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

Author: Jonn Lilyea

  • Democrats new strategy; SSDD

    Steve Hirsch in the Washington Times tells us that a coalition of Republican and Democrat Congressmen are trying to reward Communists in Cuba;

    Legislation to chip away at the Bush administration’s hard-line Cuba policy is in the works in the House, where Republicans and Democrats are planning a variety of measures aimed at easing the U.S. policy on Cuba.
        The first bill, which would lift the ban on Americans traveling to Cuba, was introduced yesterday by Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican.

    And of course Charlie Rangle couldn’t help but take a potshot at the President on the war in Iraq;

     Mr. Rangel criticized Mr. Bush as being “locked into punishing Castro,” but suggested that Mr. Bush would not veto bills that have Republican support.
        “He’s in enough trouble for the war that the best he can look for is trying to be able to accomplish something among Republican members. He owes them big time,” Mr. Rangel said.

    One-note Charlie.

    And Charles Hurt reports from the Washington Times this morning that the Senate Democrats blocked an amendment to the minimum wage bill that would have imposed stiffer fines on employers who hire illegal workers;

    Senate Democrats quashed a proposal yesterday that would have dramatically increased civil fines on employers who hire illegal aliens.
        Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, offered the amendment to the bill now being debated that would increase the federal minimum wage.
        Ridding the economy of illegal aliens, he argued, would do far more to help low-income wage earners than simply raising the minimum wage. Not only do aliens displace U.S. citizens in the work force, he said, they also artificially suppress wages.

    And old fat-ass, drunken Teddy Kennedy chalks it up to Republicans not caring about American workers;

    Republicans are “not for those millions of Americans who are heading home tonight, who’ve worked long and hard, facing their children hoping that at last … the United States isn’t going to fail us,” he said. “What do we tell them after five days?”

    And then takes a shot at the President about the war in Iraq;

    After accusing Republicans of stalling, Mr. Kennedy then proceeded to read aloud for five minutes a story in the New York Times about soldiers fighting in Iraq.

    I’m beginning to see a pattern here. Is this the new Democrat strategy? Everything is related to the War Against Terror? Whether it is or not? They found an issue that pleases their base and attracts a few bleeding heart independents so they hang on to it like grim death.

  • ROE changes

    According to the Washington Post this morning, rules of engagement for our troops in regards to Iranian agents has changed;

    For more than a year, U.S. forces in Iraq have secretly detained dozens of suspected Iranian agents, holding them for three to four days at a time. The “catch and release” policy was designed to avoid escalating tensions with Iran and yet intimidate its emissaries. U.S. forces collected DNA samples from some of the Iranians without their knowledge, subjected others to retina scans, and fingerprinted and photographed all of them before letting them go.

    Last summer, however, senior administration officials decided that a more confrontational approach was necessary, as Iran’s regional influence grew and U.S. efforts to isolate Tehran appeared to be failing. The country’s nuclear work was advancing, U.S. allies were resisting robust sanctions against the Tehran government, and Iran was aggravating sectarian violence in Iraq.

    This is great news. Coupled with the “surge” it proves that the administration is getting serious about this war, finally. The possibility of dead Iranian provacateurs makes me pleased. 

    However, in this morning’s Washington Times, Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough in their Inside the Ring column report that a major obstacle to our troops effectively destroying the enemy and protecting themselves is military lawyers;

    Defense officials tell us one of the rules of engagement for U.S. combat troops in Iraq is vague and written by lawyers with little or no battle experience. The result is that troops are at risk of getting killed in action because of military lawyers’ penchant for ambiguity.
        One troubling rule that is among several printed on the card given to troops going into combat is “use minimum force necessary to decisively eliminate the threat.” It is viewed by many in the military as ambiguous and confusing.
        “Does it mean you are obligated to wrestle with a threat rather than shoot him or her?” one defense official asked. “That is how a lot of police officers lose their lives each year, as the criminal gains control of the police officer’s firearm. How about approaching and/or wrestling a threat who, it turns out, is a homicide bomber?”

    ROE is more important than body armor. Put a couple of these overeducated twits on point with a rifle and see how long they agree with their own restrictions on the troops.

    We’re told that one of the first things Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the next commander of forces in Iraq, needs to do is demand an overhaul of the rules of engagement by line officers, not lawyers, so that ambiguities will be eliminated and lives saved.

    Let’s hope the good general releases our fighting men from the idiocy of folks who think too much.

  • Coulter vs. Press

    Ann Coulter is scheduled to take on Bill Press tonight on Larry Kudlow’s Kudlow and Company at 5pm EDT. Ought to be fairly entertaining. I hope Ann leaves enough pieces of Press for us to point and laugh at.

  • Oxygen Thief Hall of Fame

    Crotchety Old Bastard, my former battle buddy, has announced the opening of nominations for the first Annual Oxygen Thief Hall of Fame Charter Members list. Make your nominations! 

  • “Botched joke” blamed for Kerry’s decision

    Donald Lambro in the Washington Times blamed Kerry’s “botched joke” for Kerry’s decision not to run at the White House again in 2008.

    Mr. Kerry had intended to make another try for the White House, but a remark he made in the fall while campaigning for Democrats suggesting that only poorly educated Americans ended up fighting in Iraq sparked an uproar of criticism, even from within his own party, that drove him from the campaign trail.
        Mr. Kerry said at the time that his comments were nothing more than “a botched joke.” But the angry public reaction to his remarks, especially from military voters and veterans, embarrassed his party and, some said, tarnished his image as a presidential prospect.
        “I have concluded that this is not the time for me to mount a presidential campaign,” Mr. Kerry said from the Senate floor…

    Kerry’s decision was probably the most brilliant move he’s ever made in politics, perhaps in his entire life (aside from marrying two rich widows). He’s a loser, pure and simple. Apparently in Massachusetts doesn’t care who represents them in the Senate, which should be ample reason to vacate the 17th Amendment. He’s a sissified spoiled rich kid who should have learned that when he saw what an idiot the rest of the country thought of him. I’m sure he thinks that he was cheated and that he deserves to be President. Luckily 53% of Americans (the ones that work hard and raise their families) thought otherwise.

    What’s really disgusting is the way other Democrats treat him like a fallen hero;

    His decision won an emotional tribute from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who was on the Senate floor as Mr. Kerry finished his speech.
        “So I say to John Kerry: I love you, John Kerry. And I’m so sorry that things didn’t work out for our country. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that I will always care about you greatly and remember the times we’ve spent together,” the Nevada Democrat said.
        His 2004 running mate, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, paid tribute to Mr. Kerry by saying the withdrawal decision must have been tough because “we know his first instinct is always to respond to any call to serve his country.”
        Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Democrat, said that from Vietnam to the 2004 campaign, “John Kerry has fought for his country and his ideals and will continue to serve his country with honor and distinction in the years to come.”

    But I guess to a crowd of cowards, Kerry does look like a patriot and hero. How’s that saying go? It’s easy to look like you fly like an eagle when you’re surrounded by turkeys.

    As proof of my assertion that Kerry is “sissified”, I offer this report from Financial Times by way of MSNBC;

    “We came close – certainly close enough to try again,” Mr Kerry told senators, at one point choking back tears.

    Damned if we need a president who starts blubbering over his own shortcomings.

  • That time of year again

    Parents have hustled their children off to college this month for their Spring semester, while the anti-war protesters groups have been recruiting participants for their rallies for the perpetuation of turmoil and Islamofacism. This Saturday, there’s an anti war rally planned here in the nation’s Capitol once again;

    United for Peace and Justice describes itself as a coalition of 1,400 local and national organizations. Among them are the National Organization for Women, United Church of Christ, the American Friends Service Committee, True Majority, Military Families Speak Out, Iraq Veterans Against the War, the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, CodePink, MoveOn.org, and September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows.

    Among the featured speakers will be Vietnam War-era protester Jane Fonda, according to the organizers. Others include actors Danny Glover, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, civil rights activist Jesse Jackson, and Carlos Arredondo, who in 2004 set himself on fire after learning of the death in Iraq of his Marine Corps son, Alexander.

    Has anyone else noticed that these useless events are planned to occur during the time school is in session? You never see one during Summer vacation or Christmas holidays (I guess students are too busy to be bothered by their consciences while vacating their minds).

    I’ve been to a few of these just out of curiosity and I’ve noticed that most of the participants are away from the cameras and busy picking up members of the opposite sex rather than protesting. There’s always a thin line close to the cameras who raise enough ruckus for triple their number, but the large majority see these things as an opportunity to meet other college students.

    When the weather is cold, you can find most of the protesters huddled in the yuppie coffee shops that are scattered around the National Mall, the White House and the Capitol while in warmer weather, they’re stretched out on the grass in the numerous parks in the area.

    I’ll try to summon enough interest to get a few pictures Saturday and show you what I mean. maybe I’ll get to see some my favorite people;

    Among the featured speakers will be Vietnam War-era protester Jane Fonda, according to the organizers. Others include actors Danny Glover, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, civil rights activist Jesse Jackson, and Carlos Arredondo, who in 2004 set himself on fire after learning of the death in Iraq of his Marine Corps son, Alexander.

    I’m all twittery.

  • Call Putin what he is; adversary

    Today in the Washington Times AP’s Vladimir Isachenkov writes that;

    Russia’s defense minister yesterday harshly criticized U.S. plans to deploy missile-defense sites in Central Europe, saying Moscow doesn’t trust the U.S. explanation that they are intended to counter missile threats posed by Iran and North Korea.
        Sergei Ivanov, speaking during a trip to India where he co-chaired a bilateral commission on military ties, said neither Iran nor North Korea has or will have a capability to build missiles that can reach Europe.
        “They don’t and won’t have intercontinental ballistic missiles,” Mr. Ivanov told reporters. “And a question comes: whom it’s directed against?”

    Well, who do you think it’s directed at, Serg? Probably an adversary who supplies our adversaries with anti-aircraft missiles, an adversary who blocks necessary sanctions in the UN Security Council against enemies of world peace, an adversary whose citizens are selling weapons grade uranium from a plastic bag in their shirt pocket (Captain Ed at Captain’s Quarters goes in depth on this today)

    While taking in fists full of cash from the Iraqi government in the years leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Russians blocked actions against Hussein. What would the Russians do if the US were supporting the Chechnyans in anyway like the Russians are supporting Iran?

    But more importantly, where are the US officials asking in the media against from whom will those anti-aircraft defend in Iran? Any air attack on Iran from the US or Israel would be to neutralize their nuclear program which at this moment threatens the stability of the region.

     Putin and Russia still see the US as an adversary, and they’re still pursuing their old Soviet policy of engaging us and containing our military and economic strength through proxies.

    It’s time we recognized that the old Soviet Union is alive and well in Putin.

  • The Carter Clan still doesn’t get it

    Apparently, Jimmy Carter was busy elsewhere this weekend before he embarrassed himself at Brandeis. From an article by the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer (by way of Little Green Footballs) we discover that Carter’s old crew had a big celebration in Athens, GA this last weekend trying to rewrite his legacy;

    Tom Johnson, former president of CNN, said Carter should be judged by his body of work, not the disappointments of his final year in the White House.

    “That obscured four years of achievement,” Johnson said.

    So what did I miss in the previous three years? Was it the double-digit inflation? Surrendering the Panama Canal? Doubled fuel prices? Jimmy Carter’s “malaise speech” was given the summer before the election year (“his final year”) and by that time Americans were pretty dissappointed in their choice.

    Jim Wooten, a New York Times reporter in the 1970s and later an ABC correspondent, said it would be interesting to play out 1980 without the hostages.

    “I think Carter would probably have won,” Wooten said.

    Sorry, Wooten, but the Iranian hostage crisis was a symptom, not the cause. By the time the Iranians had taken hostages, the Soviets had stationed a 9,000-man combat brigade in Cuba and had invaded Afghanistan because Carter had made it clear that there would be no tangible reaction from the US.

    And of course, the man, Jimmy Carter, who lost control of our foreign policy, had advice for us for the future;

    “We are developing an ingrained hatred for people who aren’t Christians,” said Carter, a Sunday School teacher since he was 18 years old.

    Unwarranted fear of terrorism is behind these feelings, he said.

    “The distortion that we are about to be destroyed makes us suspicious of those who don’t worship the way we do,” he said. “And our country has no reason to be afraid.”

    Other than the fact that an entire religion wants to destroy our way of life. It’s not that they don’t worship the way we do, numbnuts, it’s WHAT they worship and WHAT they value that should give us reason to be afraid.

    And need I remind you, Jimmy, you walked the entire distance from the Capitol to the White House on your Inauguration Day – just like every President before you for nearly two hundred years. You were the last. By the time you left office, it wasn’t safe for the new American President to walk the street among his fellow citizens to mark the celebration of a government by the People. Every President since Jimmy Carter has had to ride that magic mile in a bulletproof limosine. Let’s talk about fear being unwarranted, you snaggle-toothed bumpkin.

    Unwarranted fear from stuff like this I suppose;

    Israel and the United States will soon be destroyed, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday during a meeting with Syria’s foreign minister, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) website said in a report.

    Sounds like someone we can reason with, doesn’t it? But he’s not worried because apparently he knows that Democrats won’t let happen an attack on his rogue state;

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday he did not expect a U.S. attack on Iran because there were plenty of “wise people” in the United States who would not let it happen.

    “Wise people” can be roughly translated to “useful idiots”.

    At least some people get it.