Monday, February 28, 2005

An Open Letter to the President

Dear Mr. Bush,

Let me open by stating that you were the beneficiary of my vote last November 2nd. I state that proudly. Your stance in the Mideast, and the freedom now blooming there, makes me proud to be an American. And your idea of the ownership society creates hope for a better future in the hearts of Americans here at home. That said, there is a hugely important issue that demands your immediate attention. An issue you have been oddly silent on.

How is it that at the same time the light of freedom is being lit in the Arab world, it is in danger of being extinguished right here at home? The Supreme Court is, at this moment, hearing a case that is absolutely crucial to the American way of life as we know it. In Kelo v. City of New London, the Court has the future of private property in this country in their somewhat inept hands.

The case, as you well know, involves a municipality attempting to force property owners to sell their legally entitled land. This land will then be turned over to the Pfizer pharmaceutical company for the sole reason of simply increasing the city’s tax base. The gist of this decision is that it will then be legal for any governmental body to seize land from ‘A’ and give it to ‘B’ merely to add cash to their dwindling coffers.

Imagine Mr. President, if the Mayor of Washington D.C. decided that the land the White House sits on would be better used, would be more economically lucrative, if it was redeveloped as a water park. Sound far fetched? Not if you are an average land owning citizen unfortunate enough to have bought land in an area a developer deems profitable.

Our country was built sir, as you are well aware, on private property rights. The right to own land is one of those rights, however is not the only property right we as Americans possess. Private property rights, presently anyway, include the owning of one’s money, one’s possessions, one’s savings and investments, and even one’s intellectual property. It has been, and is now, the dream of most Americans to own their own home. To own a car, have savings, build an estate. To gain wealth through hard work and initiative. To have a good life, and maybe leave something to the next generation. But if the High Court deems our ownership society(your words) a thing of the past, the consequences will be far reaching and dire.

And what will the consequences be? How will the wrong decision by the Court affect housing sales? How will it affect property values? What will be the incentive to work hard and save in order to buy a home for yourself and your family, if it never is really yours in the first place? When the government can take your land merely because it believes it can use the land more economically, how far are we then from the government taking your paycheck because it decides it can spend that money more effectively? How far from it taking your vehicle because that SUV is not fuel efficient? How far, Mr. President, from Communism?

Is it right sir, that the future of our Capitalist system lies in the hands of a group of persons never elected by the people of this great country? If we are to become a state where land is basically owned by the government and rented to it’s people, should this change not at least come from the Legislature? The body constitutionally ordained to make the laws?

In your bid to be the leader of the free world, you spoke of an ‘ownership society’ and of spreading freedom to the oppressed throughout the world. Exactly what type of freedom do we want the world to strive for? Do we want those oppressed to look to America as an example of what freedom can be? Where, Mr. President, is freedom without a right to ownership? How free are a people whose government abuses that right? Your ownership society is now at risk, Mr. Bush, as is the freedom of your own people right here at home.

(E-mailed to Mr. Bush 2-28-05 @ 6:25 P.M.)
crossposted @ The Wide Awakes

Saturday, February 26, 2005

Taxing My Logic: Scientology

Know who L. Ron Hubbard is? He invented Scientology.
Ever wonder what Scientology is? Well, sit back and enjoy the show....

Once upon a time (75 million years ago to be more precise) there was an alien galactic ruler named Xenu. Xenu was in charge of all the planets in this part of the galaxy including our own planet Earth, except in those days it was called Teegeeack.
Now Xenu had a problem. All of the 76 planets he controlled were overpopulated. Each planet had on average 178 billion people. He wanted to get rid of all the overpopulation so he had a plan.
Xenu took over complete control with the help of renegades to defeat the good people and the Loyal Officers. Then with the help of psychiatrists he called in billions of people for income tax inspections where they were instead given injections of alcohol and glycol mixed to paralyse them. Then they were put into space planes that looked exactly like DC8s (except they had rocket motors instead of propellers).
These DC8 space planes then flew to planet Earth where the paralysed people were stacked around the bases of volcanoes in their hundreds of billions. When they had finished stacking them around then H-bombs were lowered into the volcanoes. Xenu then detonated all the H-bombs at the same time and everyone was killed.
The story doesn't end there though. Since everyone has a soul (called a "thetan" in this story) then you have to trick souls into not coming back again. So while the hundreds of billions of souls were being blown around by the nuclear winds he had special electronic traps that caught all the souls in electronic beams (the electronic beams were sticky like fly-paper).
After he had captured all these souls he had them packed into boxes and taken to a few huge cinemas. There all the souls had to spend days watching special 3D motion pictures that told them what life should be like and many confusing things. In this film they were shown false pictures and told they were God, The Devil and Christ. In the story this process is called "implanting".
When the films ended and the souls left the cinema these souls started to stick together because since they had all seen the same film they thought they were the same people. They clustered in groups of a few thousand. Now because there were only a few living bodies left they stayed as clusters and inhabited these bodies.
As for Xenu, the Loyal Officers finally overthrew him and they locked him away in a mountain on one of the planets. He is kept in by a force-field powered by an eternal battery and Xenu is still alive today.

Oh, by the way, we are all full of those dead ‘thetans’, now called ‘body thetans’. And we need to be audited with the use of a ‘electropsychometer’ or ‘E-Meter’ to get rid of them. Well, I guess that explains that rash....

This is the ‘religion’ so many of the Hollywood rocket scientists swear by? Actors like Tom Cruise, John Travolta, and (this breaks my heart)Nancy Cartwright,the voice of Bart Simpson?

One last point, in 1940, Mr. Hubbard stated:

"Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion."

In 1950 he published Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, and then in 1954 he founded the Church of Scientology. As of 2001, the ‘church’ held assets of $500 million. It currently holds tax exempt status.

Friday, February 25, 2005

In Other News

When did we enter the land of insanity? All the below stories are true. The names haven’t been changed to attack the guilty.
So here we go, welcome to Bizarro world...

1) From Johan Goldberg @

‘Maine State Rep. Brian Duprey introduced an unusual piece of legislation this month. It's a pro-life bill designed to tighten protections for the unborn. That's not the unusual part. That happens all the time. The interesting part is that Duprey's bill is designed to protect gay fetuses.
Rep. Duprey told a local paper, The Magic City Morning Star, that he'd been listening to Rush Limbaugh's radio show when Limbaugh commented that if scientists ever located the genetic cause for homosexuality - the so-called "gay gene" - then homosexuals would become pro-life "overnight."
"Most people would agree that to kill someone just because that person might be gay would constitute a hate crime," Duprey said. "I have heard from women who told me that if they found out that they were carrying a child with the gay gene, then they would abort. I think this is wrong. Those unborn children should be protected." That's why he introduced LD 908, "An Act to Protect Homosexuals from Discrimination."’

Does posting this qualify me as a homophobe?

2) From My Way News:

‘An appeals court said a man can press a claim for emotional distress after learning a former lover had used his sperm to have a baby. But he can't claim theft, the ruling said, because the sperm were hers to keep.’
‘Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" after their affair six years ago, saying she secretly kept semen after they had oral sex, then used it to get pregnant.’
‘"She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift - an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee," the decision said. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request."’

I can’t make this stuff up!

3) From

‘A British gum summit, meeting in London Tuesday, outlined proposals to introduce a chewing gum tax to fund cleaning the sticky sweet from streets.’

Oh, but Wrigley fights back...


‘The company also has developed a gum that is biodegradable--a feature meant to relieve environmental concerns about wads of gum stuck underneath desks or chairs.’

Hey, they can always tax cigarette butts.

4) From

‘Two former employees of the Gorilla Foundation, home to Koko the "talking" ape, have filed a lawsuit contending that they were ordered to bond with the 33-year-old female simian by displaying their breasts.’
‘‘One example: "On at least two incidents in mid-to-late June 2004, Patterson intensely pressured Keller to expose herself to Koko while they were working outside where other employees could potentially view Keller's naked body. ... On one such occasion, Patterson said, 'Koko, you see my nipples all the time. You are probably bored with my nipples. You need to see new nipples. I will turn my back so Kendra can show you her nipples.' "’

Sorry, can’t help myself, I just have to pose a few questions on this one....

a) Will PETA ignore Koko’s sexual proclivities the way NOW did Clinton’s?
b) Would Koko get more action if she invested in a little bikini waxing?
c) What exactly is the hand signal for ‘nipple’?
d) Must we now redefine ‘marriage’ as a union between two adult primates?
e) Does Koko like boys? Hope so, cause she’s the ‘gorilla my dreams!”

5) From The Age:

‘The director of a German zoo has defended her campaign to mate a group of homosexual male penguins with females, arguing that it is the only way to preserve a dying breed from extinction.’
'Gay groups reacted with outrage when four female penguins were flown in from Sweden to allow keepers to see if they had any influence on the homosexual pairings.
Since then gay activists from as far afield as Australia have been protesting at the zoo's attempts to "cure" the penguins of their homosexuality. The zoo has been bombarded with threatening letters and phone calls saying that gay penguins have a "right to a free choice of partner". But the zoo denies it is trying to influence the penguins' sexual orientation.’

Did I mention they’re penguins!!?

6) From

‘Top House Democrat Charlie Rangel said Tuesday that it was an act of discrimination to label groups like Hezbollah "Islamic terrorists."
Asked about the refusal by some European governments to declare Hezbollah an Islamic terror group, Rangel told WWRL's Steve Malzberg and Karen Hunter, "To call it Islamic terror is discriminating, it's bigoted, it is not the right thing to say."
Rangel even questioned whether, in fact, a worldwide Islamic terrorist movement even existed, saying, "We just take for granted that there is an Islamic terror movement because we do have some fanatic people who come from Islamic countries."’

If only Charlie Rangel wasn’t real.

7) From Kathleen Parker again @

‘Tests, surveys and studies further confirm America’s increasing ignorance. A test of high school seniors, for example, found that only one in ten was proficient in American history. A survey of fourth graders found that seven of ten thought the original 13 colonies included Illinois, Texas and California.
Six of ten couldn’t say why the Pilgrims came to America. Only seven percent of fourth graders could name “an important event” that took place in Philadelphia in 1776. When seniors at the nation’s top 55 universities were asked to name America’s victorious general at the Battle of Yorktown, only 34 percent named George Washington.
These depressing statistics, which Mount Vernon executive director James Rees rattles off with thinly disguised ennui, shouldn’t be surprising considering that Washington today receives one-tenth the coverage in textbooks that he received 30 years ago. Rees tells of one textbook that offers fewer than 50 lines of text about Washington, but 213 about Marilyn Monroe.’

Your education dollars at work.

What can we do but laugh?

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Eminent Threat

Of all of our freedoms, the most important, the one that truly separates America from the socialist, communist, and tyrannical regimes is our private property rights. These rights are now, and have been for some time, under direct governmental attack.

Private property does not consist merely of owned land. It is your savings, your auto, your retirement fund, your pay check, yes even your blog.

Many of our property rights are now being seriously threatened. Of these, the left’s love of redistribution of wealth, I'm sure, will be the fore bearer of doom to our economy and our very way of life...if it is allowed to continue. But nothing, nothing is a more serious insult, nay abuse, of private property rights than the issue of Eminent Domain.

Eminent Domain is the government’s ability to take owned private property and use it for the ultimate public good. In itself this definition is socialist. That said, originally it had been used only as a last resort for the building of highways, schools, bridges, etc. But recently many state and local governments, through short-sighted programs, have redefined it to include what they deem blighted and/or high crime areas. And now they have moved even one more baby step down the slippery slope toward communism. The newest attack on our rights by our local and state tyrants is the practice of forcing property owners to sell, in order to give the property to businesses, merely to garner the tyrants a larger tax base.

Let me restate that...A municipality can now take your property forcefully, through the threat of fine or jail, and hand it over Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart promising, of course, the benefit of higher taxes to the municipality. That is just wrong. And unAmerican.

When the government can do this, you have NO property rights. You do not own your land, that is merely a myth. You simply rent it from the government. Who can then evict you at any time. Any time they feel they can earn more money from the next lessee.

The Supreme Court is this very moment hearing a case on this very issue. In ‘Kelo v. New London’, seven evil home owners actually think they have a right to live on their own property. The gall of these people.

The city of New London, Conn. and their attack dog lawyer Wesley W. Hortonsee it differently. In their minds these poor sots stand in the way of progress. And let their rights be damned.

This is not an issue confined to one or two jurisdictions. There are many, many Eminent Domain cases being fought throughout the country today. It is a fight we citizens must win. Other rights mean little if our right to private property is abridged. In the end, freedom of speech is just words, freedom to bear arms(to protect what?) an empty promise, freedom of assembly is meaningless; if a man can not own what he has rightly earned.

But , thankfully, we have some allies in this fight. Castle Coalition @ has a very informative web site, with many links to local groups that are bringing the battle to the enemy. As does the Institute for Justice found here.
The blog Eminent Domain Watch is a great place to find up to date information as well.
Unfortunately, there seems to be only one Supreme Court judge with a copy of the Constitution, and that of course is Judge Scalia. From Slate..
Justice Antonin Scalia asks what difference it makes that New London is depressed. What if a city acknowledged that it wasn't doing badly, but just wanted to condemn land to attract new industry? He describes Horton's position as: "You can always take from A and give to B, so long as B is richer." And O'Connor offers this concrete example: What if there's a Motel 6 but the city thinks a Ritz-Carlton will generate more taxes? Is that OK?

Yes, says Horton.

"So you can always take from A and give to B if B pays more taxes?" asks Scalia.

"If they are significantly more taxes," says Horton.

Truly frightening.

How did we get to this point in America? If I wasn’t so angry I think I’d just be sad.

Crossposted @ Blogger News Network

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Let's Have Some Fun...

I often engage in a past time that I sarcastically refer to as ‘poking the bear’. I define ‘poking the bear' as:
stating an opinion which one believes will most likely get a rise out of one’s opposition.

I engage in this activity not only on my blog, but in my daily life. I will fully admit here that I immensely enjoy this endeavor.

For those who do not understand this concept, here are some examples:

-PETA today came out against Roe vs. Wade...they feel the ongoing battle between Roe and Wade has resulted in a ‘quagmire’.
-In a related story Hillary now has stated she hates all homosexuals.
-In other news, scientists have used Quantum Mechanics to prove Christianity to be the only true religion, and evolution, finally has been fully debunked.
-Other scientists, at the risk of losing their jobs and livelihood, have come out as whistle blowers and told 60 Minutes:
“Stem cells do not exist, never have. It’s all been a hoax. And you idiots fell for it..hahhahahha! And Global Warming...oops, we really screwed up there. In fact, when we reran the numbers, it turns out Earth is actually getting colder. Sorry.”
-Howard Dean told reporters that Social Security is not just in crisis, it is near disaster.
-Mensa has agreed to accept George W. Bush as a member now that it has been found he has the Guinness Book of Records record for highest I.Q. ever.
-Atheists now believe Saddam Hussien actually is evil and Pat Robertson is ‘kinda cool’.
-Joke of the day...A Muslim man goes to the corner store to pick up a pack of Camels. When he gets home, his wife asks him how he's going to feed them all.
-Psychologists agree that liberal compassion is based on pity and guilt.

As you can see, the ‘poking’ need not be based in reality. But merely on getting a rise out of the intended victim. It helps, however to use your opponents talking points or obvious emotionally invested buttons against him.

If I got a rise out of you from any of the above examples, you are the ‘bear’. Yet this is not just a sport for the right, lefties can play too. The court is big enough for all of us. So I am opening the comments on this post as a forum for either side to ‘poke the bear’.

Let’s put anger aside for a moment and have some fun....

Sunday, February 20, 2005

I Guess That's Why They Call It a Sin Tax

Recently Democratic governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, called for an increase in the state cigarette sin tax of $.75. This would bring the per pack tax rate in Illinois to $2.33. This is not the price per pack, this is the tax per pack.

This would put Illinois as the third highest tax per pack state just behind New Jersey. Leading this elite group is Rhode Island @ $2.46 per pack. $2.46 per pack!
Here is the break down of the full top ten...

1. Rhode Island- $2.46
2. New Jersey- $2.40
3. Michigan- $2.00
4. Alaska- $1.60
5. Massachusetts- $1.51
6. Connecticut- $1.51
7. New York- $1.50
8. Washington- $1.42
9. Hawaii- $1.40
10. Pennsylvania- $1.35

I do not smoke. I personally find it somewhat obnoxious. But these ‘sin’ taxes are just insane. Here are some numbers, then I’ll get to the point of this post...

-32.9 percent of adults who are below the poverty level smoke, compared to 22.2 percent of adults
who are at or above the poverty level.
-31 percent of adults who do not graduate from high school smoke compared to just 12.1 percent
of those with a college education, and 7 percent of those with a graduate degree.
-Among college-age adults, those not in college are much more likely to smoke than full-time
college students (37.6% v. 26.7%).
-Smoking among college bound high school seniors is 23.6 percent while smoking among noncollege bound seniors is 37.5 percent.


So basically, what I’m seeing here is cigarettes are used more by the poor than by the affluent. And thus, taxing cigarettes will burden those less fortunate to a larger degree.

So what we really have here, then, is a tax on the poor.

There is something else odd happening here. Of the top 11 states in tax amounts per pack, all but Alaska are blue states. Hmmm. Blue states. Wait a minute here, that means they vote Democratic right? And Democrats are always screaming about how the poor are overly burdened, right? That we should only tax the ‘rich’?

Hey, something doesn’t add up here....these numbers just don’t make sense.

But of course they do.

(cross posted @ Blogger News Network)

Saturday, February 19, 2005

A Little Common Sense

I honestly hate to help the left. Unfortunately however, being the compassionate caring human that I am, I can not help but follow my nature.
So here goes....Listen up progressive guys and gals...and you just may learn something.
Since the election you’ve harped, over and over, on how it isn’t your stance on the issues that most Americans find appalling, it is simply the 'framing of the message'. You say the Republicans ‘defined’ their message better.

Per Chuck Graham(D) 24th District Rep. from Missouri...

“You can’t let the other side define what the issues are. We need to define ourselves better as Democrats and the Democratic Party. We need to be talking about the things that matter to people. We need to understand why they vote the way they do. And we need to make sure we’re speaking to those issues.”

Do you know what, he’s right. But, would you like to know what really matters most to ‘the folks’? What they really look for in ‘the message’? Common sense. That’s it. Not elitists spouting from academia. Not rich Northeastern spoon-fed neo-moralists telling them how they pity, and thus honor, the poor. Not lawyers, made rich feeding off the coffers of large corporations, telling them how those very same corporations are the root of all evil. But instead, simply common sense.

And you know what libs? You are not getting off to a very good start.

Lets look at the way you’ve handled two somewhat similar situations in the news recently.

First we have Larry Summers, president of Harvard University. He had the gumption, yea even the audacity, to state though somewhat sheepishly, what most right thinking sensible people already believe. That men and women are inherently different. That they think differently. That this difference can and does affect one’s performance and decision making. This, progressives, is that elusive ‘common sense.’

From ‘Brain Differences in Males and Females’ Tarleton State University:

‘Because of the physical differences in brain morphology, men and women use their brains in
different ways. Men tend to rely on single cues to process information and make judgments (Heim, 2001). When shown a series of photographs and asked to explain the emotion that was depicted, men tended to observe only broad, obvious cues. Women, on the other hand, noticed not only the obvious cues, but also the subtle cues. As a result, women tended to identify the correct emotion more often than men, but they took slightly longer to do so (Heim, 2001).
Spatial ability is located in the left hemisphere (Peek, 2001). Because this area tends to be larger in men than women, men had an advantage in hitting targets, mentally manipulating maps, compute mathematical problems, and breaking items into their basic components (Sutter Health System, 2001). By comparison, women scored lower in hitting targets and computing math problems (Chadwick, 2001). Researchers noted that when asked to manipulate maps, women changed the physical orientation of the map itself; men, however, could make the perspective change in their heads. Women had a more “global” understanding of word problems than men, and tended to understand how mechanical gadgets worked on a “theoretical level” rather than on a technical level (Eby, 2001).’


So how have you reacted to Mr. Summers blasphemous comments? His ‘freedom of speech’? By crying for his head. By forcing apology after apology from a man who made the unfortunate mistake of stepping on your PC toes. You do not back him. Do not fight for his speech that is obviously ‘protected by the first amendment.’

Alas, ‘the little people’ see this for what it is.

Contrast the above, to the way in which you have dealt with our next little item of interest...

Mr. Ward Churchill, the professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado.
A man that has called the innocent men and women killed in the 9/11 massacre ‘Little Eichmanns.’ The man who stated:

'As to those in the World Trade Center ... Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire - the 'mighty engine of profit' to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved.'


One of the things I’ve suggested is that it may be that more 9/11s are necessary. This seems like such a no-brainer that I hate to frame it in terms of actual transformation of consciousness.’


I want the state gone: transform the situation to U.S. out of North America. U.S. off the planet. Out of existence altogether.’

OK, well that was fun.

And how have you, the left, treated this ‘great thinker’? With awe.

‘His first amendment rights must be protected.’ ‘He has the right to his beliefs. This is America after all.’ ‘To fire him would violate his civil rights.’

‘Regular Joes’ see right through this.

And here is what they see. A party who attacks a man for stating what is simply common sense to most right thinking humans. A man, shredded by the left for stating a fact(though many may not like to face it)of life. A party that does nothing to protect this man’s freedom of speech. While at the same time, screams bloody murder when the ‘freedom of speech’ of an anti-American, anti-Semitic, pseudo American-Indian screams for death to America and its people. They see a party that hates America, and thus, them personally. This is what they see.

Is this the ‘message’ you want to send? Is this how you ‘define’ your position? Is this your ‘common sense’? Because this is exactly how the average American perceives you. And this is why your party as it is now ‘defined’, is destined to be voted, in your beloved Mr. Churchill’s words...’out of existence altogether.’

Crossposted @ BNN

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

The Bitter Truth


Results of a new national survey of 864 physicians and 1,339 members of the general public revealed that a significant majority of both groups believe that mandatory, federally funded HIV testing would improve the overall health of the U.S. population.
The national e-survey was conducted by HCD Research during February 12 -14, as part of its continuing investigation of the social, political and economic issues confronting the U.S. health care system. The margin of error in the survey was plus or minus 3% at a 95% confidence level.
The survey revealed that among the general public:
-- 63% of Americans believe that mandatory, federally funded HIV testing would improve the overall health of the U.S. population
-- 60% indicated that the associated health care benefits of mandatory, federally funded HIV testing outweigh the social implications
-- 40% indicated that the social implications of mandatory, federally funded HIV testing outweigh the associated health care benefits’

Are you people entirely crazy?
The responsibility falls on those who spread the damn disease. Although the word I should use is irresponsibility...from the New York Times:

‘the growing popularity of crystal meth in New York, which many say has led to an abrupt increase in unsafe behavior and a spate of infections. Although exact figures are difficult to determine, a recent survey of gay men found that 25 percent had tried crystal meth in the last few months.’


‘Although the number of AIDS-related deaths has plummeted since the advent of a more potent class of drugs in the mid-90's, the rate of new infections has remained unchanged at about 40,000 cases a year, frustrating many advocates.’

Why? Maybe this would explain it...

According to the researchers, 42.9 percent of homosexual men in Chicago's Shoreland area have had more than 60 sexual partners, while an additional 18.4 percent have had between 31 and 60 partners. All total, 61.3 percent of the area's homosexual men have had more than 30 partners, and 87.8 percent have had more than 15, the research found.’

Or this regarding the possibly new HIV super virus ...

‘The two male contacts in New York, only one of whom is cooperating with the investigation, are among hundreds of men with whom the New York man told health officials he has had sex in recent weeks while using crystal methamphetamine.’

‘60 sexual partners’? ‘Hundreds of recent weeks’?
Hmmm...sound like any of your sex lives? If so, go get checked. But don’t you dare make a law to force me to do the same.

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Ground Zero Posted by Hello

Standing beside the remains of the towers. Posted by Hello

Ground Zero January 2005

She stood a ghostlike silhouette before the gray cold safety fence. A stunned frozen statue choking back tears. Below the street where she stood lay nothing special to speak of. A hole splattered with pot holes and twisted metal. Sand, and gravel, and earth rending machines. But there was something else. A feeling of something more...something important...important and sad.
The emptiness in front of her was echoed in the empty sky here, where metal and glass and man had once stood high. She’d never expected to be this touched. This moved. Never thought those souls lost through fire and tumbling and the crushing power of gravity would have remained on this hallowed ground waiting for the crowds. Waiting to touch. Waiting to remind.
He was surprised by the coldness in his heart. He’d thought he’d have felt it a little bit more. But instead, it was her shoulders bent to the pavement that had had an affect. It was then he’d remembered. Remembered the flames. Remembered the horror. Remembered the sadness. And now, only now, remembered the anger. The searing anger. It came, a hot poker through his soul. Burning through the callous of time. Bringing him, once again, to the moment of the attack.
And in that moment he made a promise.
A promise to her. A promise to himself. And a promise to those whose lives were taken by the evil that lives in man’s soul.
He would never stop. Would never forget. Never let the editors of history rewrite these heroes out of time.
When is the last time you saw the towers fall? The last time you watched as body after body dropped from windows of flame? Saw the posters of the missing on the gates St. Pauls? Watched the dust covered faces emerge from the cloud? Saw the pain on the faces of family and friends? How long has it been? Do you remember it now?

Monday, February 14, 2005

Rubbing It In Their Wounds

With the recent revival of news stories dealing with the post election Liberal flight to Canada, I have decided that the only compassionate thing for me to do is to offer my help. With this in mind I have decided to initiate a new program. The Sponsor A Liberal Team or SALT.

SALT is a program designed to help offset the costs accrued by any Leftist whom chooses to permanently move to the Great White North. Just imagine the searing pain of those who voted for John Kerry, only to have Democracy bite them in the ass. Be empathic, if you can, to the Progressives who sent so much money to Mr. Kerry’s campaign that they can now not even afford their own private health care. Try to have a little compassion for those poor souls who have had to survive this ‘greatest economy since the great depression’. Who have lived through the brutal torture perpetrated on them by the Hitler-like sitting president.

Please Conservatives, as we know you are all rich, please have some compassion. Your neighbors need your help. Here is how you can give it. Just send a self addresses stamped envelope along with your generous donation of $50.00 to:

Sticks and Stones
123 Some Pl.
Nowheresville, IL 12345-6789

In return you will receive a hand written letter from your liberal friend, a photo of your own personal liberal next to the International Falls border station, and a gift certificate to the upcoming Ward Churchill/Eason Jordan speaking tour, entitled “Canada: Sure We Killed a Bunch of Indians, Eh...But Our Journalists Remain Pretty Safe.”
So don’t wait, donate now! Those in need should not have to suffer one more minute...and neither should we.

And for those of you who wish a more hands on approach to your charity, Uncivil Rights has a program just for you...visit here @ Limos For Liberals.

Thursday, February 10, 2005

Poking the Bear

What do you think would happen in this scenario:

I am a college professor, for let’s say the University of Illinois. I have tenure. I work in the Ethnic Department.
In class one day, the subject of Chief Illiniwek is broached by one of my lovely students. I state, “Who cares about that stupid Indian. All injuns are wife beaters and drunks anyway.”

How long do you imagine I would have my job? Do you think the ACLU would be knocking down my door to handle my case? Do you think Ward Churchill would be asking for my head? Do you think my liberal minded students would protest my firing? Would talk show hosts everywhere be debating my right to freedom of speech? Would it matter that I didn’t even call for the killing of innocent Americans?

Just wondering.

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Just Sickening

I hate the public school system. This story is the perfect illustration of why...

BERWYN, Ill. - When a band teacher was arrested here and charged with sexually abusing 16 students, jaws dropped at the allegations: Police said the teacher had tied young girls to chairs with duct tape and rope and then re-enacted sexual bondage scenes from his porn collection.

OK, that’s sick and evil. But there’s more.

Investigators now say the school district in this blue-collar Chicago suburb had received complaints about the teacher years earlier and had warned him in 2001 against "inappropriate touching" but never reported him.

WHAT????? He was warned? He wasn’t dragged down by his manly parts to the nearest police station booked and left to rot? Who is running these schools, Paul Ruebens? Who are they there to protect, the students or the pedophilic teacher? Do they not care about the pain these girls will carry for the rest of their lives? Do they not understand the financial liability their actions have brought upon that school district and every tax payer therein? How many types of wrong can one decision have?

Robert Sperlik Jr., 45, was still teaching last month when the parents of a 15-year-old girl contacted police with her story of abuse and Sperlik was arrested.
He was formally indicted Wednesday on multiple counts of kidnapping, sexual abuse and unlawful restraint.
The case has led to a flurry of allegations and legal actions. Two former students have filed federal lawsuits against the district over its handling of the allegations. And Sperlik's lawyer has demanded a gag order, saying police have talked so much about the case it could be hard to find an impartial jury or unsullied defense witness.

I am not a big one for lawsuits, but my God....Whoever was in charge of the decision to keep this monster is just as guilty as he is. Those poor girls. I am speechless.

Meanwhile, police say the investigation into what really happened in Sperlik's classrooms over a six-year period ending in 2003 is continuing and the number of alleged victims could grow. They have yet to identify two students in Polaroid pictures found in Sperlik's North Riverside home, partly because the girls have so much duct tape on their faces.
"It's a troubling time," said Berwyn School District 100 Superintendent Patricia Wernet, who was not in the job when the alleged abuse occurred.

Who was? I want his name!

Sperlik, who is being held without bond, appeared in Cook County Circuit Court Wednesday but did not speak.
His attorney William Hedrick used the preliminary hearing to blast Berwyn police for "parading" his client in front of news cameras and mailing a letter to residents about the case. The letter said police believe that the case is an "isolated occurrence" and that Sperlik's arrest "should put an end to this behavior."
"As opposed to acting as a police department, they appear to be acting as leaders of a mob action," Hedrick told Judge Daniel Weber. Weber set a Monday hearing on the gag order request. Police said the letter was meant to calm worried residents.
Outside court, Hedrick said Sperlik maintains his innocence.

Good God, I’ve heard enough. You can get the rest of the story here. And please if you have kids in public schools, get active. You can see by this story just how frightened you should be. If its not the monster himself, its his bureaucratic enablers. Maybe this will make some of you libs out there think twice next time before you say some no name government beaurocrat has your of your families best interests at heart.

Monday, February 07, 2005

Admire the Left

Ever hear statements like these from the left:
“We hate war.”
“Gun violence is evil.”
“Racism is wrong.”
“We should help the needy.”
“We need to better educate our children.”
I know I have. Problem is, when they make statements like this, it seems they feel they somehow deserve some type of credit. That by the mere statement, they are superior. As if by the simple verbalization, that they are on the side of right. This is where their logic goes completely off the tracks. Because in their minds, this makes the opposition on the side of wrong.
Here is a heads up progressives, there is no sane human who does not agree with the above statements. We on the right do not love violence, racism, intolerance, or disaster. We just don’t find the need to state the obvious. These statements are a priori to conseratives. We do not look for adulation through empty words.
And we deal in reality. Because, unfortunately, logic often has left the building when it comes to discussion on these issues. But I’ll try anyway.
War is hell. But there are times it is also necessary. Absolute pacifism cannot be defended. In the end it will always lead to Totalitarianism.
Gun violence on the street is bad. Now there is a surprise. But so is knife violence, fist violence, and even the threat of violence. The perpetrator is always solely responsible no matter what weapon he chooses. It makes as much sense to sue the maker of silverware if a perp uses a fork to kill his victim as it does to sue a gun manufacturer in a shooting death.
Racism should not be tolerated. Agreed. But haven’t we gone too far. Hate crimes? Do these laws not tell us that some victims are more important than others in the eyes of the law. Sounds kind of racist. And Affirmative Action? Giving one person an upper hand in college education based solely on the color of their skin? Again, sounds kind of racist to me. Even the courts worried about this law, as they wanted to put a time limit on its enforcement.
We should help the needy. Obviously. The fact is many of us would rather do it personally, though churches, charities, or volunteering. We do not believe that the government should, through the threat of jail or fine, force us to give.
Children should get a good education. Why, of course, they should. Our country will not long last if our educated young cannot compete with the rest of the world. But throwing money at the problem is not the answer. Never has been. We need parents who care about the education of their children. The left seems to not understand this. They seem to believe some bureaucrat cares enough about your children to ensure they get a quality education. We need good teachers. Not sub-average teachers who only hold a job because the NEA protects them. We need competition. Competition breeds innovation and quality. School vouchers could do that.
In closing, the left seems to want our admiration for stating the obvious. On the other hand, the right while believing many of these same things looks for solutions not merely adulation.

Saturday, February 05, 2005

Give Them the Purple Finger

Thanks to Michelle Malkin, I found this, here:

'TONY EASTLEY: The ABC's Middle East Correspondent, Mark Willacy, is in the Iraqi capital,

Mark Willacy, we've heard reports about the high voter turnout, but now there are reports of how some voters have taken on the insurgents in order to vote, you know, the people are fighting back.

MARK WILLACY: That's right, Tony. The Iraqi police have investigated a case in the village of al-Mudhariya, which is just south of Baghdad. The villagers there say that before the election insurgents came and warned them that if they voted in last weekend's election, they would pay.

Now the people of this mixed village of Sunni and Shia Muslims, they ignored the threat and they did turn out to vote.

We understand that last night the insurgents came back to punish the people of al-Mudhariya, but instead of metering out that punishment the villagers fought back and they killed five of the insurgents and wounded eight. They then burnt the insurgents' car. So the people of that village have certainly had enough of the insurgents.

TONY EASTLEY: Do you think that is a one off, Mark, or is it a sign perhaps that some Iraqis are no longer sympathetic to the insurgents' cause, or at least no longer willing to turn a blind eye?

MARK WILLACY: It would appear that people are getting sick of the insurgency. I understand, though, that this is the first report of Iraqis confronting insurgents and actually fighting back in such a way.

But certainly many people here see the insurgency as the work of foreigners who want to turn their country into some sort of Islamic state, like Afghanistan under the Talbian.

And a couple of days ago we spoke to some voters in central Baghdad and every one of them basically said that they'd like the insurgents to stop their bombing and shooting attacks. Some even said they'd voted just to send a message to the insurgents that they would not be frightened any more.'

Welcome To LaLa Land

Guess I poked the bear. Here are some comments to my last post:

‘All of you need to think. These people did not attack us!
Osama Did!
Anyone who speaks so loosely about killing people. Has no concept of life....
You think it's good to kill innocents and folks who do not want to be occupied!
If your town was taken over and you were told what flag to wave. You'd fight back too. If you say no. you are not being realistic!
And the election was a farce...Iraq and US 2000, and 2004
Libertarian You? I doubt it.
You come off as a hate monger..
The bastion of the ill informed....


‘You have got to be joking! You would NOT be talking like this at all, if YOU were the one being sent over seas to be shot back at. I laugh at all of you that support this massacre. It's not a war, it's a GENOCIDE! Look at the damned full picture! We entered a muslim country, took it over and are killing their people. Republican's say it's ok, because they are "terrorists". Well Jiminy Crickets, is that all that Hitler was doing? I don't freaking think so! You need to grow up, put on a uniform and go over there with those soldiers and get your ass shot at for a few months. I guarantee that you'll be screaming unfair in no time as well. As for you're little General, I don't see him over in the thick of battle. He's sitting on his ass in D.C. drinking coffee and eating Krispe Kreame doughtnuts with that loose screw you people call a president! He's more whacked in the head than Reagan ever had been! Lets give Bush a damned nuke button instead of a flush handle on his toilet. A


‘Ah hell, let's just blow the whole world up and start all over! THAT is where Bush is heading, not to "peace" but to another world war, and soon, he'll have a CIVIL war again. If you republican's think we'll sit here and take your shit much longer, better think harder on that. There was rebellion once, there can be again.

12thharmonic, I can only 'come off as' your simplistic, skewed mental perception would have me. Yes, as America is today, I would fight if my town were taken over. However, if I was living, as the Iraqi people were, under Tyranny and fear of death or dismemberment, then maybe I would not fight an 'occupying' force. Would you?

Genocide, MissLuvz(sorry could not link to this site)? Muslim is not a is a religion. Answer this, if you were in power, would we even have a military? I think I know the answer. War is hell, don't think you are superior for thinking that. Every sane person believes that. The difference is, a sane person knows that at times violence is both necessary and crucial.

Why do your ilk compare everything you disagree with to Hitler? First off, it makes you look illiterate and ill informed. And secondly, if you had lived in the time of Hitler you surely would have appeased him. "He just wants a better life for his people."
You truly want to ‘nuke’ the entire Mideast? Oh, I’m sorry, ‘the whole world’. Now MissLuvz...that does not sound very luvzing.

Come on, your threat of a civil war is just ludicrous. You would, at the most have a ragtag group of anarchist and professional protesters. And at the least an army of PETA-philes and peaceniks. Although, as offensive as it would be to you, your army would have to arm itself with, sit down now, WEAPONS! Yuck! On the other hand, you could go to the UN and attempt to get an international coalition to fight your war for you. Good luck.

Aside to The Mad Tech.....I AM NOT CRACKER! The above comments did not insult me, that did.

Friday, February 04, 2005

You Can't Handle the Truth

Has our country become so feminized that we can not see the forest for the trees? Have we become so soft that we can not face up to the frightening truths of our world? That evil is real. That there are evil men. That we need strong, aggressive people to fight them. Apparently the left doesn’t think so.
They complain that Alberto Gonzales is too aggressive. Who would they rather have as Attorney General, Buster the Bunny? “Well, hello terrorists. How are you? Meet my neighbors, they're lesbian syrup farmers.”
Or maybe Jon Stewart? I’m sure he could use his sarcastic wit to prevent the next terror attack. “A terrorist, a rabbi, and the pope walk into a bar....”
Robert Kennedy was aggressive. How would he be seen by today’s far left. As a right wing zealot, I would guess.
And what is the big deal with Gen. Mike Hagee of the U.S. Marine Corps? Here are his words:

"Actually, it's a lot of fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. ... It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling."
He added, "You go into Afghanistan. You got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

Sounds about right to me. He is a soldier. Do you get that? He is not the owner of a daycare facility. Or the director of Animal Control. He is a soldier. Do you get that, progressives. He fights wars. So you can sit back, relax, be offended, and complain about his bloodlust...from the safety of your liberal ivory towers, of course.

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Basic Economics I

‘I try to get out, but they just keep draggin’ me back in.’
I just can’t get away from the issue of Social Security. Today on the Michael Medved radio show, Mr. Medved was taking calls from the left on what they hated about the State of the Union speech last night. Guess what...they hate the privatization of Social Security. Can you believe it? Me neither. But, none the less, he received several call on this issue.
Several hilarious, yet at the same time, disturbing calls. The main talking point, of course, was that there is no crisis. However, they all agreed that the benefits payed out would exceed the money coming into the program by 2018. But this is where the agreement ended. And right where my enjoyment began.
Because it is at this point that the treasury bonds are to be sold back to the government.

In 2018 (approximately), payroll taxes will no longer be enough to cover Social Security payments. To make up the difference, treasury bonds from Social Security's trust fund will be sold back to the government, and in order to pay for those bonds income taxes will have to be raised.’

And this is also the point where the liberal mind stops operating on logic. One after another the callers insisted that there will be no crisis at this point because the bonds will just be paid back. ‘The Federal Government will then pay back the bonds’......did you catch that. In order for the program to stay solvent the Federal Government will have to pay back the bonds. Let’s see, is that the same Federal Government that took out those bonds in the first place in order to pay for other programs and pork laden projects? And the very same Federal Government who has NO MONEY. Yes, it’s true, the same Federal Government that even after 200+ years still hasn’t found a job. You are it’s income. Only you. It has not put your Social Security payments away in some bank in Fort Knox. It has spent that money, and when these bonds come due, the Federal Government will then come looking to you to pay them. So what does that mean? It means you will be paying higher premiums for Social Security and higher taxes to pay for the bonds. Now that is funny!

Tuesday, February 01, 2005


Thought this was important enough to post the entire thing:

Ron Paul’s
Texas Straight Talk
A Weekly Column

Don't Let Congress Fund Orwellian Psychiatric Screening of Kids

January 31, 2005

Every parent in America should be made aware of a presidential initiative called the “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.” This commission issued a report last year calling for the mandatory mental health screening of American schoolchildren, meaning millions of kids will be forced to undergo psychiatric screening whether their parents consent or not. At issue is the fundamental right of parents to decide what medical treatment is appropriate for their children.
Forced mental health screening simply has no place in a free or decent society. The government does not own you or your kids, and it has no legitimate authority to interfere in your family’s intimate health matters. Psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, and the drugs regularly prescribed produce serious side effects, especially in children’s developing brains. The bottom line is that mental health issues are a matter for parents, children, and their doctors, not government.
Unfortunately, however, the mental health screening initiative received funding from House and Senate appropriators in the 2005 federal budget. This funding allows states to create or expand mental health screening programs with your tax dollars. More importantly, the commission recommends a broader federal program in the near future.

Last fall I introduced an amendment to eliminate any funding for the proposal in a year-end spending bill. Although the amendment failed, the response to my office was overwhelming and highly supportive. The notion of federal bureaucrats ordering potentially millions of youngsters to take psychotropic drugs like Ritalin strikes an emotional chord with American parents, who are sick of relinquishing more and more parental control to government.
Accordingly, the first bill I introduced this year bill forbids federal funds from being used for any mental-health screening of students without the express, written, voluntary, informed consent of their parents. The bill is known as “The Parental Consent Act of 2005,” or HR 181. This legislation strikes a vital blow for parents who oppose government interference with their parental authority, and strengthens the fundamental right of parents to direct and control the upbringing and education of their children.
It is important to understand that powerful interests, namely federal bureaucrats and pharmaceutical lobbies, are behind the push for mental health screening in schools. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to run our lives, and the pharmaceutical industry is eager to sell psychotropic drugs to millions of new customers in American schools. Only tremendous public opposition will suffice to overcome the lobbying and bureaucratic power behind the president’s New Freedom Commission.
Your help is needed. Please tell everyone you know about HR 181, and ask them to call their representatives and senators in Washington to voice strong opposition to forced mental health screening. Demand that the Department of Health and Human Services receive no tax dollars in this year’s appropriation bill for screening programs, and that states receive no federal dollars for programs of their own. Refer to my congressional website for articles from September 2004 about mental health screening, and sobering statistics about anti-depressant drugs and kids in the text of HR 181. Most of all, talk with your friends, family, and colleagues about the underlying issue of whether the state owns your kids. Remind them that freedom can be maintained only when state power is limited, especially when it comes to fundamental freedoms over our bodies and minds.

Do what you can to help this man....