopping in the Dairy Section.

9. After doing #7 and #8, you will have him set up for #9 which is the Big One. And what's the "Big One"? Go stand by the toilet paper. When the manager approaches, take a long deep breath and give a smiling glance toward the ceiling. If his jaw drops, take his picture and move on. If his jaw clinches hard, forget the picture and move on. Quickly.

For me, the process of reviewing my list of boredom breakers has always resulted in making the monotony go away. Maybe this technique will work for you.

If reading this again doesn't do it, try #6 above. I can absolutely guarantee that your boredom will vanish before you get your dark glasses on.

- By Michael M. Bates

Billy Carter, registered foreign agent of the Libyan government and brother of President Jimmy, urinated in public at the Atlanta airport. Sam Houston Johnson, alcoholic and brother of President Lyndon, claimed he was virtually a hostage in the White House and was followed by the Secret Service when he went out. Donald Nixon, budding entrepreneur and brother of President Richard, used his fraternal connection in the late 1950s to secure a business loan.

You can choose your friends, but not your family. A number of politicians have found the axiom all too true.

Mrs. Clinton's brothers may yet play a role in her pursuit of the presidency. And she is indeed already in pursuit, if Time magazine's cover article this week is to be believed.

Mrs. Clinton is putting the machinery in place. Her husband is "'thinking about (her presidential prospects) all the time,' says one of Hillary's advisers. 'He's thinking about it and talking to a lot of people, promoting Hillary. This is something he is very focused on.'"

Time magazine wants to help. This is the tenth Time cover she's been on. Even Princess Diana didn't receive such royal treatment. .....................................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

What is it about the MSM that they have to get a shot or two in, even when the news being reported is positive?

On August 10th, Yahoo! News offered us an Agence France Presse story reporting the good news that the U.S. Military is meeting their recruitment goals for the most part. The news was rather good and a bit startling since most MSM news stories seem to allude to the feeling that things are universally bad for the Military.

Military recruiters either met or exceeded their goals in July, putting the US active duty force in a strong position to finish the year with the needed number of new recruits, Pentagon figures show.

So goes the first paragraph. Wow, you might think. Maybe things are doing well?

Then comes the second...

The monthly recruiting figures show, however, that the army's national guard and reserve components continue to struggle to meet recruiting goals.

Oh, NO... it's REALLY bad after all?

A little further down the story you'll also see this little shot at the war effort...

Last year, the army came in 8.3 percent short of the goal, raising alarms about its ability to replenish its ranks in the face of a difficult and increasingly unpopular war.

Why, exactly, was it necessary to bring up last year's lower numbers unless to use it as an excuse to remind us all how the MSM imagines this war so "increasingly unpopular"?

Taking the whole story in and digesting the actual facts presented reveals that the Armed Forces are doing pretty well even in the face of war, despite the several shots the AFP takes against the war and military.

-Army and Marines are ahead of their goals
-Pentagon reports four percent over July's monthly goal
-Marines 12 percent over goals through July 31st
-Air Force and Navy met their goals

In fact, it seems the only service that is not doing so well is the Army National Guard and the Army Reserves recruiting efforts. But, tying this to the war being "unpopular" seems a little odd since the other services are not having the same problems meeting their goals.

Perhaps there are reasons other than the war being "unpopular"?

Not in the MSM's palybook there ain't!

-By Warner Todd Huston

Imagine, if you will, a Conservative judge delivering a pro-gun ruling in a case brought by a pro-gun group of which he is a member? Would the left across the country just shrug their shoulders and utter a noncommittal "so what"? Or imagine the leftist outcry if a conservative judge who donated money to anti-abortion groups would have rendered a decision against abortion? Would the left simply move on without taking much notice? Or do you think there would be a tremendous wailing and gnashing of teeth by every leftist in the country?

Now, tell me. Have you heard a corresponding hew and cry about the leftist judge who belongs to a group that donates money to the ACLU and who was the Michigan judge who ruled against the Bush Administration's N.S.A. "wiretapping" program? Did you hear how she ruled in favor of that same ACLU when she belongs to a group that funds the ACLU?

Bet you wont see much about it. The New York Times published a piece about the story today, but spent more time pooh-poohing it than anything else.

Conflict of Interest Is Raised in N.S.A. Ruling

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — The federal judge who ruled last week that President Bush’s eavesdropping program was unconstitutional is a trustee and an officer of a group that has given at least $125,000 to the American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan, a watchdog group said Tuesday.

Not much outrage there. And they immediately followed that opening paragraph with one claiming that the story only came to light because of a "conservative organization" that dug it all up.

The group, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization here that found the connection, said the link posed a possible conflict for the judge, Anna Diggs Taylor, and called for further investigation.

Now, it is a fact that judges often do not recuse themselves when they should. It is true that this judge who ruled in favor of a group she has intimate connections with is not acting too far outside common tolerances. But, the question I have is where is the faux outrage on behalf of the MSM?

You just KNOW they would be losing their minds had this judge been a conservative, ruling FOR a conservative issue and being as closely tied to the plaintiff as this leftist judge is to a leftist group.

Ah well, it just shows MSM's bias in a brighter light!

By Nathan Tabor

As anyone who lives in the ‘burbs knows, the all-American pastime on Saturdays isn’t necessarily a trip to the baseball diamond. For many of us, it’s a trip to the local Wal-Mart. This is particularly true as the back-to-school season is in full swing.

So, it’s a little bit disconcerting to know that, as families across the U.S. are loading up their shopping carts, the elite in the Democratic Party are scowling. While many of us are concerned about al Quaida, a number of Dems have identified Wal-Mart as public enemy number one this political season.

As far as I know, the CEO of Wal-Mart isn’t running for President, but don’t tell that to Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of Delaware, a presumed Presidential contender. In Iowa recently, Biden delivered what the New York Times described as a “blistering attack” against Wal-Mart.

In addition to serving America’s need for clothes, toothbrushes, and other luxuries, Wal-Mart happens to be the nation’s biggest private employer. In other words, the company now has more than a million people on its work force. This is a business that is giving jobs to folks—but, according to the bizarre calculations of Democratic leaders, Wal-Mart is bad news for the economy.

Senator Biden suggests that Wal-Mart doesn’t care about “the fate of middle-class people.” But Wal-Mart does business with middle-class people everyday. I don’t know how often the Washington elite shop at Wal-Mart, but the average-income families that I know shop there all the time, because that’s where they can get the best deals for their dollars.

Granted, chances are you won’t earn a six-figure salary at Wal-Mart. But you can earn a paycheck. And you can gain the type of experience that will help you apply for jobs in the future which require more responsibility and will earn you more money. That is, after all, the American way—to start out on the first floor of business and work your way up to the boardroom.

And, speaking of boardrooms, isn’t it curious that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was a member of Wal-Mart’s board, returned a campaign contribution from the company to protest Wal-Mart’s health benefits? That, apparently, was the start of the unofficial Democratic campaign against the company.

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana has claimed that the anti-Wal-Mart effort is not anti-business. But, when you attack one of the nation’s biggest businesses, it stands to reason that people are really going to wonder whether you have the best interests of business at heart.

No one can be in favor of corporate corruption…bad management decisions…and mistreatment of employees. But the fact is that, without business, many of us would not have jobs. Of course, that concept is mystifying to career politicians who do not have to meet a weekly payroll or deal with constant competition. Their jobs may be safe—but the average taxpayer’s job isn’t.

I may not agree with every corporate decision made at Wal-Mart headquarters, but there can be little argument that the company is a business success story. If it were not so successful, it wouldn’t be under attack. In fact, a national poll showed that Americans generally support Wal-Mart—an attitude which seems to be borne out in the company’s sales. The company posted an $11 billion profit last year.

In a letter written to Iowa Wal-Mart workers, company officials said they “would never suggest to you how to vote, but we have an obligation to tell you when politicians are saying something about your company that isn’t true. After all, you are Wal-Mart.”

And a lot of us are Wal-Mart shoppers—whether we want to admit it or not.

-By Warner Todd Huston

Finally, someone trying to put a curb on the widespread abuses of the law the ACLU is responsible for...

Sen. Brownback: ACLU -- Not Taxpayers -- Should Foot the Bill for Church-State Lawsuits Proposed Legislation Would Halt Lucrative Legal Attacks on Religious Freedom

The Public Expressions of Religion Act (PERA) (S. 3696) was the topic of discussion at hearings on Wednesday (August 2) before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights. The U.S. House is considering similar legislation (H.R. 2679) that is sponsored by Indiana Congressman John Hostettler. Brownback has made it clear in recent weeks that if groups like the ACLU want to sue city after city for displays of religious images, it should be on their own dime -- not at taxpayers' expense.

Senator Sam Brownback is trying to get a bill passed that would help cut down on these expensive, nuisance lawsuits that the communist ACLU is always annoying Americans with day in and day out.

Some U.S. senators this week have heard testimony from both sides on a piece of legislation that would strip legal fees from church-state lawsuits. Such legal victories, often described as "Establishment Clause" cases, have provided the American Civil Liberties Union with millions of dollars in profits as it pursues numerous cases challenging public displays of religious belief in America.

Currently, it is a LAW that the ACLU can get the US government to pay for their lawyer's fees should they bring a court case that attempts to destroy religion in schools or government.

You heard that right, the US government -- that's you and ME, folks -- actually doles out money to the ACLU while they attempt to tear down our culture with their un-American, nuisance lawsuits!

Brownback points to the costs of such suits and says that the high price tag explains why so many cities and States just buckle to the ACLU's mere mention of bringing a lawsuit. It is proof of how out of control the ACLU's jihad against religion has gotten.

At yesterday's hearing, Brownback said attorneys fees should not be awarded to plaintiffs who file lawsuits alleging violation of separation of church and state. "Many jurisdictions simply acquiesce to the demands of the ACLU and prohibit all displays of religious faith in order to avoid the potential expense of litigation," the senator said. "Legal fees is the threat that the ACLU uses."

I hope maore and more people come to realize that the ACLU is NOT fighting for anyone's "rights" with their many and repeated attacks on religion in the USA. They couldn't care LESS about the Constitution and law. It's ALL about the money!

(Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council) calls the lucrative legal fees being won in lawsuits targeted expressions of religion a "perverse" incentive. PERA, he says, is needed to repeal a section of the Civil Rights Attorney Fees Act that gives groups like the ACLU "a financial incentive" to attack all public expressions of religion. "This perverse incentive also pressures embattled state and local authorities to capitulate rather than be forced into lengthy, costly litigation," says the FRC leader.

We'd soon see most of these anti-American lawsuits dropped if the ACLU had to pay their own lawyer's fees, I'll guarantee. Their free government cash would suddenly be cut off and all the efforts of tearing down our culture would suddenly seem far less interesting to them.

Call you representatives and urge them to support Brownback's efforts!

-By Warner Todd Huston

Hold on there, sports fans. I am not casting aspersions on those venerable gladiators of the gridiron residing in Miami, here. No, I am talking about the fishes. You know, the ones in the seas?

Turns out that animal rights psychos and those who want to ridiculously anthropomorphize our smiling beasts of the oceans are wrong. Dolphins aren't smart because of a brain as "big as a Human's".

Paul Manger from Johannesburg's University of the Witwatersrand, however, says it is not intelligence that created the dolphin super-brain – it's the cold.

In order to survive underwater, these warm-blooded animals developed brains that have a lot of the insulating material – called glia – but not too many neurons, which is the grey stuff that counts for reasoned thinking.

Now THAT makes sense!

I have always looked askance at this claim that Dolphins are so smart. I mean, what evidence have we ever really SEEN that they are supposed to be so smart?

Have they ever really spoken to us in all those experiments we hear about? They certainly have never built a McDonald's or Starbuck's down in the gloomy deep, have they? Heck, I'd settle for a short note letting us know that they are doing OK.

Them Dolphins just never write anymore.

Of course, we have been told that Dolphins have an intricate social structure. We are told that they communicate quite effectively. We are told that they act in concert. We are told that these are the reasons they simply must be intelligent. That and the big brain they are known to have, that one that is as big as a Human's.

So what? Ants exhibit almost all those same traits (minus the big thinker). We don't seem to want to fit an ant for a cap and gown to go to the head of the class, now do we?

There's worse news for misguided humans that want to make Dolphins the Einsteins of the waters, unfortunately. It appears they are dumber than Goldfish.

That's right. Goldfish. You know, the bright, shimmering little fishy into who's bowl you threw a ping pong ball in order to win him and take him home -- much to your Mother's consternation -- at the Summer carnival you went to when you were a child? Did you know that your prize was smarter than Neptune's sages?

"Goldfish can solve problems that dolphins can't. When a goldfish jumps out of its bowl, it's thinking past its immediate environment. Dolphins don't have the cognitive leap," Mr. Manger said in a telephone interview Thursday.

OK, I have to admit that I don't understand that reasoning from the good Doctor, either. But it MUST say something about how stupid Dolphins are. After all, no Dolphin has yet come forward with high priced attorney in tow in order to sue the Doc for libel, right? Even if one did we could just throw him a dead Mackerel and he'd swim away forgetting all about his grievances. He IS an idiot, after all!

So, now we know. Dolphins are big nit-wits. Their big brains end up being like an insulated lunch bag keeping their tiny little intellect warm on those deep dives into the cold waters in which they live.

So, can we please stop with the Dolphins-are-so-smart blather we hear from animal rights extremists and Oceanographers so imbued with wishful thinking? Can we get beyond this claim that anything on the planet other than man has enough intelligence to make them rise above the brutish animal classes of our fair world? Can we stop pretending that animals deserve "rights" in the same way men do because they "feel" and "think" just like us?

... and can we stop having Sci-Fi novels with Dolphin characters thanking us for all the fish?

And, I am ready for any challenge on my stance should any upset Dolphin file suit. I am prepared to take my case to the highest courts in the land. I know some good attorneys should any upset Dolphin send a subpoena my way. I am sure they will come to my aid and blow away the arguments of any representative of the members of the Mensa of the deep. I might even hire a Goldfish.

But, just in case, I am going to put a bucket of dead Mackerel on ice.

by Larry Pratt

Both Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and Ned Lamont who defeated him in the Connecticut Democrat primary are anti-gun. Nevertheless, gun owners should pay attention to the outcome of this race. Indeed, anyone interested in survival should pay attention.

From all that anyone can determine, the only issue that separated Lieberman and Lamont is the war against terrorists. Lieberman, although an enemy of personal self defense, was an unabashed supporter of defending America from Muslim crusaders intent on killing every man, woman and child on earth who does not proclaim themselves to be Muslim.

Fourteen hundred years of jihad is not enough evidence for the Democrat left. They are unconcerned about those who today proclaim jihad even while beheading and exploding as many people as possible in the name of their religion.

Since the left is typically unconcerned about religion, they seem to be incapable of accepting the reality that anybody else might be motivated by religious beliefs.

The students of the ‘60’s who lionized mass murderers such as Che Guevara, Mao Tse Tung and Fidel Castro are now the professors, media elite and other Democrat party activists who still lionize their old heroes – and now also are apologists for Muslim terrorists.

The self-destructive view of the Democrat left goes well beyond the naïve mantra that “violence never solved anything.” Tell that to the people of the south of Sudan. They stopped the genocide of some 2,000,000 non-Muslims by the jihadi regime that illegitimately rules the country. The Sudanese People’s Liberation Army did not stop the jihad by talking. They did it by shooting and killing Muslim crusaders before they could kill any more.

The Democrat Left’s support of terrorists derives from self-hatred. They are convinced that Americans, and Westerners in general (but also including African Christians who were slaughtered without a peep from the Left), are the source of violence and resentment in the world. Because we have caused the problem, they believe, we deserve to be attacked. This belief is so deep set that the Left believes self defense and retaliation are morally unacceptable.

We should not think that the Democrat Left’s hatred is reserved for President Bush. They hate him because he is fighting back against terrorists. Thus, anyone connected with national defense – even a socialist such as Sen. Lieberman – gets treated to the same scathing hatred that has been directed toward President Bush.

If Lieberman’s defeat is a harbinger of future elections, any Democrat who believes in self defense, be it personal or national, can expect to get the same treatment. And of course, Republicans can expect to get more of the same as long as they support self defense.

The issue of our age is self defense. The Democrat Left has drawn a line in the sand in Connecticut. They are against survival.

Larry Pratt is Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, a national gun lobby with over 300,000 members located at 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA 22151, (703) 321-8585.

-By Warner Todd Huston

Gather 'round, multiculturalists everywhere. I'll tell you a story guaranteed to prove to you that we are all really "just people", citizens of the world, after all. Why, this story will show you all that one culture is as good as another, one nation just like the next. Heck, fellers, we're all just the same and all cultures are as good as the next and this'll PROVE it ...

14 Indians, including kids, flogged in "Maya punishment"

Guatemala City, Aug 22 - Fourteen Guatemalan Indians were publicly flogged, forced to kneel on bottle caps and shorn of their hair after being convicted by a traditional assembly of various offenses, local media reported Tuesday.

The so-called "Maya punishment," provided for in traditional codes acknowledged by the modern nation-state, was applied Monday in the northwestern town of Nahuala, community leader Pascual Ixmata told the press.

The 14 accused - four of them women - were whipped and forced to kneel on bottle caps, and their hair was cut off.

The male miscreants, who were charged with sniffing glue, also had sacks of sand placed on their shoulders, Ixmata said.

The women scourged Monday had been accused of selling children to adoption brokers, the same crime for which 12 other Indians - eight men and four women - were subjected to the "Maya punishment" 10 days ago in the town of Pasajaquin.

There. Ya SEE? We ARE all the same, huh? Our American culture isn't any "better" than any other culture!

These "Mayans" were pretty cool folks, eh? I wonder how they invented bottle caps thousands of years before a bottle capping machine was invented though... I guess that is why they were so great!

One other thing, aren't natural drug plants sorta easy to get down there? I mean, they have drug cartels all OVER the place. Why did they need to sniff glue to get high when EVERY drug on the planet is easily within reach everywhere you go down there? I guess that Georgie Sorros' idea that if we make drugs legal, no one will want to break the law sort of fails to make sense in light of this one?

Anyway, it sure shows that our justice systems are so alike as to be scary, eh? I can't Tell you how many times I have seen drug dealers in the USA made to kneel on bottlecaps and have sand bags put on their shoulders. And they DESERVED it, too!

Yep, every culture is just like the next one. I just feel so warm and squishy inside...

-By Warner Todd Huston

American history has been under attack since the 1920's when Communist and American historian, Charles Beard, made himself famous by pushing the claim that the Constitution was merely a document of hate and greed as opposed to one based on any sort of high principle. Needless to say, an ever-left leaning Academia loved him for it.

Now, what passes for "History" in our schools is repeated waves of fad history focusing on what is considered the latest minority who had been given short-shrift in our eeevil and racist past, crashing upon the eroding shoes of our schools decade after decade. Anymore, “history” is little more than successive waves washing away "America" and leaving in its wake, the flotsam and jetsam of the small incidents of the American shoreline while slowly tearing down the great rocks upon which it is built.

Enter ABC News to give us another story about how wonderful such a focus on minorities is for American students. Erin Texeira gives us a typical PC view of how American history should be taught to our children in her August 20th story, "Minorities Seek History Class Changes".

American students often get the impression from history classes that the British got here first, settling Jamestown, Va., in 1607. They hear about how white Northerners freed the black slaves, how Asians came in the mid-1800s to build Western railroads. The lessons have left out a lot.

There is the typical PC view of traditional American history all wrapped up in one paragraph. Unfortunately, what she and all who bemoan our history don't understand is that we trace our country to that Jamestown settlement for a reason. The United States of America was not founded by Blacks, Asians, or "Latinos", even though each added to the flavor of the stew.

White, Anglo-Saxons where who won the battles to make the United States possible. That is why we focus on them. Yet, at the same time, any casual look at even those old, stuffy history books reveals the diversity that was the times. We all remember the American Indians, the French, the Spaniards and the blacks that fought alongside or against those Englishmen as they carved out these United States. It is impossible to read even old historical treatments and not see these "minorities" even if they lost the battle for supremacy.

But, because Whites are portrayed as the "winners" and some of these minorities as the "losers"... well, we MUST destroy that notion as far as the PC historical revisionists at ABC news are concerned.

The worst part of Texeira's story was her lamentations about how our nation does not have a "Latino" museum and her worries that all the many Asians in these ignorant United States are so unduly ignored.

The Mall has dozens of sites highlighting American culture and history, including the National Museum of the American Indian that opened in 2004, 20 years after it was authorized. Organizers in June settled on the future site of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, but its opening date is still years away. A Latino museum would be even further off.

Sadly for Ms. Texeira there is no such thing as a "Latino", historically. If you would have strode the byways of Spanish Florida in the early 1800's asking for all the "Latinos", for instance, you'd have gotten nothing but blank stares from the Spaniards, Indians and blacks living there at the time. "Latino" is a modern, made-up term to describe a demographic, not a term that describes a nationality or a "race".

So much for Texeira’s own "history" quotient! But, she doesn’t stop there.

Asian-Americans are the only immigrants in U.S. history to have faced laws explicitly written to bar their entry laws that were not overturned until immigration reform in the 1960s, said Dmae Roberts, whose eight-hour public radio program on Asian immigration, "Crossing East," airs on hundreds of stations.

"People know very little of this outside of California," she said.

Of course, few of the early Chinese immigrants that faced these discriminations wanted to become Americans initially. Many merely intended to make it rich in California's gold fields and go back to China with their riches in tow and many 49ers reacted to them along those lines. For that matter, few Asians even lived outside California for many years in our early Republic. They just weren't a factor in our founding and growth, railroad-building aside.

Early Asian history in the US is interesting, certainly, but it hardly classifies as a subject that we should waste time on with young students who don't know when the Civil War was fought, who our first president was, or what country we rebelled against in 1776. To waste time with all these "minority" views of history in our grade schools cheats our children out of learning the basics while they focus on the less important minutia.

Certainly in higher education it behooves us to expand the vision of subject matter, but why would a child NEED to know that the Chinese had a hard time of it in California at the expense of learning about the Monroe Doctrine? Why do we need to force young students to read umpteen accounts of "Latinos" in America before teaching them about the Declaration of Independence?

Of course, it is a good thing to have a full view of history. We need a well-rounded understanding of what our ancestors went through as it reveals a nation's character and can, in the best examples, help us understand why we are how we are. But, to focus on every small subject to the detriment of the big ones is a mistake. To people like Texeira, history should be about "diversity", not about presenting a program based on what is important and formative before presenting the minutia. After all, do we teach children algebra before we teach them subtraction?

Yes, it's all about "diversity" to those who make a fetish out of "minority" studies ...

Some tales have gone untold because, in the less-diverse America of the past, minorities didn't make the decisions on textbooks and other means of passing along history. And in many cases, minorities who had faced blatant discrimination wanted to discard evidence of past horrors.

As long as we can knock down those old dead white guys and all the "past horrors" they are responsible for, I guess that is of much higher importance. And, talking about those farther down the foodchain is more important than worrying about who wrote the Gettysburg Address... or what it even said.

If we enjoyed baseball, for instance, the way these people want us to learn history we'd be rooting for the groundskeepers, or excited to get the autograph of the lumberjack that cut the tree down that made Babe Ruth's bat.

In fact, who is Babe Ruth? What's HE ever done for the sport? But, do you know how important his COBBLER was??

- By Hans Zeiger

If there are doubts about the title of this article, perhaps it is because we have not thought of this war on Islamic terror as a religious war. But it must be a religious war.

Because the terrorists define it as a religious war. At a rally this week, Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmedinejad declared, "On one side, it's corrupt powers of the criminal U.S. and Britain and the Zionists...with modern bombs and planes. And on the other side is a group of pious youth relying on God."

Ahmedinejad and his young thugs are men of faith. The Muslim devotees in England who would have blown up ten planes this week were young--ages 17 to 35--and they were faithful. One young man among the arrested terrorists gave up life as a slothful pothead to become a Muslim. These little groups of "pious youth" are are on a ji'had to take the West, and they will not stop because a postmodern, enlightened Westerner of the Left asks for tolerance and peace.................
Click HERE To Read On

- By Frederick Meekins

According to reports, a trendy Chicago suburb voted "the sexiest suburb in America" may be on the verge of banishing from its venues of commerce those not conforming to arbitrarily contrived body aesthetics.

Lane Bryant, a retailer known for marketing clothing to full-sized women, has been denied the opportunity to open a store in a development called "The Village Of Oak Park".

Before the hypercapitalists decide to slit my throat as they are wont to do whenever anyone dares to question a decision made by big business, it must be noted that the decision to deny Lane Bryant the retail space was not made by a private sector firm or entrepreneur but rather by the committee managing the village, an entity quasigovernmental in nature.

The bureaucratic mouthpiece for the community association told the press that, "Lane Bryant is not the kind or quality of shop that is desire for development," and, "We want a more broad based retailer benefiting the village, rather than a niche market."

In other words, "Fat chicks, keep out." For unless the Village --- a term as almost as nauseating as COMMUNITY as it is usually invoked by an insular elite out to micromangage the lives of those residing in a particular locality --- is planning to open a Wal-Mart or a Target (places these Communitarian types despise even more than the overweight), by definition the retailer would otherwise serve a niche market...........................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

If the loony MSM were viewing Joe Lieberman's primary loss to leftist, Ned Lamont, in any more a convoluted manner, they would be crosseyed, tonguetied, and hogtied. I mean, the backflips they are making to explain this story are so magnificent that it'd make any Circ de Soleil acrobatic clown green with envy.

Our intrepid Time/CNN political analyst, Mike Allen, has tried on his colorful leotards to spin Joe's loss into the newest GOP dirty campaign trick for the 2006 midterms in his titled, "Why the Republicans Are Loving the Lieberman Loss".

It is amazing how every article about politics seem to start with the emotional underpinning that the Republicans are somehow merely scheming, or are just capitalizers, dirty tricksters or looking for "weapons" to get votes. Could it be that a Republican here or there might actually be serving his true principles by highlighting an issue? Nah, don't be ridiculous. It's sure to be just some kind of angle or trick!

The defeat of Joe Lieberman fits this MSM template perfectly, as does the article here mentioned by Mike Allen.

Here is the very first paragraph of Allen's story:

From Washington State to Missouri to Pennsylvania, Democratic candidates found themselves on the defensive Wednesday as the Republican Party worked ferociously at every level to try to use the primary defeat of Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut to portray the opposition as the party of weakness and isolation on national security and liberal leanings on domestic policy. Doleful Democrats bemoaned the irony: At a time when Republicans should be back on their heels because of chaos abroad and President Bush's unpopularity, the Democrats' rejection of a sensible, moralistic centrist has handed the GOP a weapon that could have vast ramifications for both the midterm elections of '06 and the big dance of '08.

Notice the flavor of the story.

Lieberman's loss was only being "used" to reveal Democrat's "weakness" by that "ferocious" GOP even though those wascally Republicans should be down for the count because of "chaos abroad" and the president's "unpopularity". Even the statement that Lieberman is a "sensible, moralistic centrist" is coupled with Republican's weaponizing of the Senator's perceived status, casting that presumed centrism into a negative ... or even doubtful... light.

The story goes on to present the activity of the GOP election machine kicking into high gear to showcase this act of the Democrat's lurching wildly to the far left yet there is a curious lack of discussion in the story of what really happened in Connecticut to the Democratic Party itself.

The entire situation is cast in the light of the Republican spin machine without any focus on the fact that Lieberman is considered by many a "moderate"(but rarely by Republicans who have paid attention -- Lieberman's record is strictly liberal), and that his sudden and nearly complete purge from the Democratic Party by Party bigwigs such as DNC Chairman Howard Dean and veteran Party spokesman, Ted Kennedy, was so quick as to nearly prove the GOP's contention correct that the Democratic Party is dispensing with moderate views. The MSM are furiously downplaying the fact that the Democrats are trying to rid themselves of someone who might disagree with them in some few instances even as they offered that same candidate for the second highest office in the land but a few years ago.

No, it's worse than that. They are trying to rid themselves of a candidate who disagrees with them on only ONE issue; the war in Iraq! No one in the MSM seems to feel it is an interesting story that one issue is enough to get a former Vice-Presidential candidate mercilessly dumped from his own Party.

We have repeatedly seen this story in the MSM over the last week how Republicans are spinning Joe's loss, how GOP Party machine operatives are capitalizing on that loss, and how the MSM fears that the GOP is going to make it a winning election issue. But, where are the many stories about how the Democrats really HAVE begun to look like they intend to make a lurch to the left?

Where are the grave warnings that the "moderates" are being eliminated, marginalized, and forgotten by a Party that cares only about its extreme ideology?

If the GOP had suddenly made a corresponding lurch to the right, wouldn't the MSM be wailing and gnashing their teeth over how the Republicans had forsworn the voice of the vaunted "Moderate"?

So, what we have been repeatedly treated to are stories focusing on the GOP's spinning of Lieberman's loss, but precious little analysis of just what it means to the Democrats. This softens Lieberman's loss and truly whitewashes Lamont's far left ideology, giving cover to the Democratic Party's wild lurch to the left.

But, what would we expect from the MSM, wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party, George Soros, CEO?

- By Michael M. Bates

Presidential campaigns keep getting longer. They now begin while arguments about who in fact won the last election are still raging.

At least a dozen wannabes troll in Iowa this month. Some, such as Republicans Sam Brownback and Haley Barbour and Democrats Evan Bayh and Tom Vilsack, aren't largely known. But they definitely want to be.

Others, like John McCain, Newt Gingrich, and John Kerry (I think he may have served in Vietnam) enjoy wider recognition, if not popularity.

Most of the boys make appearances at the Iowa State Fair. With more than a million fun-seekers in attendance, it's a great place for pols to demonstrate their camaraderie with the pee-pul. Pork chops on a stick are one of the culinary delights they can share with prospective constituents to show that at heart they're essentially just down home boys. .....................................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

LEGISLATION ACTION ALERT!!

Here is an interesting bill, introduced by Senator Tom Coburn (R- OK), that should be encouraged to continue winding its way through the cogs of the Senate.

Senate bill - S2590

The "Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006".
A creation of a searchable website, open for public use, that details a full disclosure of entities receiving Federal funding.

It has 29 co-sponsors that runs the gamut of a bipartisan effort. From John McCain and Virginia's George Allen, to Illinois's Dick Durbin and Minotiry leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, both sides are well represented.

However, I have learned that an undisclosed Senator has requested a "hold" on this bill. Here is the definition of a "hold" in Senate parlance:

Hold - An informal practice by which a Senator informs his or her floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The Majority Leader need not follow the Senator's wishes, but is on notice that the opposing Senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure.

Well, that means SOME Senator is trying to stop us "little folk" in "fly over country" from being able to easily find out where our money is going!

And, in this day and age of technology, there should be no reason why we shouldn't be able to quickly and easily discover what agencies are getting milk from the government teat!

So, be sure and contact your Senator and tell him to get the hold off of this bill and get it PASSED!

By Nathan Tabor

Forget the threat of terrorism…the price of gas…or the struggle for families to make the monthly mortgage payments.

No, the issue on the minds of many newspaper editorial writers is whether women can get pills.

At a time when some medical experts are wondering whether our population is, in fact, over-medicated, a number of editorial boards are demanding that the so-called morning-after pill be offered over the counter to women who have regrets about their sexual encounters of the night before.

Even if you don’t buy the notion that the morning-after pill can end an innocent human life—or even if you don’t care if it does—you should at least care about what impact easy access to this post-coital pill could have on women’s health.

Any woman who has taken the traditional birth control pill knows that there are possible side effects—everything from the possibility of stroke to weight gain. The idea that it’s A-OK for women to ingest “Plan B” without ever expecting to encounter any negative health effects is ludicrous.

Planned Parenthood, the largest purveyor of abortions in America, issued a statement claiming that Plan B “holds the potential for improving women’s health if the FDA keeps its word this time” and permits over-the-counter access.

But the fact of the matter is that the morning-after pill is actually playing Russian Roulette with women’s health.

As Concerned Women for America—a group which has more female support than the radical National Organization for Women—has stated, “The prescription process protects women’s health.”

At a time when the Food and Drug Administration has been forced to re-examine the safety of the abortion pill RU-486, it seems odd to throw caution to the wind and remove some of the regulatory protections that could prevent women from being hurt by the morning-after pill.

A number of individuals have also pointed out that Plan B promotes promiscuity. Promiscuity leads to sexually-transmitted diseases which pose a serious threat to the health of young women. It is irresponsible for the leaders of the abortion lobby and the news media to promote non-prescription use of a drug that could conceivably cause our STD rates to soar.

And then there’s the key question of enforcement. You can say that the drug will only be marketed and sold to those women over age 18, but any clever teenager who knows how to lobby an older sibling or friend to buy cigarettes or booze for her will easily gain access to Plan B. And what’s to say that teen girls will not start binging on morning-after pills, once they become as common as KitKats on drug store shelves?

As Concerned Women’s Wendy Wright stated, “The person who buys the drug is not necessarily the person who will take the drug. What the FDA would have to consider is a foolproof plan to keep proxies from buying the drug and giving it to adolescents.”

And let’s be clear—those proxies could include sexual predators trying to exploit teenage girls.

And let’s be clear on another point: There’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the drive for over-the-counter sales of the morning-after pill are part of the abortion lobby’s propaganda campaign. The lobby knows that public support for contraception is much higher than public support of abortion—hence, its insistence on calling the morning-after pill “emergency contraception.”

But, one has to wonder—If groups such as Planned Parenthood are in the business of family planning, why would there be millions of emergencies requiring a pill to resolve? What Planned Parenthood is really promoting is irresponsibility, carelessness, and, in the end, surgical abortion.

Because, if a woman still finds herself pregnant after taking the morning-after pill, she’ll be lured into thinking that the only solution to her problem is to abort her baby the old-fashioned way.

And so the manipulation and exploitation of American women continue.

- By Vince Johnson

The traditional definition of democracy no longer applies to our present form of government. Consider the definition of "democracy" as currently stated in Merriam-Webster's Dictionary:

"1 a: government by the people; especially: rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections."

As any fool can plainly see, the "supreme power" in America has shifted from the people to what I refer to as the "Supreme Quart!"................
Click HERE To Read On

-By Warner Todd Huston

After reading something like a recent story in the L.A. Times, one is struck with how little "news" or analysis is often included in the "news" paper, and how much evocative, emotive, fluff has replaced any attempt at informing the reader of what is really going on.

In the story titled, "His Heart Was Full for Lebanon and U.S.", writer ... or maybe I should say "story teller" as that seems more descriptive... Sam Quinones, gave us what amounts to a one sided, propagandistic account of the life of a man killed in Lebanon who so "loved" both the USA and Lebanon.

The subtitle pretty much tells the reader the direction of the story.

Mohamed Hammoudi lived in Los Angeles for years. He was enjoying his retirement in his homeland when an Israeli bomb struck.

There you have it. An almost American murdered by an evil Jew bomb. A kindly fellow who just loved everyone and was needlessly killed by those militaristic Jews.

Quinones goes on quite a lot about the life of Mohamed Hammoudi who we are told "admired a lot about the United States". Of course, we aren't treated to any examples of this "admiration" just the writer's say so that it was true. Though, we do find later in the story that he enjoyed reading the works of "Bob Woodward ... and Noam Chomsky", so we can guess how much "love" he might have had from his appreciation of the works of authors commonly known to savage the US, its culture and its politics.

Certainly, it is sad when people who were not necessarily "guilty" are harmed in war. It truly is sad that kindly Mr. Hammoudi lost his life. But, there are reasons things happen and this story leaves the feeling that the Jews just started casually throwing American made bombs about the countryside indiscriminately as there is no real effort to set the attacks in context in any way.
Consequently, we are treated to the nice life of Mr. Hammoudi for many paragraphs coupled with digs at the USA and Israel all along the way.

Here are all the swipes at the US and Israel in the story...

-He was enjoying his retirement in his homeland when an Israeli bomb struck.

-But two weeks ago, as Hammoudi sat down to a meal in the hilltop house in southern Lebanon that he had inherited after his father died, an Israeli bomb struck, destroying the stone structure and killing Hammoudi.

-"I've been crying from the first bomb landing, not only for my brother — for my whole family, for my whole country," said Hammoudi's sister Mariam

-When he died, "the United States lost more than what Lebanon lost," said Hassan Mansour, a lifelong friend who discovered Hammoudi's body.

-He was among a steady flow of Lebanese returning to vacation or live, repopulating a region largely deserted during Israel's occupation of Lebanon, which ended in 2000.

-Then both their houses were hit by Israeli bombs. No one saw Hammoudi after that.

-"After 30 years in the U.S., they sent you 'smart' bombs to get you killed," cried his sister Haniah.

-Most of Mansour's extended family has lost everything. Almost every house in Ainata is damaged, and many people are homeless.

-Perhaps the worst damage, Mansour said, has been to the esteem in which the Lebanese people held the United States.

-"People love Americans. Everybody wants to go to the United States," he said. "There is no need for this. You can easily have all these people on your side. I don't know why we have to go and make them our enemies."

-Hammoudi's family said Israel's attacks would only bolster Hezbollah, because the group — and not the U.S. or Israel — is most likely to care for those displaced by the bombing of villages such as Ainata.

-"Israel created Hezbollah," said Hammoudi's sister Mariam. "I am personally against Hezbollah. But when you have an enemy, you can create a devil to defeat the enemy."

-Meanwhile, bombs have silenced the voice of Mohamed Hammoudi.

Seems like the entire article reproduced there, doesn't it?

Well, it almost IS the whole article!

The lie that Israel "created Hezbullah" was especially egregious.

Now I will add here all the paragraphs that might be considered explicatory for the USA or Israel, sections that contain any hint of why the Israelis are doing the bombing in the first place and any support of that action.

-On July 12, Hezbollah fighters crossed into northern Israel and abducted two soldiers, sparking an Israeli bombing campaign in southern Lebanon.

Yep. That was it. One paragraph. 21 words in a sea of condemnation and vitriol.

Nope, what we have here is just another example of the L.A. Times supporting terrorists, making them seem softer, put-upon, and abused by those rotten Americans and Jews. Propaganda for terrorists, plain and simple.

And all that emanating from an American newspaper.

Thanks, L.A.Times, for aiding victory .... for Hezbullah.

-By Warner Todd Huston

We have a bit of good news on the 2nd Amendment front today...

"(CNSNews.com) - A federal judge on Wednesday rejected an attempt to dismiss a Second Amendment lawsuit against the City of New Orleans."

This means that the city has been told that they cannot arbitrarily have dismissed a lawsuit brought against them by the National Rifle Association and the 2nd Amendment Foundation seeking to chastise the government for having confiscated guns from New Orleans' citizens in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina.

"We're encouraged by this latest ruling," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "For almost a year, we've been fighting the city's delay tactics, which included outright lying by city officials that any firearms had been seized.

"Only when we threatened Mayor Nagin and Superintendent Riley with a motion for contempt did the city miraculously discover that they actually did have more than 1,000 firearms that had been taken from their owners."

Because of this action some states already passed laws that would outlaw the confiscation of legal guns in time of crisis. But, this lawsuit against New Orleans is important in that it could set the precedent that it is truly illegal for a government to stormtroop across the landscape confiscating gun legally owned by 2nd Amendment abiding citizens.

But, this isn't the final battle in this. Now we can see this case proceed to the "discover phase". It could still end up a loss for Constitutional rights. But, at least it must continue and will not merely be thrown out of court.