This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Jonn Lilyea

  • Typical leftist techniques

    I was reading Curt at Flopping Aces early this morning – after my first morning cup – and saw his piece on “Celebrity Idiots Attack Karl Rove” and it sounded so familiar. Well, it’s familiar because it’s the same way I’ve been attacked by supposed friends and new acquaintances who’ve decided to wade into a political discussion with me. When they discover my political views, they feel it’s their appointed duty to convert me into “one of them”.

    When I try to avoid the conversation (usually when my wife is around because she hates it when my face gets red and I turn into “that guy”), they continue on with their blathering and grab me by the arm to keep me rooted in my spot while their spittle runs down their chin and the volume increases. I’ll make a one line reply  – a statement of indisputable fact – and the saliva count increases along with the decibles. As if volume and spittle production increases will convince me to be an intellectually-vacant moron. 

    The fewer facts presented only increases the volume – and the namecalling. At first, they avoid calling me names and the start with the President, then work through his staff, then Haliburton, and somehow Ken Lay always gets thrown in.

    When I don’t react to all of those vacuous debating techniques, the gun gets turned on me. First, by making sideways, glancing blows like “…well, anyone who thinks otherwise must be a moron…”, or “aren’t you ashamed of what those cretins have done to your party?”

    Then suddenly, I’m a jackbooted thug who eats puppies alive, kicks old people and murders unsuspecting teenagers.

    The more I appear like I won’t be convinced to surrender my soul to the gods of their weird religion, the angrier, louder, and more irrational they become. You can see examples of this behavior across the internet – especially in the comments section of HuffPo. And in my email.

    When I read about Al Sharpton getting death threats, I know it’s BS. The Left are the side that make death threats, hell, I’ve gotten them here. They like to say they get death threats – who would waste the time to make a death threat to those three pinhead Dixie Chicks? Who has time for that?

    I’ve never seen a Conservative on television get fist-pounding mad on any of the talk shows, but you see the Left doing it all the time. The closest I’ve seen from the Right is Bob Novak walking out of a CNN broadcast during a commercial break. The biggest emotional outburst from a conservative was Dick Cheney calmly telling Pat Leahy to attempt asexual reproduction. That’s it. That’s all they have.

    But almost nightly you can see the Left in hystrionics over something or other – especially when they have no real facts. I’ve never seen a Conservative crying in the Congressional hallways because no one is listening to them, but we were treated to that just a few weeks from Code Pink – grown men in pink sweatshirts with tears streaming down their faces because Nancy Pelosi won’t end the war in Iraq yesterday. I guess they’re comfortable with their masculinity – but the rest of us aren’t. Comfortable with their masculinity, I mean.

    You read about John “Christmas in Cambodia” Kerry storming into a confirmation hearing in a committee in which he’s not even a member, and grilling a political foe, then storming out again – the Left takes great glee in emotional, pointless gestures like denying an ambassadorship to Belgium. Then the feigned outrage at the recess appointment to Belgium (it’s fricken Belgium for pete’s sake).

    Despite the fact that there’s no real evidence that Alberto Gonsalez ordered the firings of several federal prosecutors for political reasons, the Left is jumping up and down screaming for his head. But, I guess they don’t see that keeping Sam Fox from being ambassador to Belgium as the same thing, huh?

    The left has nothing. No science, no morals, no sense of history – just emotional outbursts.  That’s why I don’t go out much anymore. And that’s why Leftists live in an echo chamber – no rational person wants to talk to them.

  • The war is still lost

    So, the war is still lost according to Reid’s defenders in Congress – despite the fact that his press office told me on the phone that Reid was misquoted on Friday. John Murtha, afraid that Reid might steal his title as the biggest troop-hater is reported by Fox News as saying;

    “I am proud of these troops and what they have done,” said Murtha, D-Pa. “They won the war and the mission was accomplished. We cannot win it militarily. It can only be won diplomatically.”

    In typical Democrat fashion, Murtha tries to have it both ways. The troops have done a great job losing the war.

    Not to be out done, Dennis Kucinich, who has been stoned since August 1, 1990, apparently, yips;

    “Our soldiers didn’t lose the war,” said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio. “I maintain the war was lost the minute the White House fabricated a cause for war.”

    How did the Bush White House fabricate a cause for war when we’ve been at war with Hussein since he invaded Kuwait, Dennis?

    But at least fewer Republicans are jumping ship like they did earlier this year;

    “Whether or not some choose to acknowledge it, we are at war with militant Islamists who seek our destruction,” Ros-Lehtinen said. “Yet some on the other side of the aisle today announced that the war is lost in Iraq. This comment shows little understanding of the ability and determination of our men and women in the Armed Forces.”

    But other Republicans, like Chuck Hagel, can’t help themselves from caving in to the anti-war rhetoric from Reid, like he did this morning in the Washington Post;

    We are at a crossroads at home. One option is that Congress can pass and the president can sign a war-funding bill that gives our troops the resources they need and places responsible conditions on that funding that will press the Iraqi government to perform and make the tough choices. President Bush should not see this as a threat from Congress but as a reasonable progression of events after four bloody and costly years.

    The other option is that the president can veto the funding bill, Congress can overplay its hand, and both sides can get locked into a political standoff — with U.S. troops caught in the middle. This would not produce constructive pressure on the Iraqi government to reconcile its differences, and it would ensure that the United States would remain trapped in Iraq, doing ever-greater damage to our force structure and military capabilities.

    See? If the President just signs on to the Democrats’ $40 billion of pork and wasteful spending everything will be just fine. If the President capitulates and surrenders to the Democrats (and their al Qaida allies), we all win, sort of. Nevermind that a withdrawal timeline was never part of the trumpeted ISG study, and is the major point of contention between the Democrats and the President.

    When Democrats don’t fund our troops, it’ll be the President’s fault that he’s still leading the nation instead of sticking his finger in the wind like Hagel.

    The Democrats are adamant that the President sign their ill-crafted and cobbled-together legislation even though they, themselves, don’t believe in it. But it’s all they can get passed – and they aren’t sure what Plan B should include. From Reuters via WaPo;

    But when a Democratic-controlled panel of Senate and House of Representatives members meets on Monday to iron out differences between their respective bills, the product is expected to contain 2008 withdrawal dates.

    Many lawmakers have been speculating those dates might be nonbinding, as sketched out by a Senate-passed bill.

    More non-binding BS. And the President told them a month ago he was going to veto their sludge, so why are they just now getting around to “mulling” their options as AP reports;

    Democrats are considering their next step after President Bush’s inevitable veto of their war spending proposal, including a possible short-term funding bill that would force Congress to revisit the issue this summer.

    Another alternative is providing the Pentagon the money it needs for the war but insisting that the Iraqi government live up to certain political promises. Or, sending Bush what he wants for now and setting their sights on 2008 spending legislation.

    This is what is considered “leadership” by the Democrats. Instead of dictating what they’ll accept, they navel-gaze and pontificate and keep their fingers crossed that more troops will die in Iraq so the American people will back their assanine duct-tape and baling-wire spending plans.

    But they can’t dictate, because what they won’t admit is that the majority of Americans don’t trust Democrats with foreign policy. If the majority of Americans had the opinions on the war that the Democrats claim we have, they’d have a bullet-proof majority in Congress instead of a razor-thin majority. And Nancy Pelosi’s poll numbers wouldn’t have tanked after her ring-kissing exercise in Syria.

    But don’t worry. When Hillary is President, she’ll appoint her husband to be a roving diplomat, according to AP via the Washington Times;

     Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that if she is elected president, she would make her husband a roaming ambassador to the world, using his skills to repair the nation’s tattered image abroad.
        “I can’t think of a better cheerleader for America than Bill Clinton, can you?” the New York Democrat asked a crowd jammed into a junior high school gymnasium. “He has said he would do anything I asked him to do. I would put him to work.”

    Isn’t that what got us into this mess in the first place? Half-assed engagements with our nation’s enemies like Somalia, Haiti, Iraq, Serbia, Bosnia, East Timor, Iraq again, the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Rwanda. And don’t forget his apologies to Africans for our role in the slave trade.

    And then to provide some comic relief, Clinton makes this bizarre statement;

    “They have shown contempt for our government,” Mrs. Clinton said. “We’ve got to get back to having qualified people, not cronies, serving in the government of the United States.” 

    As if Whitewater, the missing FBI files, the Travel Office firings, Vince Foster’s death, the IRS investigations, the Kathrine Willy seduction, the Juanita Broadrick cover-up and all of the other, more obvious and famous corruption, crony-ism and deception never happened.

    Yeah, we need more of that.  That’s real Democrat leadership.

    At Hang Right Politics, COgirl reports Nevadans’ opinions of Harry Reid’s comment.

    Dafydd at Big Lizards analyzes the events in Iraq that Reid used to support his pre-emptive surrender.

    No rant against Reid is complete without Joe Lieberman’s response;

    With all due respect, I strongly disagree. Senator Reid’s statement is not based on military facts on the ground in Iraq and does not advance our cause there.

    Michele Malkin has anti-war quotes from John Edwards, email responses from troops and pointed me towards Mohammed from Iraq the Model who asks;

    Instead of telling us to stop fighting back, I’d like to see some people stand up and protest the crimes of the terrorists and tell them to stop the killing and destruction…turn the stop-the-war campaign against the terrorists, is that too much to ask for?

    If we can’t even blame the lone guy that gunned down 32 people last week, how are we gonna summon the testicular fortitude to condemn an entire organization of psychopaths? I guess those poor Iraqis must be laboring under the misperception that we’re a rational people.

  • Sometimes I forget; today I remembered

    Sometimes I get so wrapped in the politics of this war against terror, I forget what it’s really about. When Harry Reid makes bonehead comments about losing the war in Iraq, when John Murtha calls our troops murderers, when Dick Durbin calls our troops SS concentration camp guards, when Nancy Pelosi kisses the ring of terrorist supporting despots, I get so fricken angry that all I can do is just pound out my thoughts about the hatred I have for those sorry excuses for humans on this poor cracked and dented keyboard.

    Today, though, I forgot about them for a minute.

    Most of my readers know that every Saturday morning I go to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for my weekly dose of SOS (it stands for “Shit on a Shingle”; hamburger gravy over scrambled eggs and a biscuit – the real reason I stayed in the Army for twenty years). I love being among soldiers, and I love SOS so it’s the highlight of my week.

    Today was a little different. My wife and I were coming out of the parking garage and a young soldier and his wife were making their way into the hospital, too. He was in a wheel chair and his right leg was gone just below his thigh – I noticed he was wearing an 82d Airborne Division T-shirt. So as I walked by him, I shook his hand and said “Thanks, Airborne”. He gave me a big smile and took my hand firmly and said “Thanks” to me.

    Then I asked him what unit he was in and he told me he’d been attached to the ’05 (That’s the 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment) when he’d been wounded in Tikrit. That’s what he called it – wounded. His whole right leg was gone, but he called it a wound. So I grabbed his wheelchair and started pushing him toward the elevators and we talked – I’d told him I’d been in the Three-Two-Five 25 years ago and he laughed and asked how my knees were holding up. We carried on like two old friends, two brother paratroopers reminiscing.

    He told me that he was convalescing well and he hoped to be out of the hospital soon and that he wanted to remain on active duty. That he’d heard other guys whining about their condition, but he was going to hold up just fine. I told him that he sounded like he was holding more than just fine and we smiled at each other. I hope he didn’t notice I was holding back tears – tears of pride in the generation that succeeded mine. 

    We all got on the elevator and went up to the third floor where my wife and I were getting off. He stuck his hand out and thanked me for my service. HE THANKED ME! I was dumbfounded. This twenty-year-old kid, missing his leg, was thanking me for my service. I grabbed his hand and thanked him for doing what I couldn’t do any more, and I got off the elevator in a partial daze.

    It was at that moment I realized these kids don’t care about the politics, they don’t give a tiny rat’s ass that Code Pink stands their drones up in front of Walter Reed with idiot Bush=Hitler signs. They don’t care that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House or that Harry Reid makes moronic statements that he later “regrets” were taken out of context. They don’t care what Jack Murtha or Dick Durbin say about them.

    All they care about is their job, doing it right, keeping us safe and living up to legacy that they’ve been left by the generations of warriors that came before them. All the talk about conditions at Walter Reed, all the surrender flag-waving rhetoric and hippie drum beating is just background noise. These folks are writing our history and they don’t have time for the critics and naysayers.

    Sometimes I forget that this war isn’t about the politics, but today a young paratrooper and his young wife reminded me. And I think we’ll all be just fine.

  • Vermont Senate confused about it’s job

    AP is reporting that the Vermont Senate, while the Republican Lt. Governor was off one day, has voted to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney;

    The non-binding resolution was approved 16-9 without debate — all six Republicans in the chamber at the time and three Democrats voted against it.

    As if there wasn’t enough evidence that the hard working dairy farmers in Vermont are being held hostage by slow-witted flatlanders, the vermont Senate thinks this vote will actually have an effect on the war in Iraq;

    “I think it’s going to have a tremendous political effect, a tremendous political effect on public discourse about what to do about this president,” said James Leas, a vocal advocate of withdrawing troops from Iraq and impeaching Bush and Cheney.

    I’m not sure how it is now, but when I lived in Vermont two decades ago, the legislature was part-time. It’s probably full-time now because a search hasn’t turned up any information to the contrary, and this a perfect example of what you get when politicians have too much time and not enough State on their hands.

    UPDATE: More whacky quotes from the self-important flatlanders who have seized Vermont, courtesy of the Burlington Free Press;

    “I don’t think Bush will get impeached, but it is an important statement,” [Richard] McCormack said. “The president has wrapped himself in the flag and there are a lot of good people who think it is more patriotic to support Bush than oppose him.”

    McCormack said impeachment resolutions are “an assertion of patriotism.” He said, “Many people oppose Bush because of his contempt for our national institutions.”

    I guess contempt for national institutions might include waiting for the President of the Vermont Senate to take a day off and rabble seizing power just long enough to pass an idiot, unConstitutional nonbinding resolution to appease other idiots and morons who don’t understand that legislating is not just making empty, pointless gestures as if you were players in “Lord of the Flies”.

    And it ain’t over yet;

    Rep. David Zuckerman, P-Burlington, began gathering signatures on a House impeachment resolution Friday afternoon. He expected to file the resolution with the clerk of the House on Tuesday afternoon, so it would be up for consideration Wednesday.

    It’s not the Vermont that I fell in love with anymore. There is hope for Vermont’s future in the comments on the BFP article, though. I’m pullin’ for ya, guys.

  • Gun Control as a weapon

    I know I’m late to the Virginia Tech “massacre” debate, but not so late that I don’t get to see ass clowns use it for a reason to undermine our rights, apparently.

    In today’s DC Examiner, Harry Jaffe complains that not enough DC residents are protesting for “states rights” for DC. As an excuse that DC needs states rights (which as I’ve explained before is like giving car keys to a 10-year-old) jaffe presents the fact that courts have sided with Americans’ right to protect themselves in their homes with firearms. Jaffe begins by butressing his argument with the Virginia Tech shootings;

    I tend to be a practical protester, with an eye toward results. Here’s my take on three worthy reasons to take to the streets in Washington: voting rights, righting judicial wrongs, and gun control — in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings.

    And ends with an idiot mish-mash of garbled reasoning;

    For years, we had a strong gun–control ban as a bulwark against the tide of handguns that come our way from Virginia. It gave teeth to our laws and power to our cops to grab guns.

    Now courts have overturned that law, and we could lose one of our best defenses against mayhem. But the best way to keep guns off our streets would be to encourage Virginia to make it harder to buy deadly weapons, such as the semiautomatic guns that killed 33 at Virginia Tech, and the ones that migrate to our streets.

    That’s pretty convoluted thinking, for one thing. The best way DC residents have to protect themselves from criminals is giving up their weapons? DC has the highest violent crime rate in the country and yet Jaffe trumpets the 31-year-old liberal draconian gun laws as the District’s best chance to beat crime.

    All the appeals court said was that DC residents could own guns and keep them in their homes for self-defense. Does Jaffe think that the DC cops have time to do a house-to-house search to “grab guns”? I doubt you could pry a sizable number of DC cops away from the Popeye Chicken joints long enough to check even one home. When DC had a gun buy-back program in 1999 and 2000 (25 years after the gun law was enacted) they took in 6253 guns – there were still that many guns in the District. Doesn’t sound like the laws are working – so why write more?

    Luckily, I have Charles Krauthammer on my side;

    Unfortunately, in today’s supercharged political atmosphere, there is the inevitable rush to get ideological mileage out of the carnage.

    It did not take long for the perennial debate about gun control to break out, preceded by the inevitable scolding and clucking abroad about America’s lax gun laws.

    Yeah, I caught bits and pieces of that clucking this week. Euro-weinies scolding us for our “gun culture” yet unable to protect themselves from gun and knife-wielding lunatics and asundry “youth” criminals destroying half of Europe everytime the weather gets warm.

    But that doesn’t stop perpetual handwringer EJ Dionne from complaining that Europe is laughing at us;

    Our country is a laughingstock on the rest of the planet because of our devotion to unlimited gun rights. On Thursday, an Australian newspaper carried this headline: “America, the gun club.”

    Dionne proves he doesn’t understand the debate;

    Any reasonable measures are blocked because most Republicans are opportunists on the gun issue and Democrats have become wimps. Republicans have exploited support from the NRA for years, and Democrats, eyeing rural congressional seats, are petrified of doing anything that offends the gun lobby.

    Republicans have this weird thing where we think the Constitution protects the rights of citizens, not it’s a list of suggestions for privileges that politicians can use to reward their constitituents. Democrats are the ones exploiting the fear of more gun violence instead of accepting the fact that guns protect us more than they kill us.

    But, honestly, I hope Democrats take Dionne’s “Democrats are wimps” line to heart. Nothing would wipe out Liberalism in one fell swoop like a national campaign against gun owners.

    Actually, I figure it’s this lunatic liberalism that thinks judges can predict human behavior – especially if they’re allowed to ignore other liberal “experts”. And, Lord knows we can’t violate the rights of lunatics to own guns, even though we think it’s fine and dandy to restrict mostly sane and rational people from owning guns. Which is exactly what Jaffe is supporting.

    I’ll bet cash money that neither Jaffe nor Dionne would have supported putting a note on Cho’s NAC file that hinted he might be a little nuts and shouldn’t be sold a gun. They’d just rather broadbrush paint the entie nation’s residents as potential lunatics instead of just restricting the dangerous guys.

    It’s comforting to know Mr. Krathammer thinks as I think;

    In a previous age, such a troubled soul might have found himself at the state mental hospital rather than a state university. But in a trade-off that a decent and tolerant society makes with open eyes, we allow freedom from straitjackets to those on the psychic edge, knowing that such tolerance runs a very rare but very terrible risk.

    It is inevitable, I suppose, that advocates of one social policy or another will try to use the Virginia Tech massacre to their advantage. But it is simply dismaying that a serious presidential candidate should use it as the ideological frame for his set-piece issues.

    Yeah, Democrats are good at standing on dead bodies for their political advantage. Look how tall they stand on our dead troops. I expected it when I first heard of the shooting.  But Clinton’s gun policies is what ultimately doomed the Gore presidency – too many hunters in Florida. Any Democrat who thinks that gun control is good way to get the White House is deluding themselves, but the Democrats’ field of candidates isn’t short of deluded people, is it?

    In fact, I think we need to ban Spring. Every Spring these youthful gunmen come out – it usually happens in mid-April – and start blasting away at their fellow classmembers. It must be the Spring weather. Maybe we should lock up all males after the first week of April.

    Or maybe as Diana West of the Washington Times says today, we should scrap liberalism;

    Since for a long time. Since we, as a society, decided to abolish “normal,” effectively eliminating the parameters of, well, normal behavior. Since we, as a society, decided to rid ourselves of taboos, effectively disarming basic self-defense mechanisms, including good judgment. It is unlikely Cho realized any of this as he maniacally exploited society’s weaknesses. But it is crucial we understand our inaction on Cho’s warning signs as a consequence of political correctness and begin to reverse it. Otherwise, we won’t have even a hope of warding off such evil next time.

    But, then how many Democrat Presidential candidates would there be if we reinstituted “normal” – or even “rational” for that matter.

  • Reid; The war is lost (Updated)

    I noticed on a couple of blogs and discussion boards last night that Harry Reid can’t wait for the new tactical plan and the new commander in Iraq to have their effect so he called it a defeat pre-emptively. The Washington Post buried the story on page 3 (it’s not on their front web page, either – I had to “search” “Reid+war+is+lost”);

    President Bush warned Thursday that pulling out of Iraq too soon would trigger a bloodbath akin to that of the Cambodian killing fields of the 1970s, while Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid declared that it is too late to stay because the war has already been lost.

    On a day that reverberated with echoes of the Vietnam War era, Bush and Reid (D-Nev.) engaged in a long-distance debate over the lessons of history and the fate of the latest overseas war as part of a struggle over $100 billion in funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Reid cast Iraq as another Vietnam and Bush as another Lyndon B. Johnson, while the president described dire consequences if the past repeats itself.

    And over at the Washington Times, Joseph Curl and S.A. Miller report that Reid was having a senior moment and can’t distinguish between things that only happen in his mind and things that happen with real people;

    “This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday,” Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill press conference with anti-war state legislators.
        Mr. Reid said that both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates agree with his position, though neither has ever declared defeat.
        “You have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows,” said Mr. Reid, who left the press conference without fielding follow-up questions.
        The White House said no one recalled Mr. Reid saying “the war is lost” at the meeting with the president.

    Surprisingly enough, when I called Reid’s office this morning just to be sure that the media didn’t quote him wrong or take him out context, my call got switched to a mail box which was full and then dumped. Hmmm-I wonder if Reid is taking any heat.

    The Washington Post story goes on to illustrate how dingy Harry really is;

    “I know that I was like the odd guy out yesterday at the White House,” Reid said. “But I, at least, told him what he needed to hear, not what he wants to hear. I did that, and my conscience is clear.”

    So even though no one in the White House, according to the Washington Times, remembers Harry saying the war is lost, Harry still thinks it happened. And the Washington Times tells us the troops aren’t even in theater while Reid is calling it a failure;

    Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, this week said a little over half of the 25,000-troop surge he requested has arrived in Baghdad.

    Crotchety Old Bastard emailed me last night (for those of you who don’t know, his son deployed to Iraq late last year on the speartip of the surge in the mighty 1/325th Airborne Infantry Regiment) and he’s asking for everyone to post comments that he can print out and dump on Reid’s desk when he visits here soon. Michele Malkin put COB’s letter to Reid on her front page.

    Curt at Flopping Aces has the best multi-media blog post I’ve seen on this latest crybaby Dingy Harry exercise in mental masturbation. Although, Crotchety Old Bastard is much angrier.

    UPDATE: OK, so I got through to Reid’s office this morning at about 8:30 and talked to his press office. The young man explained to me that Reid’s comments were taken out of context and that Senator Reid regrets that he’s been misquoted. Apparently, Reid said “As long as we continue to follow the president’s current strategy, the war is lost.”

    My original contention that Reid is ignoring the fact that the new strategy hasn’t even been fully implemented still stands. Reid’s office told me that the new strategy must include the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group – that the bulk of US troops need to be “redeployed” (his word not mine) out of Iraq.

    That’s just baffling. While Reid is calling the President a reincarnation of Lyndon Johnson, he’s also calling for implementing the Johnson policy of reaction forces to protect mobile training teams. So I guess we’re at the point where we just have to assume that Harry Reid is insane as well as being a lying political sack of camel dung.

  • Overcome by events

    Sorry, folks, but I’ve been overcome by events both personal and otherwise. I’ll be back soon – I promise. So much to catch up on, I’ll try to be back Friday – early.

    Maybe some of you guys I’ve asked to guest blog should step up (hint, hint).

  • Reading assignment and miscellaneous stuff

    Having a busy weekend. Something happened thirty years ago today and my wife is fairly angry that I don’t remember what it was. Hope I figure it out soon so I can get pancakes for breakfast. So while I get my brain housing group soaked in RBC, get smarter and stuff at these blogs;

    If you read nothing else this weekend read Andrew Walden’s “Learning from George McGovern and Earl Browder” on The American Thinker. Excellent.

    And, if you’ve got an hour or so, read this from Eject! Eject! Eject! and every time you need an uncommon dose of common sense.

    Blackfive discovers why the Iraqi Parliament was vulnerable to attack this past week. 

    If you still think that Liberalism hasn’t become a religious faith, read Samhita’s “analysis” – notice the emphasis on the first half of the word – (via Crotchety Old Bastard, Ace Of Spades and Protein Wisdom) of the Duke University cluster. Please be prepared to take a shower afterwards. 

    And, if Sharpton “brought down” Imus, Imus’ fall couldn’t have started very far from the bottom. And who believes anyone on this planet would waste even a nanosecond of their life to locate contact information so they could threaten Al Sharpton? I figure he’ll choke on his own bile soon enough.

    Don’t miss Sharpton’s stammering defense of his inability to apologize for his misdeeds in the Tawana Brawley case (oddly enough, it echoes the post from Samhita mentioned above) to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday when it gets rebroadcast this afternoon. While waiting, read about Sharpton’s attack on the entire German Army. I guess Imus gave him the courage to run to every open mic he sees. If there’s a reason Imus deserved to be fired, it was for kissing Sharpton’s ring more than anything else.

    Meanwhile, Curt at Flopping Aces , via Screw Loose Change, discovers the REAL reason Imus was fired.

    El Presidente at Slapstick Politics asks why we should trust climate experts on Global Warming when they can’t get the weekend weather right.Â