Bountyhawk

Jesse Jackson: Pro-Castration

2008-07-11T09:16:00.002-05:00

Have you ever heard that you become the thing on which you fixate? Jesse Jackson is afraid that every white person south of Pennsylvania (and maybe some in Pennsylvania) is a would-be lyncher eager to castrate him. Everything reminds Jackson of the Selma police riot - indeed, to hear him speak one would think that it is still 1968 and Dr. King was just assassinated. Hence, after fixating on these redneck bogeymen, when Jackson wants to vent, he uses a castration comment about Barack Obama. I remember the first time I heard an allusion to race-based castration. Remember "The Dirty Dozen," the top-grossing movie of 1967? Jim Brown played Jefferson, a soldier whose crime included killing or seriously wounding some "crackers" trying to castrate him. Well, we've come full circle now: it's the self-appointed leaders of the Civil Rights Movement that now think about castrating black men. Why does Obama anger Jackson so much?
The answer is simple: Obama is living evidence that African-American people can achieve great feats and attain power. Obama is not beholden to Jesse Jackson for everything he has, and that angers the good reverend. Jackson teaches that the White Man has stopped all achievements by African-Americans and keeps the entire community impoverished to this day. Jackson and his ilk have been saying since the riots of 1968 that all violence in the Black community is caused by poverty, unemployment, and lack of funding for government programs.
By calling on African-American men to take some measure of personal responsibility for their own children, Obama undermined Jackson's constant refrain: "ALL of the problems of the Black community are the White Man's fault." Read anything Jackson has ever written on the subject and it invariably leads to that conclusion: blame Whitey first. Jackson's movement leads to the dead end of poverty and dependence on big government and his is bitterly resentful of any black man who refuses to follow him there.

Death of Separation of Powers

2008-06-12T13:41:00.002-05:00

OK, it's official: in America, we no longer enjoy the protections of the Separation of Powers. On this day, June 12, 2008, five justices on the Supreme Court declared that they have absolute authority to nullify any and everything that President Bush and Congress may do regarding the War on Terror. The Constitution specifies that the Commander in Chief prosecutes war with the consent of Congress. President Bush has obtained the consent of Congress for his military tribunals pertaining to the Guantanamo detainees twice. Each time, the Supreme Court has stricken the law as "Un-Constitutional" even though the Constitution does not give the Judicial branch any authority over making war. The first time, the Supreme Court ruled as it did because Congress had not passed the law covering detainees until after their capture. Today, they struck down the new law without even a hint of justification.
John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and Anthony Kennedy are going to cost the lives of American servicemen. This ruling that terrorists have access to American courts, just as though they were common criminals, will attract ACLU lawyers like flies on a manure pile. Terrorists will get released and make their way back to the battlefield. Other detainees will be released from "lack of evidence" (as though the laws of evidence apply to POWs on the battlefield) and will similarly live to fight another day. Those five justices are tyrants without an army. They are accessories in the future murders of American servicemen. The people rejoice when tyrants are overthrown and soldiers take heart when the likes of Tokyo Rose are silenced. I look forward to news of the retirement or death of these five justices. God have mercy on all of us.

Who has forgotten Till and Evers?

2008-04-01T09:20:00.003-05:00

Do you remember the names Emmett Till and Medgar Evers? If so, chances are you are an American who dreams of racial equality and healing, of a colorblind society where people judge one another only on content of character. Emmett Till was a 14-year-old boy from Chicago who made the mistake of calling a white girl "baby" in a Mississippi town where he was visiting relatives in 1955. A small party of white men took him forcibly from his uncle's house and murdered him. The murderers struck suddenly and remorselessly and their victim did not deserve death. It was a lynching.
Medgar Evers was an activist for integration in Mississippi who agitated in favor of James Meredith gaining entrance to the University of Mississippi in 1962. A white supremacist named Byron de la Beckwith murdered him in 1963. A veteran of World War II who fought at Normandy, Evers rated a grave in Arlington Cemetery. I saw several pebbles on Evers' grave last August, left there by visitors who paid him tribute. His death was sudden, violent and undeserved. It was a lynching.
More recently, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright shouted "God Damn America" from his pulpit, expressed satisfaction that Al Qaeda terrorists had successfully attacked the United States on September 11, 2001, and spread the crackpot story that the United States government developed AIDS as a tool of genocide against black people. Subsequently, his congregants found his body hanging from a tree and a cross smoldering nearby.
Oh, that's not what happened? It must be, because his successor at the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ said he was the victim of a lynching on Easter Sunday. He died an innocent sacrifice, just like Jesus did. Link here:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/23/in-eastor-sermon-trinity-united-pastor-compares-rev-wright-to-jesus/
In this year's presidential race, we have discovered that one of our candidates has been listening to a preacher proclaim black nationalism from the pulpit for 20 years. Jeremiah Wright subscribes to black liberation theology, which champions hating white people for slavery, segregation, lynchings, and multiple programs of discrimination from the past. Americans like me, who were born decades after the fall of the last de Jure segregation legislation tend to wonder what crimes we could have committed and how long it will take before some of the self-appointed leaders of the black community realize that the war for equal opportunity is over and they won.
Who has fogotten Emmett Till and Medgar Evers? Who has forgotten what a real lynching is? Who has changed the focus of the Civil Rights movement from social equality and judicial justice to revenge for past wrongs? When white people have failed to commit enough crimes, who has accused them of things they did not do, such as inventing AIDS? Who can be saved who worships a god that hates white people?
Rest in peace, Till and Evers.

On Saddam's (D, Hades) payroll

2008-03-26T18:10:00.002-05:00

Remember in late 2002, when Congressmen Jim McDermott (D, WA), David Bonior (D, MI) and Mike Thompson (D, CA) went to Iraq to get photo ops with Iraqi children and denounce the Bush administration? At the time, they sounded as though they were on Saddam's payroll, as they impugned President Bush's integrity and voiced strong skepticism against the approaching campaign. As it turns out, they were indeed on Saddam's payroll, as the AP reports. A story here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080326/ap_on_re_us/iraq_junket
shows that a non-profit organization in Michigan financed the trip with money it had laundered from Saddam himself. McDermott's spokesmen are claiming that they knew nothing about Saddam's involvement, but the situation begs several questions.
If they didn't know the source, where did they think the money came from? Did they think a lobbyist would pay for them to go to Iraq? McDermott admits that his entire purpose was to showcase the children who would be hurt by the invasion. He is not stupid - he had to know at the very least that Saddam could not have designed a better propaganda tool than three American Congressmen denouncing their own government on Iraqi soil surrounded by children. It doesn't matter whether McDermott knew Saddam had actually paid money - he fought part of Saddam's propaganda war for him. The argument amounts to, "I have no self-interest in this matter; we American useful idiots do the bidding of mass-murdering dictators free of charge."
What did Bonior know? Bonior was the Michigan native; he would be most likely to know something about the organization giving them money. I anticipate updates on this story.

Obama Denounces His Own Pastor

2008-03-14T19:27:00.002-05:00

I am sure Barack Obama is the only presidential candidate in history to denounce the messages of his own pastor and simultaneously deny having heard the sermons in question. In 20 years of membership at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, he has never heard Jeremiah Wright say that the U.S. developed AIDS to create genocide in Africa, that there are more black men in jail than in college, that the U.S. government carried out the 9/11 attacks, etc.? Even Wright's defenders all affirm that "social justice" is one of his main topics. "Social Justice" is usually synonymous with "black nationalism." If his claims of naivete are correct, Obama has certainly slept through a lot of sermons. This is Al Gore's Ice Tea Defense all over again. As of yesterday, Obama must have been one of the only people in America who had missed the publicity of Wright saying, "God damn America."
This situation resembles that of a work associate of my Dad a few years ago who faced discipline for visiting a pornographic website on a company computer. The man claimed that he left the site immediately upon realizing that it was pornographic, but his claims were hard to believe because he stayed at the site for 45 minutes before leaving. Twenty years is a little longer than 45 minutes. Some would call Obama's 20-year membership, his marriage ceremony at that church and his decision to have his daughters baptized there as something of an endorsement of the church.
Here is the heart of the matter: Jeremiah Wright is Obama's pastor of 20 years, his personal spiritual adviser, and he has just left his pulpit to work full time for the Obama Campaign. If Barack Obama will throw THIS man under the bus, who is next? Is he going to divorce Michelle for saying that she only just started being a proud American? This junior senator from Illinois is a very power-hungry young man.

It's "1984" in Canada

2008-03-08T10:33:00.003-05:00

In true Orwellian fashion, the group currently in charge of censoring all potentially offensive speech, press and website material is the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). Currently, author and columnist Mark Steyn is facing a suit resulting from his book America Alone. He quotes an Imam verbatim and some Canadian Muslims have taken offense. The Imam says that the Muslims will take over Europe through the miracle of being fruitful and multiplying, which supports Steyn's thesis and is true. In simple point of fact, Europe is today a continent of yuppies who have at most one child and rely on Muslim immigrants for much of their population growth. Steyn's latest column on the CHRC and its attacks on free press is here: http://www.steynonline.com/content/blogcategory/15/100/
In the column, he observes that one single man, Richard Warman, has brought a significant number of lawsuits that the CHRC has prosecuted at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Warman scours the internet to find racist or possibly racist groups that might possibly offend someone and he sues on behalf of the someones. At the CHRC's own website, there are three suits chronicled that Warman brought against websites for the crime of violating others' "human rights" by expressing sentiments that he judges hateful. In Canada, people do not have the rights of free speech and free press because Mr. Warman is combing through every website he can lay eyes on to curb said rights.
Obviously, if those hateful groups commit any DEEDs that violate laws, they should face prosecution. the same people who keep telling Christians "you can't legislate morality" are censoring speech. If the groups practice discrimination in hiring, libelous defamation of specific parties, or some other civil offenses, the offended parties should be allowed to bring suit. Warman is not an offended party - he is a busy-body agent of the CHRC who is determined to bankrupt those who disagree with him.
In America, we have free speech and free press. No government agency sued or shut down the publishers of two books that discussed assassinating President Bush. The government made no complaint when some left-wingers made a movie titled "Death of a President" that actually shows President Bush getting shot through the advances of digital technology. No government entity of any kind took any action against the Dixie Chicks when they criticized President Bush. Rather, their fans stopped buying their music and now they imagine that they were stifled.
Maybe it is because we fought a Revolution and the Canadians did not that we preserve rights that they are selling cheeply.

A Bomb on Armed Forces Recruiters in NY

2008-03-06T08:41:00.002-05:00

Terrorists set off a bomb at the Armed Forces Recruiting Site at Times Square this morning at 3:45 AM. Obviously, it is a domestic job from the anti-war faction of the Democrat Party, feeling a little upstaged by the display ELF made earlier in the week. The Homeland Security Department has already declared that the bombers pose no imminent threat to the United States. By blowing up an empty building, these ingrates sent an anti-military message, but salved their own consciences by not shedding any blood. Foreign or Islamist terrorists would have blown up the place while it was occupied.
Count me as one veteran who wishes they had set off the bomb by accident.

William F. Buckley is dead

2008-02-28T09:22:00.005-05:00

Well, I've gone and done it again: allowed a great man to die without having read any of his books. It was Milton Friedman last year, WFB this year. Truly, I am too young to eulogize Buckley: he was a Cold Warrior and I was born at the zenith of his campaign: the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan. By the time I was aware of the world farther afield than Rock Hill, South Carolina, Reagan had already faced down the Soviet menace at Reykjavik and the central struggle of Buckley's life had ended in victory. Historians today try to convince us that the Soviet collapse was inevitable - which must be why no one saw it coming.
Many obituarists have to remind their readers about the departed subject and what particular contributions for good or ill he made to modern civilization. In Buckley's case, his record speaks for itself. Modern Conservatism as a philosophy owes him an incalculable debt of gratitude - the sort of gratitude that we all owe our mothers - so absolute and sweeping that, in a strange way we almost take it for granted. Before WFB founded National Review, exactly what Conservative voices were influencing Americans by print and radio?
Rush Limbaugh often remembers 1988, when he came on the scene as a Conservative talk radio host in the wake of the fall of the Fairness Doctrine and WFB invited him to the annual National Review banquet. At that time, one banquet hall could easily hold all of the conservative columnists and public spokesmen of the day, but now we have so many that some of them attack each other, which is a wonderful luxury. We now have Hannity, Ingraham, Coulter, Boortz, Malkin, Beck, Steyn, O'Reilly, Krystal, Barnes and a cable network that does not feel the need to censor them, Fox News. We have The Weekly Standard, The Washington Times, The American Spectator, and Human Events, which was reported to be Ronald Reagan's favorite weekly newpaper. If this list is incomplete, thank you for making my point - the Conservative voices are too many to number aright.
Here is the crux of the matter: today, I observe one entire political party that wants our side to lose the War on Terror. In Cold War days, Buckley confronted one political party (the same one, in fact) in which many of its influential members wanted the enemy to win. I feel nervous about this situation in spite of all of the supporting voices of the Conservative movement just mentioned. Buckley faced a much more daunting situation and had no supporting cast. Still, he "stood athwart history yelling 'Stop!'" and altered American politics for the next half century at least.
Thank you, Mr. Buckley.

2007 Oscars: The Apathy Scale

2008-02-26T07:34:00.002-05:00

Once again, I heard a news report that the Oscars earned disappointing ratings. That, and we will experience warmer temperatures in spring than we did in winter. Maybe it's also news that five-year-old continue to weigh more than newborns.
In the strictly American fashion, let's have three strikes for the Oscars and some good old fashioned statistics!
Strike 1: the Host. Jon Stewart is a political man. The Daily Show is officially comedy also, but it is really a televised equivalent of the Rush Limbaugh show: entertainment and news intended to support the host's viewpoint. Americans do not want political comentary mixed in with their movies - witness the epic bombs that the recent political and war movies have proved to be. In addition, Jon Stewart was a bad choice for host because the fans' favorite is still around. A recent poll by Entertainment Weekly found that 43% of respondents picked Billy Crystal as their favorite host, Stewart polling third at 17%. Crystal last hosted the Oscars in 2003 when The Return of the King won Best Picture.
Strike 2: the Nominees. The gap between what the fans watch and what the Academy deems watchable is widening considerably. I researched the respective grosses of the nominees at this site:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?page=1&view=releasedate&view2=domestic&yr=2007&p=.htm and found that the median gross for the 21 nominees for the seven major awards was $18 million. Assuming $7 per ticket, roughly 2.5 million people saw "Into the Wild," for instance. The Box Office Mojo site ranks the movies by gross from 1 to 150. Six nominees for major awards - picture, actor/actress, supporting actor/actress, director, screenplay - grossed so little that they fell below #150.
Strike 3: the Winners. Here is where the rubber meets the road: Marion Cotillard won Best Actress for "La Vie en Rose," which ranks 145th in box office gross. All of her fellow nominees except Ellen Page performed in similarly obscure pictures. Only buffs and historians like me will ever know who won Best Actress of 2007. Oscar's Best Picture, No Country for Old Men, is currently America's 40th-best picture, although it is still in theatres. It might exceed $50 million in gross.
If you compare my last posting with the reality, I predicted 6 of the 8 major awards correctly. Obscure movies were nominated, obscure movies won, and every critic knew obscure movies would win. Hence, so few viewers. The Academy has a chance to remedy this problem next year. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian will probably gross well over $100 million and rank in the top 10 in gross. Will it get big nominations, or just a few meaningless technical nods? We shall see.

Oscar Predictions

2008-02-22T16:08:00.002-05:00

I'll check the winners on the internet Monday morning - I don't have enough of a dog in this fight to stay up until ungodly hours watching gimmicks precede Best Makeup and other such rot. I started making predictions in 2000, after reading a critic's Golden Globes picks and comparing his predictions to the reality. None - and I mean none - of his predictions bore fruit. After that kind of precedent, anyone can become a predictor.
This year, I have seen almost none of the movies, as usual. I took my wife to see "Transformers" because those huge special effects epics have to be seen on the big screen. (This could also explain why "Transformers" grossed more than all 5 Best Picture nominees COMBINED.)
Best Picture: "No Country for Old Men." Second Choice: "There Will Be Blood"
These two films own the buzz of the critics, which is what matters most at award time.
Best Director: Coen Bros. for "No Country for Old Men." Second Choice: Paul Anderson for "There Will be Blood"
I would be amazed at any other outcome for these two awards, but stranger things than an upset by "Juno" have happened.
Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis for "There Will be Blood." Second Choice: Johnny Depp for "Sweeney Todd"
In this case, Day-Lewis has paid his dues. Remember "Gangs of New York?" That movie established his acting ability in grim, villainous roles. This one should pay off. One of these years, Depp will win for a role like "Sweeney Todd," but not this time. Last Best Actor award for a star in a musical: Rex Harrison, "My Fair Lady," 1964. It's been a while.
Best Actress: Julie Christie, "Away from Her." Second Choice: Cate Blanchett, "Elizabeth: the Golden Years."
Obviously, it won't be Ellen Page, so that leaves four roles that fewer than 3 million people saw. (assuming $7 per ticket on average) I understand Julie Christie's character has amnesia or some other mental ailment, which Oscar voters LOVE!! (eg. Shine, Forrest Gump, Rain Man...)
Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem, "No Country for Old Men." Second Choice: None needed.
This ceremony is a formality for the villain who has won every preliminary award. The sentimental favorite, Hal Holbrook for "Into the Wild" is only actually sentimental for those old enough to remember "All the President's Men." The Academy never gives a career achievement award over a clear frontrunner like Bardem.
Best Supporting Actress: Amy Ryan, "Gone Baby Gone" Second Choice: Ruby Dee, "American Gangster"
I expect that my streak of accuracy in this category will end this year. Oscar loves nominating gender-bending roles, so Blanchett as Bob Dylan is also deadly attractive. Anything is possible, but my rule of thumb is picking out the role that is closest to a lead part. On that basis, I'll go with Amy Ryan.
For other predictions, I have "Transformers" and "Pirates" picking up two technical awards each, "Juno" and "No Country" taking the Screenplay trophies, "Elizabeth" and "Atonement" winning Costume Design; and Score and Art Direction respectively. "No End in Sight" will win Best Documentary and "Ratatouille" will claim Best Animated film.
Maybe next year they'll nominate "Prince Caspian" and I'll be interested in the show. Yeah, fat chance.

George H.W. is for McCain: another moderate

2008-02-18T14:48:00.003-05:00

Our 41st President, George H. W. Bush, endorsed John McCain for president today, thus continuing McCain's No-Moderate-Republican-Left-Behind endorsement drive. Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger gave him his first endorsements, but H. W., like them, can hardly help McCain's effort to unify the party and attract conservatives. H. W. is the man who called Reagan's economic ideas "voodoo economics" during the 1980 campaign, and the man who broke his "read my lips" promise about no tax hikes. McCain already had the wobbly centrist voters who backed Bush in '80 and Dole in '96. I guess we can look forward to Bob Dole, Christie Whitman, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar and Olympia Snowe endorsing McCain next. (but not Lincoln Chafee - the erstwhile RINO-in-chief finally figured out that he never was a Republican and has endorsed Obama.)
RINO, for those of you in Metter, Georgia, is Republican In Name Only.
This election, we have to push conservatives for Congress as though it were an off-year election. No matter who wins the White House, we will need conservatives to counter the socialists in both parties.

Movie Review: Amazing Grace ***

2008-02-17T15:40:00.002-05:00

"Amazing Grace" is the story of William Wilberforce and his campaign to outlaw the slave trade in the British Empire in the late 1700s and early 1800s. John Newton, former slave ship captain, author of the song, and elderly clergyman of some sort, is the source of some of Wilberforce's inspiration. The theme of youthful enthusiasm for earth-shattering reform makes a repeated appearance, as close friends Pitt the Younger and Willberforce try to persuade Parliament and spark a mass abolition movement among young English citizens. Much of the film transpires in flashback form, as a twenty-years-older Wilberforce looks back on the heady days when he should have caused a large enough stir in the people for slavery to be abolished. The key, the abolitionists find, is to raise the consciousness of the ordinary citizens by publishing diagrams of slave holds, displaying the manacles that restrain slaves and the boxes in which they cross the ocean in the holds of the ships. There is a girl who falls in love with Wilberforce, and so forth. As a movie, "Amazing Grace" takes nearly two hours' time, but it feels longer due to the inessential romance. A movie simply cannot capture all of the facets of a man's life. That is the office of books.
As a film, "Amazing Grace" has a good script and a functional cast, with Albert Finney's Newton the definite highlight. As history, I was disappointed by not surprised: it is not easy to make the slave trade appear worse than it was, but the creators manage it. I have read that slave ships experienced a mortality rate of 5-30%. The movie represents the idea that 2/3 of the slaves who left Africa died en route to the New World. Sailors doubtless dug through the masses of human remains in Kingston to call out, "I found another one breathing!" Of course, the black man who urges Wilberforce to advocate abolition mentions repeatedly, "I was a prince in my country." The myth that white men took armies to Africa to round up unsuspecting black innocents will not die, evidently. In fact, the vast majority of slaves suffered capture in a war with a rival tribe and the black victors marched them to the coast for sale to the white shippers.
One question the movie raises, perhaps without meaning to: Do we owe our National Anthem to the abolitionists? In a ploy to damage the slave trade, Wilberforce sponsors a bill to provide for the searching of ships flying the neutral American flag. Why not let the Privateers do his dirty work for him? A few impressments of American sailors and outcries from the Americans later, the War of 1812 was raging on the American Continent.

Heath Ledger: Death of an Insider

2008-02-06T11:43:00.000-05:00

As is the case with all artists, we will measure the magnitude of Heath Ledger's accomplishments according to how long his art lasts and how many people remember him. By this standard, Ledger will live for another decade or so across this country and he will never die in Hollywood. Ledger did all of the things that an actor should do in order to curry favor with the Hollywood In-Crowd: he sought roles in Oscar-type movies, played a homosexual character in a movie, spoke out publicly about the need for America to normalize homosexual conduct, and did his mandatory stint with drugs and rehab. When he heard that West Virginia had banned "Brokeback Mountain," Ledger informed all of us for the first time that the West Virginians had been lynching black people in the 1980s. None were more surprised at that than the historians.
Why do such rich and famous people grow so dissatisfied with life and throw everything away doing drugs? After the last two weeks or so, the autopsy has been ruled "inconclusive" at least for the present, but drugs clearly played a part.
As to his legacy, no one outside Hollywood born after the year 2000 will know his name. I read an Entertainment Weekly article recently about young and promising actors who died untimely deaths. I had not heard of most of them because their movies are no longer popular. For Ledger, "A Knight's Tale" may maintain a certain cult following, but his teen movies, namely "10 Things I Hate About You" will soon enough be a source of mirth due to how "so '90s" they are. "The Patriot" was a hit, but its historical inaccuracies prevent the buffs from embracing it, not to mention that he played a rather silly part. In time, the buffs are the only ones who watch period films and we do not watch that one. Not many people saw "Monster's Ball" the first time, and those who saw it couldn't remember him for all the Halle Berry eye candy. The same can be said for his most recent works, "I'm Not There," "Candy" and "Casanova:" all gained some critical and insider acclaim, but none brought home box office money.
"The Brothers Grimm" is a genre movie that can hope for at best a cult following, but such a fate is unlikely. "Brokeback Mountain" grossed $80 million, but it was a passing fad. There will be more movies about homosexuals and only Hollywood insiders will memorialize "Brokeback" as a courageous trailblazer. "Brokeback's" fans will remember it as the first movie to express some degree of authenticity or relevance until the next movie comes along to be the first authentic and relevant movie. Does anyone else notice that every big movie with a strong liberal political message is the first of its kind? In a way, then, it is fitting that his posthumous movie will be the biggest success of his career. "Dark Knight" will likely gross $100-200 million, so Ledger will live behind the mask of the young Joker's paint for a little while longer.
Rest in Peace, young man. In a few months I will reach the age at which you departed this life. I wish you had found the love of Jesus Christ, who gives me a reason to want to live.

The Manning Show

2008-02-03T23:33:00.000-05:00

This Super Bowl championship is the perfect antidote to what some sports commentators called "the year of the asterisk." The NFL had a close brush with an asterisk champion, but the Giants have spared us all of that. A few days ago, Spygate expanded to include Super Bowl XXXVI. Bellichick may have videotaped the Rams' practice on the day before the game. I don't know if he did, but I find the allegation believable in the extreme. The man is the ultimate "win-at-any-cost; nice-guys-finish-last; it-ain't-cheatin'-unless-you-get-caught;" school of thought. Add to him quarterback Tom Brady, the conspicuous consumption type, who dates supermodels and deserted his girlfriend after impregnating her. Fans who think themselves decent sportsmen have to despise the 2007 Patriots in the same league with Tark the Shark and Jimmy Johnson's Miami Hurricanes. Chalk it up: THE GOLIATHS DO FALL SOMETIMES!!! Tarkanian's Running Rebels fell in the Final Four to Krzewski's Duke Blue Devils in 1991 and Stallings' Tide rolled over the 1992 Hurricanes. HUA!!
Amazon.com was offering a "Dewey Defeats Truman" book titled 19-0. The link to it is here:
http://www.amazon.com/19-0-Historic-Championship-Englands-Unbeatable/dp/1600781500/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202098034&sr=1-1
After this victory, the Giants have changed the whole commentary narrative. We were asking, "Are these Patriots the best ever, having won a 4th Super Bowl and gone undefeated?" Now we can cheer the greatest upset in NFL history and revel with a decent kid who has now escaped the shadow of his brother. The talk next year will be, "Can a Manning win the Super Bowl to make it 3 in a row?" Everyone who loves the Mannings has to be on Cloud 9 now. Enjoy this moment. It doesn't happen often.

The Oscar Nominees...aka "Who?"

2008-01-30T15:25:00.000-05:00

Well, here we are in another delightful Oscar season. Bob Hope often quipped that in his household Oscar was known as "The Fugitive" and that Oscar time was "Passover." Lately, I would add that many Oscar contenders fit into the category "The Unwatchables." Oscar historians are familiar with another bizarre concept from decades past: the show finishing early. I have watched the Oscars since 1995, not tuning in every year for one reason: only about one year in 3 has a movie that I have actually seen nominated for the big awards. Reviewing the Oscars is boring now because the critics and the movie people make the same complaints every year about the show and the Academy members never fix their problems.

The Academy members always complain that they have lost viewers and usually blame said loss on the host. In reality, the host has little to do with whether people want to watch the show: it's the Oscars, stupid. Nominate movies that people have seen and the stars of those movies, and people will watch, genuinely interested as to who will win the big awards. This year, the five movies up for Best Picture have so far COMBINED to gross $246 million. That total will increase, but six other movies exceeded that number by themselves. Spider Man 3, Shrek 3, Transformers, Pirates 3, Harry Potter Order of the Phoenix and I Am Legend each grossed over $250 million and they combine for a grand total of 4 Oscar nominations. The wildly successful Lord of the Rings trilogy managed to get through three Oscar seasons without an acting victory. We in the viewing public want to see actors we know of win for roles that we have seen. That happens only occasionally.

The critics complain that the show is too long. No one - that means not even the producer's mother - wants to see a mock symphony of people operating sound effects equipment to lead into the Best Sound Editing category. Just give the awards out already, and move the show along. Almost without exception, every recipient who is not an actor, director or producer is someone of whom the audience has never heard and about whom they will never care.

Will we have an Oscar show on TV this year? Judging by the nominees, the answer is "Who cares?" The Academy nominated 21 films for the top awards: Picture, Director, acting, and writing. The median gross for those movies was $17 million and seven movies grossed under $10 million. Last year, 28 movies surpassed a box office gross of $100 million, but only three of them are major award nominees. Of those three, two have only one nomination each, ("American Gangster," "Ratatouille") so "Juno" is the only blockbuster with significant Oscar nominations. Here is a likely scenario: Kate Blanchett wins Best Supporting Actress for "I'm Not There," (gross: $4 million), Hal Holbrook wins Best Supporting Actor for "Into the Wild" (gross $18 million), Julie Christie wins Best Actress for "Away From Her" (gross $16 million). If Tommy Lee Jones wins Best Actor for "In the Valley of Elah" (gross $7 million), the Academy might succeed in giving all of its acting awards to obscure movies.
This year, I'll probably go to bed early.

GOP in crisis

2008-01-30T13:40:00.000-05:00

Last night, the people of Florida threw their support behind one of the greatest abominations who now has an (R) beside his name. John McCain would be the worst possible presidential candidate that the Republicans could support. Only Arlen Specter or Lincoln Chafee could be worse. He has been wrong on illegal immigration, wrong on the issue of free political speech, (McCain-Feingold, anyone?) but worst of all, he is a whore for media attention. McCain acts like an insecure, cowardly, weak legislator for hire. A few accolades in the New York Times will persuade him to do or say anything to maintain his "Maverick" label. "Maverick" means "Republican who votes like a liberal." As the standard-bearer of the Gang of 14, McCain sabotaged his own party's effort to accelerate the approval of President Bush's judicial nominees. The Democrats had used the filibuster in an unprecedented manner to halt the nominations of several judges. Thanks to McCain, nothing changed until the Democrats had time to reclaim the Senate and stonewall once again. President McCain would spend four years giving the Democrats everything they want and calling it "compromise."
Why have the voters in South Carolina and Florida given support to the man whom John Kerry sought as his running mate in 2004? Most likely, it is because McCain is a veteran, because his is pro-life (at least most of the time) and because they see no better alternative? Romney, the only serious challenger to McCain now, is a Mormon and a Northerner - those two factors probably play the biggest roles in preventing his success. As far as his stances on issues, Romney is the only conservative remaining in the race. Thompson was the other one until he withdrew from the race following South Carolina.
Super Tuesday, February 5, is the last chance for the GOP. Remember in 2000, it was close until W. won every race on Super Tuesday. This time, it appears McCain has the momentum and may ride a wave to the nomination. If Romney is the Republican candidate in November, he could win, provided that he carry all the states that went for W. in '04, or he could lose Ohio and pick up Michigan and a few other mid-Western states. If McCain is the nominee, the Republicans will not hold the White House.
Mark my words: McCain cannot possibly win the presidency if he is the nominee. Remember 2004: after four years of big government "Compassionate Conservatism," the Democrats attacked President Bush for "underfunding" the programs he had supported. They attacked him for spending too much money and too little at the same time. His policies did not siphon off enough votes to turn even one blue state red in 2004 because voters who favored big government voted Democrat. The echo always loses to the original source. McCain would be an echo on illegal immigration amnesty, an echo on government regulation of business, an echo on restrictions on political speech, an echo on war policy, and an echo on repealing the tax cuts from the Bush administration. Hillary or Obama can possibly beat Romney with difficult, but beating McCain would be easy. The good news is that my son will not remember the next four years.

WAC critics vindicated: Broncos lose

2007-12-24T10:38:00.000-05:00

After last night's game, every writer is vindicated who has voted to keep Hawaii out of the #1 spot this season. That one writer who voted Boisie State #1 last year remains the most inept officiating disgrace since the 1972 Olympic basketball game. Is the WAC really a Division I-A conference with championship hopefuls? Can Hawaii really claim to have beaten ANYBODY of any significance? Last year and this year, Hawaii and Boisie State each played a whopping 1 ranked team. By playing one another, they established the WAC Protection Project by which no WAC team faces any serious outside competition until Bowl season. Boisie State went into last night's game against East Carolina with a 10-2 record and ranked in the top 25 for beating...uhhh, uhhhh... They beat Nevada by 2 points. That's the Nevada that just got slaughtered in a 23-0 shutout by New Mexico.
East Carolina had five losses to teams including Virginia Tech, West Virginia and NC State. In other words, the Pirates played a competitive schedule and paid the price. Last night's game was #1 in fan prediction confidence in an ESPN poll. 98% of fans thought the Broncos would win. The Boisie State defensive players grabbed their ankles in the first half to let the Pirates score 31 points. East Carolina running back Chris Johnson amassed over 400 all-purpose yards throughout the game. The final Boisie State touchdown was the result of a lucky hit by a linebacker who managed to knock the ball loose with his helmet. On the kick-off and the final 1:16, which was more than East Carolina needed, the Broncos again grabbed their ankles and allowed the Pirates to move the ball and place it exactly where they wanted it for the final field goal.
How many 5-loss teams are ranked today? Answer: 0 There are two 4-loss teams, each from the SEC, in the BCS rankings and the AP includes a third, also an SEC team. That is as it should be. The SEC is the toughest conference and the WAC, evidently, is in contention with CUSA and the Sun Belt for the title of least tough.

Two Writers Pass on: Levin and Mailer

2007-12-10T11:01:00.000-05:00

We observed the passing of two renowned writers in the past few weeks. Norman Mailer and Ira Levin steered completely opposite courses in their successful quests for fame and fortune as authors, and consequently leave entirely different legacies. Levin generally avoided the limelight and you might not even recognize his name, as I did not initially. All questions of his significance end when I tell you that he wrote The Stepford Wives, The Boys from Brazil, and Rosemary's Baby, all cult classics. Thanks to Levin, the term "Stepford wife" has entrenched itself in the American vernacular. Levin also achieved a number of stage successes with "Deathtrap," the longest-running thriller in Broadway history, among others. He also adapted "No Time for Sergeants" for the stage and thereby built the launchepad for the career of a Southern actor with prominent ears named Andy Griffith. Levin's work will outlive him by decades at least because he always strove to make his writing excellent and original. If writers should be remembered for their writing, readers will never forget Ira Levin.
Norman Mailer, by contrast, was a star who also wrote. His work was so much a product of his times that it is difficult to imagine many of his works outliving his generation. As I read his obituary in The Week, I realized that I had always known Norman Mailer the advocate for left-wing politics and founder of The Village Voice, but had not realized he was a novelist. To me, a young fellow born in 1980, I began reading forty years after Mailer wrote his star-maker, The Naked and the Dead. He wrote regularly during my lifetime, but none of his books gained major recognition across party lines. In his novels The Armies of the Night, The Executioner's Song, Oswald's Tale and Harlot's Ghost he blended real events of the 1960s with fiction in order to reinforce what Mailer identified as "larger truths." To date, I have not read anything by Norman Mailer, but college courses on American literature probably assign some of his works occasionally. My children will almost certainly not read any of his work because his liberal peers in academia will have passed on and no one else thinks Mailer was brilliant.
The critics were decidedly unable to agree which of his career lowlights was the lowest: Entertainment Weekly said Mailer's stabbing of his second wife caused him to hit rock bottom, but curiously did not mention the episode in which he was an accomplice to a murder. Jack Henry Abbott was a convicted murderer in prison who wrote to Norman Mailer, wooing him with tales of literary aspirations and asking him to sponsor his release. Abbott was wise to write to the founder of The Village Voice because the liberals all know better than the rest of us. They realize that criminals possess hearts of gold and society just got them into unfortunate circumstances that are not really their fault. Stupid conservatives think that people commit murder because they possess tempers capable of murder. Putting them in prison or executing them is not intended to punish them so much as to keep the rest of society safe from them. Anyway, the outcome after Norman Mailer sponsored his release was stupidly predictable: Jack Henry Abbott murdered a waiter a mere SIX WEEKS after his release from prison. Therefore, Norman Mailer's death makes all of us genuinely safer.
Levin's writing made him great because it was timeless and excellent. Mailer's Pulitzer Prizes and National Book Award honors will not help him when no one reads his writing anymore. Although the periodicals paid distinctly higher tributes to Mailer than Levin, it is clear who will enjoy a lengthy legacy.

Jena Six Update - More Stardom

2007-10-19T17:25:00.000-05:00

Remember sixteen years ago when the MTV Music Awards invited Officer Koons and Officer Powell, who were about to be tried for beating Rodney King to present an award as representatives of law and order? Neither do I because it didn't happen. On Thursday night, however, Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis accepted an invitation from Black Entertainment Television to present the Video of the Year Award for the Hip Hop Awards broadcast. The story is here: http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071019/NEWS01/710190316/1002
"By no means are we condoning a six-on-one beat-down," Katt Williams, the award show host said during his introduction of the teens, one of whom is still facing attempted murder charges in connection with the attack on white student Justin Barker. "... But the injustice perpetrated on these young men is straight criminal." It is criminal to prosecute six young men for beating a fellow student.
What are these African-American kids learning? Fame, accolades, martyrdom status, and a stage from which they may revel in their imagined victimhood awaits if they only beat up a white male student and stomp on him after he has passed out unconscious. I guess Michael Vick and O. J. Simpson weren't available.

Rockies in the Series - How?

2007-10-16T14:26:00.000-05:00

Everyone now knows that the Rockies have amassed an amazing winning streak to make it to the World Series for the first time in their history. There are two reasons they managed it, and because of them baseball needs to re-think interleague play. The National League East Division, West Division, and Wild Card races came down to a very close contest among six teams. The Braves faded near the end of the season, but the Mets, Phillies, Rockies, Diamondbacks and Padres all contended until the final days of the season. An epic collapse by the Mets, accompanied by a sudden meteoric winning streak by the Rockies enabled the Phillies to get into the post-season and the Rockies tied the Padres and won the one-game playoff.
Here is the bone of contention: without interleague play, the Rockies would not have been close enough to tie the Padres. In regular-season play against American League teams, the Rockies went 10-8, whereas the Padres went 6-9, Diamondbacks 8-7, Mets 8-7, Phillies 8-7 and Braves 4-11. Significantly, the Rockies had BY FAR the easiest set of interleague opponents. The combined records of the Braves' opponents totaled 455-355, making their schedule the hardest. The Braves even had to play the Red Sox twice and the Indians. In difficulty, the Mets played teams that totaled 431-379, making their schedule second-hardest. Guess who got to play both the Royals and the Devil Rays and the Orioles en route to the easiest interleague schedule among contending teams? That's right: the Rockies played AL teams with a combined losing record of 477-495 and took full advantage of this ease. Without the two-tiered playoff system, the Rockies' regular-season record would not have put them in the playoffs, nor would they be in the World Series without interleague play.
Interleague games should not count toward teams' records because they are not even remotely fair in their apportionment. Yet, as we see now, an easy interleague schedule can make all of the difference between a team going home early and putting on championship rings.

Baseball 101: Bye bye, Yankees

2007-10-09T15:26:00.000-05:00

Joe Torre is one of those managers who seldom shows a temper and never seems to get himself into trouble off the field. His teams have won three World Series rings, so it is hard to understand Steinbrenner's pre-emptive announcement that failure to win the ALDS would lead to Torre's dismissal. It is a grim fact of life that winning is the only way a manager can keep his job and Torre has done that, never winning fewer than 94 games in a season. For a Yankees' manager, however, the manager is required to deliver a World Series ring every five years or face termination. What makes this situation unfare is that Joe Torre is not the problem.
The problem the Yankees have is the same one that has kept the Braves from reaching a World Series since 1999: lack of good starting pitching. The Braves picked up Mark Texeira this year and increased their run production by one run per game, but their pitchers managed to give up more runs than they could score. Hence, the Braves went home early. For the Yankees, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettite, David Wells et al. aged, moved on, got traded, etc., and the team needed new life in the starting rotation. Instead, they sank huge sums into Jason Giambi, who will make $21 million next year. Still needing good pitching, they tied their hopes to Alex Rodriguez and, as though he were not enough star power, they also got Johnny Damon. These players make the Yankees' bats the deadliest in baseball, if all you pay attention to is the names. Unfortunately, when the names Jeter, A-Rod and Matsui all bat under .200, they are worth as little as kids making a tenth their salary. Moreover, the huge investments in bats left little money for helping the porous pitching staff of the Bronx Bombers.
The Yankees are in a shambles and it is Brian Cashman's fault, the general manager who decided to blow more cash recovering the aging talents of Pettite, Clemens and Mussina rather than focussing on young pitching talent that could last for more than one season. Torre did his best with what he had. There is only so much a manager can do when his pitching is suspect, and baseball's oldest law still holds true: good pitching will beat good hitting every time. I hate the Yankees, so I hope they keep up this strategy of signing batters to inflated contracts and ignoring their pitching problem, but it is sad to see Joe Torre lose his job.

Movie Review: Half Nelson *

2007-10-03T09:13:00.000-05:00

Do not let Ryan Gosling's Oscar nomination fool you: this is a retro movie to the 1960s-1970s, when they made psychological drug-related movies like "Apocalypse Now" and "2001: A Space Oddyssey." In "Half Nelson," Gosling is a history teacher in an urban school with students who are all minorities, mostly black, and he is a drug addict. One student finds him in the bathroom in some a drug-induced state and the two of them become friends. The history curriculum consists of stories about the Civil Rights Movement and some later events involving minorities suffering persecution. The lessons appear about as exciting as watching paint dry - this is definitely not one of those "the best teacher I ever had" movies. This teacher is defeated, frustrated, drugged up and in trouble. He knows he is in trouble, but has no clue how to free himself and does not seek help. He loses his job, but the movie shows no resolution of what his life will be afterwards. The interesting moments reveal a look into the worldview of many Hollywood actors today: the news media has a strong conservative bias, reporting anti-war protests to be smaller than they are. The teacher has a hard time dealing with the fact that many people support President Bush, but he is throwing his life away with drugs. Which crisis is worse?
This is one of those movies that has no plot as it is generally understood. The actors say the final lines and the credits begin running, but there was no climax in the story, resolution or redemption. Ultimately, the teacher cares about the kids but realizes that he is part of the problem. He wants them to avoid drugs and to escape the crimes of society, but he supports drug dealers with his business and he as a teacher is part of the "establishment" and his identity as a white man increases his guilt. All he has is the hopelessness of life on drugs in today's flawed world. Like "Crash," "Half Nelson" shows problems that exist today, but provides no suggestions for solutions and not one of the characters has any hope. This is life without God. "*" is the rating: I want those two hours of my life back.

Bowden and Jena

2007-10-02T09:55:00.001-05:00

We see news headlines and pictures from Jena, Louisiana, which is now experiencing racial strife over a violent attack on December 4. Six black high school students beat a white classmate, Justin Barker, until he was unconscious and then stomped on him as he lay on the ground. One of the stompers, Mychal Bell, has now had his conspiracy and aggravated battery convictions overturned on appeal because he should not have been tried as an adult. The various cases will continue in juvenile court. Bell was a Division I football prospect, but committed another violent attack two years ago to begin derailing his aspirations. Have African-American leaders taken this opportunity to condemn violence? No, instead they have started flashing Black Power salutes and taught their kids that the youths were justified in beating Justin Barker because OTHER white students had hung nooses in a tree three months before the attack. The white students who hung the nooses faced penalties from the school, appropriately, including alternative school, suspension, and detention. The Chicago Sun-Times reports here: http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/583297,CST-NWS-gramb02.article about kindergarten teachers putting a noose around a little girl's neck to teach their kids about lynching. The kids will learn that violence against random white people is good if other white people have handled nooses. Stomping on an unconscious white student innocent of any deed involving nooses has today made the Jena 6 into heroes. Pity the black kids who learn from their parents, teachers and "pastors" that they can become heroes by beating white kids.
In other news involving promising football talent, two FSU players had a fight/confrontation with police last week, as documented on my last post, and Bobby Bowden played one of them, Geno Hayes, on Saturday against Alabama. They charged Hayes with three misdemeanors, so Bowden saw no need to sacrifice a distinguished talent. He did not start Hayes, but he used him before the first half had ended. He will do community service, but he needs a wake-up call before he turns into another Michael Vick. The other player is facing felony charges. Thank the NCAA for having rules barring athletes from playing when facing felonies, or Bowden would be playing him too. It is official: thanks to Bobby Bowden, FSU's team has consolidated its position as the official representative of criminals in college football.
The recent process in Jena will spawn ten more cases like it. Ten more Justin Barkers. Do you notice that no one uses the victim's name? Justin Barker doesn't exist in media coverage because this is a story of racism and because he is white he cannot be a victim. As long as teachers and parents and "pastors" like Sharpton and Jackson tell their kids that beating classmates is OK if they are white, this problem will get worse. As long as coaches like Bobby Bowden empower these thugs by teaching them that they will face no consequences as long as they are not actually behind bars, they will create more felons like Michael Vick. Come to think of it, now that Bell is not a convicted felon anymore, see if Bowden recruits him.

The Current College Football Lineup

2007-09-21T22:27:00.000-05:00

As I looked on espn.go.com for college football news, I saw three headlines all featuring arrests or suspensions of players. By clicking on the "More News" link, I found seven players currently under suspension because of criminal charges and one bright spot, which I will share at the end.
The first suspect is a Tulane running back, arrested in connection with a stabbing of five people. The second and third are West Virginia players, a cornerback and linebacker, wanted for receiving and trafficking stolen property. Number 4 is a Texas running back arrested for obstruction of justice and tampering with evidence. (he couldn't remember if he and she were ever actually alone) That is arrest #6 for UT since June. Number 5 is a U. of Montana running back pleading not guilty in the shooting murder of his aunt's boyfriend. Finally, although the Longhorns have the edge for now, the top convict squad of the ACC didn't let us down: two FSU players - a linebacker and a fullback - have been arrested for a bar fight.
Lastly, the bright spot in all of this zebra-striping. The head coach of Arkansas, Houston Nutt, has suspended his defensive tackle, Ernest Mitchell, for one game because he hit an Alabama player one time with his helmet after the end of a play on Saturday. The referee ejected Mitchell on the spot. NCAA rules mandate a 1/2 game suspension for this sort of conduct, but Coach Nutt appealed for an extra half-game because, "there is no excuse for that." I love hearing a coach say that about his own player's conduct. No excuses, no equivocations, best of all, no complaining about the guys who didn't get ejected. Cheers all round for Coach Houston Nutt.

The Petraeus Report

2007-09-12T08:03:00.000-05:00

I spared myself the pain of watching the Borking of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker on TV. The soundbite highlights I heard on the radio for thirty minutes yesterday were bad enough. Senator Durbin, (D-IL) who earlier compared our soldiers to Nazis and Communist thugs from the Khmer Rouge, summed up the Democrat strategy perfectly, "No one wants to call General Petraeus a liar on national television...the outside groups will do this for us." I could have shot the radio the way Representative Wexler browbeat the General, compared him to General Westmoreland and taunted, "how many more, general, how many more???" about the soldiers the terrorists have killed. The Democrats' anti-war strategy is simple and straightforward: when the news is bad, trumpet it at the top of your lungs; when the news is good, dispute the numbers. Rahm Emanuel said of the Petraeus report, "We don't need a report that wins the Nobel Prize for creative statistics or the Pulitzer for fiction."
A few noteworthy numbers lie behind these statistical fights you have heard. With the completion of August, the highly Sunni and geographicall enormous Anbar Province has cemented its place as the greatest improvement in Iraq. Prior to March 2007, Anbar had accumulated the most American casualties in nine months out of the previous 12, and seventeen months out of the last 24. In November 2004, terrorists in Anbar claimed 89 American lives. In August 2007, insurgents killed only 8 servicemen in Anbar. Between August 2005 and February 2007, the fewest men the insurgents killed in a month was 14. In twelve of those 18 months, our hostile losses exceeded 20. In the last six months, Anbar has cost us 14, 19, 14, 4, 13, and 8 men in each month respectively and never led in casualty numbers. Baghdad, by constrast, has assumed Anbar's mantle as the main problem area. My guess is that General Petraeus will next turn his attentions there.
Do you wonder if the Iraqis can handle security? Dhi Qar province claimed 59 lives through hostile fire over the first three years of the occupation, but has not cost us a single casualty in the last year. In the fall of 2006, the Iraqi Army received the main responsibility for security in Dhi Qar and they have succeeded in that job.
Now, with the surge clearly working, we can talk about troop reductions on terms favorable to our armed forces and the General whose plan has made it possible. If my next child is a son, I may have to persuade my wife to give him Petraeus as a middle name.

Vick says, "I need to grow up"

2007-08-28T15:48:00.000-05:00

Michael Vick has been caught running a brutal dog fighting ring and now faces perhaps five years of jail time. Vick called his conduct immature and said, "I need to grow up." That ranks as a finalist for Understatement of the Decade. Dog fighting is a brutal experience for the dogs throughout their lives. The lucky ones who are good fighters are subjected to abuses designed to make them ferocious until they reach fighting age. A few bloody victories later, the best ones are bred and no longer have to lose pieces of their ears in the ring. For the unlucky majority remaining, they live through the same toughening abuses before they get killed in the ring by a superior dog or killed by their owners through hanging or electrocution. Witnesses claim Vick killed eight dogs personally using these methods. At 27, Vick is a confessed felon and all he can say is, "I need to grow up."
Why are athletes forming this pattern of behavior? Why do we have men like Ron Artest, who gets on the basketball court just long enough to earn another suspension? Why was Pacman Jones wanted by police in multiple different cities for fights that nearly all happened late at night outside strip clubs? Why did Michael Vick run this brutal and inhumane dog fighting ring? And don't get me started on Ray Lewis. Why have they not grown up? The answer to this question is simple: BECAUSE THEY HAVE LEARNED BY EXPERIENCE THAT THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING. Their teachers and coaches at all levels in school taught them that they could do whatever they wanted to do as long as they could run a fast 40 and jump a high vertical and hit the critical shots in the games, etc. Simultaneously, these same coaches taught their well-behaved athletes that good conduct off the field is of no value.
Two years ago, one of my friends was teaching Physical Education at the Middle School level. Some of her students sytematically disobeyed her on multiple occasions, so she gave them detentions. They defied her; they would not serve detention because they were athletes and their coaches would get them out of it. She reported their words to the Principal and the Principal informed her that her students would indeed be excused from detention because it conflicted with basketball practice. These are 12-year-old kids we're talking about!!! They already feel above the rules and free to break whichever ones they choose. Earlier this summer, some football players from Wheeler High School robbed a store at gunpoint and now they face hard jail time. Why? They did it because they had never paid consequences for breaking rules.
The solution to this problem is as simple as the problem itself: we need today's coaches to RESURRECT THE BEAR. When Bear Bryant coached the Crimson Tide, he had rules that players broke at their peril. His hotshot young quarterback from Pennsylvania, Joe Namath, recalls that on the first day of practice he had a rude awakening. The Bear grabbed him by his facemask and told him, "boy, when I'm talking to you, you look me in the eyes and call me Sir!" When Namath was a Junior, he broke some team rules (stayed out too late, ie. did not commit any crime) and Bryant made him sit the bench during the National Championship Game. Joe Namath said later that that was the best thing that ever happened to him. He learned from his mistake and never made a bigger one during his distinguished pro career. The Bear won six National Championship titles, so he proved once and for all that coaches who discipline their players can do as well as or better than coaches who recruit from the police lineups. The bonus for Bryant is, he also got to sleep at night with a clear conscience.

Hank Aaron is King

2007-08-06T16:50:00.001-05:00

Now that the sad days of Bonds inking his name into the record books - by fair means and foul - are upon us, I think I should make a few things clear. I have read bloggers denouncing the fans who dislike Bonds as racists and haters of every sort under the sun. Neither racism nor hatred has any place in this discussion, and everyone on both sides knows it. The only reason people place asterisks by Bonds' records is that he used substances to improve his bulk, whereas Hank Aaron hit 755 home runs the honest way. By looking at his arms, anyone can see that Aaron never took steroids or any other artificial enhancers. His stats tell the same story: Aaron never hit more than 47 home runs in a season, but he broke 40 eight times and played consistently good baseball for a very long period of time. In his first fifteen seasons, Bonds never slugged over .700 or hit over 50 home runs. Suddenly, in 2001, he slugged .863 and hit 73 home runs to surpass McGwire's record. How many times has he surpassed 70 since then? Answer: 0. How many times has he surpassed 60 since then? Answer: 0. How many times has he hit over 50 since 2001? Answer: 0. The statistical explosion that was the 2001 season raises questions as to how a man of his age could commit such remarkable feats and gain so much muscle. It seems logically sound to suppose that Bonds is taking or has been taking human growth hormone. That would explain his shoe and hat sizes expanding, his accumulation of muscle bulk, and his ability to sustain his muscular growth. Steroids cause a rapid increase in muscle followed by a sudden decline, which Bonds has not experienced. The simple, irrefutable fact is that men of Bonds' age do not naturally accumulate muscle as he has done and experience hat and shoe size growth of any kind. It does not matter that he has not actually tested positive for drugs: it is painfully obvious that he has taken them.
I don't hate Barry Bonds, nor do I bear him any kind of ill will. Fans like me have tolerated his extremely arrogant attitude and lack of appreciation to the fans and never dispute that he belongs in the Hall of Fame. The only player to hit 500 home runs and steal 500 bases belongs in Cooperstown no matter who he is. Substances do not help a player develop the keen eye and lightning reflexes that enable him to hit a ball traveling at 100 miles per hour. Moreover, Bonds accomplished these two feats before substances had become an issue. The problem we have with Bonds is his "breaking" Hank Aaron's record for career home runs. Aaron played honestly using his natural talent and hard work. Bonds used talent, work, and substances, so his statistics, whatever they end up being, deserve an asterisk. Aaron is still the Home Run King.

Amnesty is Dead: Score 3

2007-06-29T15:11:00.000-05:00

The failed cloture vote of June 28, 2007, was a defeat for both President Bush and Senator Kennedy, who have not been as unusual bedfellows as their senior statuses in each party would imply. The historians will write about this first year of a Congress newly changed hands, the one that could not seem to get many things done, with a mixture of amusement and spin. Whoever desires to depict this period as one of domestic political defeat for President Bush may do so with a great degree of accuracy. Likewise, as Congress enjoys an approval rating even lower than that of the President, the Democrats have failed to pass any major pieces of legislation. Thus, this amnesty bill for illegal aliens went down to defeat despite broad bi-partisan support. President Bush, Senator Reid, and Speaker Pelosi, the senior leaders of the Executive and Legislative branches, favored this bill of amnesty for the illegal aliens. How in the world could they fail to pass a bill that all three supported?
Enter Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Neil Boortz, and the other influential talk radio hosts. Enter Michelle Malkin and an army of conservative bloggers, who read and distributed the contents of the bill to readers and listeners. President Bush and Senators from both parties mis-represented the provisions in the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" bill, but they "misunderestimated" what an informed electorate could do. The Z-Visa, which illegals could receive after a laughable 24-hour background check (the government can't even operate a metal detector and a personal frisking in that length of time) would give them legal status. They would not have had to pay back taxes, but the bill did mandate a fine, which was never going to be enforced. The Bush administration is known by its fruit: the agents of the Justice Department have never enforced our laws protecting our border. The Conservative Movement refused to buy the snake oil that the White House and the Senators were selling, instead petitioning their Senators actively for the weeks prior to the bill. We whose activities John McCain derided as "extra-curricular politics" influenced lawmakers of both parties.
The result was stunning: only 46 of a necessary 60 sentors voted for cloture on the 28th, sending the bill to defeat for the remainder of this Congressional term. Senator Reid, already hamstrung to 50 in his caucus by Johnson's incapacitation, received support from 12 Republicans, but suffered the defection of 16 Democrats to votes against the bill. The states of West Virginia and Montana each contributed both of their Democrat votes to the defeat of the bill, while Arkansas, Vermont, Michigan, and North Dakota each contributed one of their two (D) votes to stop amnesty. 6 states where Republicans hold both seats (SC, ID, ME, MS, NH, and UT) gave one vote to allow amnesty, as well as both Senators from Arizona. Nebraska and Indiana had the strangest splits, with Hagel and Lugar (R) voting for the bill and Bayh and Nelson (D) voting against it.
This is the third major political victory for the New Media against the establishment - either media or political establishment, that is. The debunking of the Burkett Memos in 2004, the defeat of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court, and this defeat of the Amnesty Bill all represent times when the New Media made its voice heard and shocked the establishment world. It matters little that in two of those three instances the Bush administration was on the losing end of the operation; call it enforcement of principles. Score 3 for the bloggers and talk radio!! Hua.

Review: Spiderman 3 ****

2007-05-24T20:46:00.000-05:00

As super hero films go, this is a movie that has it all: great special effects, exciting action sequences, and, most importantly, good acting and a good message. Most importantly, Spiderman 3 has the best moral message in a long time. Remember earlier this year when the new Superman movie came out and we learned that the Man of Steel had a child out of wedlock? The rest of the movie was good, but we had certain reservations about the plot. Not so here, as Spiderman's actions and words teach overtly the lesson that we always have a choice about our actions and our choices shape our character.
A certain tar-like substance can grow to cover people with a black elastic material that molds into Spiderman's suit after it gets on him accidentally. Spiderman/Peter Parker, discovers that when he wears the black suit he is cocky, short with people, and vengeful, but he enjoys being that way. This movie is a Jekyll and Hyde story with all of the necessary ingredients: the good character finds a way to bring out his bad side, he likes the bad side, and the bad version of him starts to take over. The black material affects Spiderman and his rival reporter, who becomes a spiderman with a mouthful of teeth similar to that of the shrieking eels from "Princess Bride." The toothy spiderman, Sandman, and Harry, Peter Parker's friend played by James Franco, all make choices and have to live with them. The climactic fight and its aftermath illustrate perfectly the principle that you reap what you sow and each person must take responsibility for his own actions. You can always choose to do the right thing.
With this performance, Tobey Maguire shows that he is an excellent actor. He manages to pull off the nerdy and cocky versions of Peter Parker, the good and bad sides of Spiderman, and does so with a million subtle expressions and gestures that are extremely fun to watch. Happily for all of us, Kirsten Dunst has matured noticeably since the last movie, so that her performance here lives up to her character's potential. A good script and an excellent supporting cast complete this movie's impressive resume. Highest recommendations.

Review: Music and Lyrics ****

2007-05-15T13:33:00.000-05:00

"Music and Lyrics" is the best romantic comedy I have seen this decade, bar none, and it is not a close call. The satire on the American music industry is sharp and extremely funny - lampooning both '80s music videos and today's Britney Spears-type starlets. This movie is filled to brimming with material that is funny because it is true. The opening scene alone is worth the cost of admission, showing a music video of the band, "Pop!" in their biggest hit from the '80s. Their hairstyles, gestures, costumes and staging all motivate the viewer to scream, "I can't believe that was cool twenty years ago!!" We learn that Colin, one of the lead singers of "Pop!" became a star after the band broke up and the other faded into obscurity to become the answer to a trivia question. The has-been, Alex Fletcher, (Hugh Grant) is in the process in the present day of trying to make a living by singing at retro-type venues that still want to see him perform. He is in trouble, however, because there are so many "new old bands" that are competing with him. (That bit about "new old bands" was my favorite line in a script full of witty and memorable observations.) Alex receives an offer from Cora, the current Britney Spears-type star who has a decent singing voice, but gyrates incessantly in skimpy costumes and calls it dancing. She has a title for her next song that she needs him to write, which project she has also given to a number of other composers and lyricists. The one who writes the best duet will record and perform it with Cora, likely launching a big hit. He also has only three days or so to write it.
Drew Barrymore is the girl who waters Alex's plants, but she gives a number of rhyming lines off-the-cuff, so he excuses his current rather eccentric partner and takes her on as his lyricist. Naturally, a romance blossoms between them and they discover certain things about one another as romance blooms. The performances are good on all counts, and Hugh Grant gives his best performance in a long time. Twelve years ago, critics and fans observed in view of his performance in "Sense and Sensibility" that "humility becomes him." Indeed it does, as he plays a very believable has-been whose pretentious stage antics leave him with the occasional pulled muscle. Drew Barrymore is anything but a good actress, but this is one time in which the part conforms to her strengths so that she does not do any damage. A number of memorable supporting performances make this a memorable movie.
In terms of content, Cora's satire on Britney et. al. is realistic and her costumes highly immodest, so you might be careful of boys watching this movie. Also, the two stars naturally become lovers before he has put a ring on her finger. In sum, "Music and Lyrics" is an excellent piece of satire, you will enjoy it, and I will purchase it as soon as it is available.

Movie Review: Flags of Our Fathers ***

2007-05-14T10:43:00.000-05:00

"Maybe there are no such things as heroes..." the character James Bradley muses in the concluding scene of "Flags of Our Fathers," which sums up the movie's message perfectly. The movie is based on the best-selling book by James Bradley, son of one of the men in the most famous photograph in American history. After his father's death in 1994, he researched the lives of all six men in the picture, three of whom the Japanese killed on Iwo Jima in subsequent fighting. The format of the movie version follows the book relatively closely, involving flashbacks and cuts between the soldiers' training, the Battle for Iwo Jima, and the war bonds tour on which the War Department sent the three survivors as spokesmen.
The movie gets 3 stars because the battle scenes are outstanding. The way the Marines move onto Iwo Jima, they look much like the real footage of that battle that I have seen. Clearly, the director of this film, Clint Eastwood, paid very close attention to showing the scenes as they really looked. Even little things - Ira Hayes hanging his poncho off the back of his belt and Hank Hansen's baseball cap - get the correct portrayal. At the outset, the Japanese did not contest the beach, instead shooting from hidden bunkers after a large body of Marines had landed. The viewer never sees the Japanese soldiers unless they are driven into the open, creating the perfect mystique of the unseen enemy. The capture and gruesome butchery of Bradley's best friend receives very sanitized treatment. They could not have shown Iggy's corpse and maintained an R rating - he was mutilated beyond recognition - but Bradley's character might have described the scene, as is recorded in the book. He does not because this movie is not about Japanese brutality - it is about American lies about heroism - and the crew never loses sight of this point.
The segments portraying the bond tour reveal an ax to grind on the part of the creators about the improper exploitation of heroic images. They show mostly accurate events, but they insert a few episodes that are not in the book and change events from the way they really happened. When one survivor initially mis-identified one man in the picture, they hosted one bond tour event with the wrong gold star mother. That Marine, Hank Hansen, had entrusted his personal effects to John Bradley as he died and Bradley took advantage of Mrs. Hansen's presence at the event to give her Hank's personal effects. In the movie, Bradley has no relationship with Hank and does not give his effects to his mother, but only lies to her about Hank being in the picture. The speech that they give on the bond tour bears no resemblance to the speech that James Bradley records in the book. The real John Bradley told the people attending the events that he and his comrades had done their part by serving on the battlefield and the home front needed to do its job to bring the war to a conclusion. In the movie, he gives a modest message about the real heroes being the ones who died and he entreats the people to buy bonds in their honor. Bonds are hereby turned into memorials to the dead, rather than tools for the troops to finish the job. When a screenwriter has a speech word-for-word and uses none of it, I have to wonder why. Obviously, we all know today that nothing happens in war except people dying, so there is no appropriate use for war bonds except memorials. The war bond drive succeeded, but the movie does not mention this because it is not a movie about success.
The screenwriter, Paul Haggis, also wrote "Million Dollar Baby" and "Crash," which teach that there is no reason bad things happen and that people are racist. I think most of us regard our history of racial strife as bad enough without adding instances of racism that did not happen. Unfortunately, Haggis had only one racial minority, Ira Hayes, a Pima Indian, with which to work. His comrades deride him as a "redskin" and call his girlfriend a "squaw," neither of which appears in the book. How likely is it that a bar in Chicago in 1945 would have a policy of not serving Indians? That scene is simply absurd. Ira Hayes had a drinking problem, but why turn him into Rosa Parks fighting a Jim Crow system that did not exist? It is the little modifications inserted into an otherwise accurate portrayal that give this film a deceptive air. The real John Bradley was a devout Catholic, but the movie character neither crosses himself, nor says a Hail Mary nor carries a rosary because Paul Haggis' movies do not have devout characters. 99% of the viewers will never know that John Bradley received the Navy Cross, the second-highest medal that any sailor can earn for valor. His son pulls a medal out of an envelope, but never tells us what it is because this is a movie about made-up heroism, not real heroism. I would say, "Our heroes are more human than we make them out to be and we should remember their human sides." This movie teaches "there are no heroes," but only invented scenes that people create as heroic so that we can understand wars. I don't recommend this movie and I will not see it again.

Pelosi Targets Intelligence Funding

2007-05-08T17:17:00.000-05:00

If you have been wondering why the Left has been so obsessed lately over global warming, we officially got our answer today. Speaker Pelosi is pushing legislation that will require intelligence agencies to monitor the climate. Make no mistake: the Democrats have been stirring up this global warming hysteria because they are against the war in Iraq. Republicans have a message, mentioned by Rudy Guiliani last week, that amounts to, "we face a deadly threat, in Islamo-fascist terrorism, and only our party is addressing it." Understanding that they lose credibility with voters when they act as though that there is no terrorism threat, the Democrats had to come up with a life-threatening situation that only their party could handle. Enter global warming, the love affair with "An Inconvenient Truth" etc. Note that Gore's book Earth in the Balance did not win a Pulitzer Prize or anything of that sort. The Democrats did not feel that they needed Gore then, but now they do, hence two Oscars for his movie.
Today, they declare that global warming is a bigger threat to the world than all of the weapons in the world, including nuclear weapons, so they can return some of the salvos that the Republicans sent over, accusing them of dereliction of duty. Now, Pelosi takes the next logical step in the process of replacing the War on Terror with the War on CO2 by attempting to siphon off funds from intelligence organizations to monitor global climate conditions. She even insults our intelligence by saying that these appropriations will not divert any funds from the intelligence work necessary to fight terrorists. The 2008 campaign will be a clear choice, as we have the war of the wars: fight Islamo-fascist terrorism or fight carbon emissions. Abstain from over-reacting on global warming or abstain from fighting terrorists. Every time our policemen unmask another plot, as they did in New Jersey today, Republicans are proven right again.

The Trouble with Saturday Night Live

2007-05-08T08:12:00.000-05:00

Some of you may have tuned in to NBC on Sunday night at 9:00, as did I, to catch highlights of "Saturday Night Live in the 90s." I tuned in to see the classic "Motivational Speaker" sketch with Chris Farley and David Spade, Tim Meadows as the Ladies' Man, Norm MacDonald and Will Ferrell as Burt Reynolds and Alex in Celebrity Jeopardy, Cheri Oteri as Barbara Walters, Molly Shannon, aka Superstar, Ana Gasteyer and Shannon in the NPR takeoffs, not to mention Darrell Hammond's outstanding impersonations of Bill Clinton and Dana Carvey's George H. W. Bush. That's what I tuned in to see, but it is not what I saw.
Instead, they interviewed the stars, writers, producers, and executives about the various classic scenes, gave a very thorough backstory on the inner workings of the show, and threw out occasional clips of the sketches that lasted no longer than 30 seconds. Who in the NBC hierarchy thinks that we want to hear about the intricacies and reasons behind Norm MacDonald getting fired? We want to see his sketches! I don't care if Chris Rock and Adam Sandler look back on their time of sharing an office as the absolute dream accomodation for comedians. I want to see funny scenes. My idea of a highlights show is one or a few hosts - no more than three at a time, but they can rotate - giving a brief backstory and introducing the greatest moments from "Saturday Night Live" in the 90s, and counting down the 25 greatest sketches. Then, having announced the sketch, they get out of the way and let us watch it. There is nothing worse than seeing only 10 seconds of Alec Baldwin advertising his Schwetty meat balls on the NPR lampoon, a 5-second dose of Barbara Walters, Matt Foley doing 15 seconds of his commentary on "living in a van down by the river," etc.
They did the same thing on a "Saturday Night Live" highlights show a few years back, so now I am officially finished watching these sorts of shows. If the producers don't even know why people watch the show, as evidently they do not, it augurs poorly for the future. A show so narcissistic that the makers think we would rather hear them talk about the great moments than see them has a dim future.

Bush Vetoes Pull-Out Pork Bill

2007-05-02T12:03:00.000-05:00

President Bush found his veto pen for only the second time and used it to strike down a bill that would set a date certain for pulling our troops out of Iraq. In so doing (sarcastic tone starts here) he ended the long tradition of American Commanders in Chief of setting dates for ending military action. We all remember General Washington and President Hancock agreeing that the colonies would fight against the British until July 4, 1782, whether or not the British had left the continent, because six years was long enough to fight that war. Who can forget General Grant and President Lincoln deciding that April 12, 1865, would be the last day that U.S. troops would be on Southern soil? It is a good thing that in each case our troops won the war before these dates, isn't it?!! Obviously, no successful war in history has included this sort of pre-emptive surrender.
The bill, as you probably know, was an emergency funding bill for the troops in Iraq that the Democrats in the House of Representatives saddled with extra pork spending and a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. It passed very narrowly (without the vote of my Representative, who is a Democrat) and stands no chance of surviving this veto. The radical base is placated now, so every Democrat must wonder, "What will they ask me to do next?"
Lieutenant Colonel (R) Buzz Patterson has coined the term Dhimmicrats for our friends on the Left who oppose the current campaign against Jihadists. Dhimmis are people of minority religions who live in Muslim countries under second-class citizenship status, paying the Jizya tax on non-Muslims. That may be the most useful descriptive term to come down the pike in a long time. They are on the road to dhimmitude, but hopefully the adults can keep them from taking this country with them.

Movie Review: The Pursuit of Happyness ***

2007-05-01T09:29:00.000-05:00

This movie is a study in pain. Never have I felt so much pity for a lead character, nor felt so provoked to pity. Pity for the protagonist in this film is like an enticement, but instead of a siren in revealing garb, we see this man beset by adversity at every moment from every direction for two hours. In "The Pursuit of Happyness," Will Smith plays a salesman in 1981 San Francisco whom the viewer learns in time is actually an ambitious entrepreneur who thought (mistakenly) that he could make a fortune selling bone density scanners. Finding that job a dead-end prospect, he encounters a stockbroker with a sports car and decides to pursue the wealth that he imagines stockbrokers accumulate. This movie might better be called "The Pursuit of Wealth" because our hero, Chris Gardner (Smith) pursues his dream of riches to the neglect of everything else.
The way to become a stockbroker, Gardner learns, is by completing a six-month internship with Dean Witter. The internship is unsalaried and his family is already months behind in rent. His wife leaves him because she cannot take the strain of their lack of income, so he takes custody of their son. They remain behind in rent until the landlord evicts them, hesitantly, and they go to a motel. Again, the lack of payment of rent prompts the landlord to evict them and they sleep in a homeless shelter, if they are there on time to get in line. I like the portrayal of the landlords in each case: they are decent, humane, and reluctant to evict, far from the Shylock image that we often see. The night that father and son spend in a bathroom at a subway station because there was no room at the shelter is the most difficult scene to watch. Every husband or father who considers his role to be that of provider for his household will feel intense sympathy for the characters at that time. Will Smith's real-life son, Jaden, plays his son, whose part is particularly well-written. He makes the observations that kids will make, speaks the unguarded truths that children will come out with at inconvenient times, and seems not to notice the total destitution of their situation. He goes where his father tells him to go, has a bed to sleep in, and does not seem to perceive the want that they experience.
As Chris Gardner describes his life, narrating part of the film intermittently, the viewer marvels at how he coudl keep up such a hectic pace for six months. Gardner spends much of the movie running to pick up his son from daycare, to catch a bus, to get to a job interview, or to catch a homeless person in the process of stealing one of his scanners. After this display, I speculate Will Smith's next movie might be "The Jim Brown Story." Most of "The Pursuit of Happyness" describes Gardner's life as an intern in the rat race of trying to get clients for Dean Witter. There are twenty interns out of whom one will get hired at the end of six months. The brokers in charge of the interns send them on errands, including menial jobs - it is reminiscent of "Devil Wears Prada," except the stakes are ten times higher. In this case, the intern is in a position of complete desperation and has a son to support. One scene grew so desperate that I turned away from the screen - I had hit the wall, and could not take the pain of this movie anymore. At the end, Gardner gets the job and walks off into the sunset with his son, so that the viewers can breathe again. "This is what I call happiness," he tells us. Captions tell us that he made millions of dollars as a stockbroker, but nothing else. Did he reconcile with his wife? Did he marry again, or pay his landlords for the rent he owed them? What did his son (who is now thirty) end up doing as a profession? A final few minutes showing him buying a house and tucking his son into his own bed would have been nice, but family stuff is not what this movie is about. "The Pursuit of Happyness" is about getting rich, and nothing else. You might want to see it once to experience a rush of sympathy, but I might advise you to spare yourself the pain and simply be thankful that you have a roof over your head and your necessities are taken care of.

Obama...We've Got Him

2007-04-27T07:40:00.000-05:00

Remember the 2004 debates, when John Kerry won the first one, lost the second and he may have won the third narrowly? Although he won two of three debates, the main result was that he gave the Republicans two excellent sound bites to use against him: "global test," and [Saddam would] "not necessarily still be in power." He further lost points for normalcy in that when asked to talk about his wife, he talked about his mother, so all three debates helped the Bush campaign.
Fast forward to last night, in which the Democrats seem determined to give ammunition to their adversaries. Since 2002, Hilary Clinton has been running in the center on the war and illegal immigration because she will eventually have to run in the general election. Barack Obama and John Edwards are running only for the primary and seeking to placate their anti-war fringe. Last night, a hypothetical question asked the candidates if they would launch military strikes after a simultaneous attack on two U.S. cities that they knew al Qaeda had perpetrated. Edwards and Obama did not endorse military action, saying that they would make an internal response, fire somebody at Homeland Security, assess our intelligence problems, etc.
What did Rudy Giuliani say this week about the Democrats? He did not say we would have another 9/11 - that was a drastic misquote from Politico.com. Giuliani said that if they were in power, the forces of this country would only play defense. This debate will haunt Obama if he is the nominee (I have too much respect for Democrat voters to imagine that they might nominate that slimey ambulance-chaser, so no mention is necessary of "if Edwards is the nominee.") because he has outlined a plan for security that calls for waiting until a terrorist attack, then waiting until the next terrorist attack... The Man of Hope has a chink in his armor.

Victory for Civil Discourse! Rosie is Gone!

2007-04-25T11:25:00.000-05:00

Last week, I caught the end of Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel, when he gives his mini-state-of-the-union address. At that time, Don Imus was the big news, so his firing represented a victory for civility in pubic discourse, Mr. Gumbel informed all of his thoughtful listeners. Now, the biggest reward we could imagine: a victory not only for civility but for sanity. The woman who recently accused the British/American military of staging the capture of fifteen British sailors, (She thinks the two armed forces are one and the same, that George W. Bush and Tony Blair are Siamese Twins, and that Karl Rove breathed fire to bring down the World Trade Center buildings, etc.)...excuse me, I just drifted off out of the sane America for a second. Anyway, Rosie O'Donnell has at last received her pink slip as co-host on The View. Her rounds of insult-sparring with Donald Trump has left the old man with the last laugh. She has been fired multiple times, which is par for the course in broadcasting, has now lost her place on two shows, and the man with the wave-kopf (a little German lingo there) is the last one standing. As you might recall, their exchange of insults began when Rosie said that Trump had gone bankrupt. That was a lie, certifiably, and he has spoken of a slander suit. Talk radio hosts everywhere are bemoaning this sad turn of events because they will have so much trouble getting funny material hereafter. She spoiled them rotten on a daily basis. Oh well, condolences to them and cheers for all of us. May she find the anonymity she has so long deserved.

Martyrs in Turkey

2007-04-23T13:37:00.000-05:00

The country currently campaigning for admittance to the European Union has a problem. The Turkish government in Ankara has just announced the arrests of five young men, students all living in the same housing complex, in the city of Malatya. They have been accused of murder in the deaths of one German and two Turks, who were found tied with their throats slit. The German, Tilman Ekkehart Geske, owned a publishing house where he printed, in addition to other texts, Christian Bibles. The Turks had converted to Christianity. When the suspects were detained, all five were bearing notes with vows of martyrdom. The story is here: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr18/0,4670,TurkeyBibleAttack,00.html
This is the second brutal murder in Malatya this year of a victim whose only offense was publishing Bibles. Last year, a teenager shot a Roman Catholic priest in Malatya. Another Turkish nationalist murdered Hrant Dink, an Armenian Christian publisher, earlier this year. Several Turks marched to protest Dink's murder, and 100,000 people attended his funeral, but a mere 150 people protested this latest attrocity, holding candles and carrying a banner in Istanbul. The Turkish government has a difficult case on its hands. They will prosecute these murderers, but the consequences may be far-reaching. The Quran states in no uncertain terms that the penalty for conversion to another religion is death, as is the penalty for persuading a Muslim to convert. If the Prophet is the highest authority, the actions of the murderers were justified. This case will bear watching, as Turkey's stance as a secular nation is tested.
This story is brought to you from the United States, where we have proudly called a chopping tool an "ax" for two hundred years. Out with the British.

Evidently Not a Connection

2007-04-20T16:02:00.000-05:00

As more details emerge about the sad case of Cho Seung-Hui, it appears that he had no attachment to Islam other than aesthetic inspiration. In the package he sent to NBC, he left his return address simply as "Ishmael," spelled the Judeo-Christian way, and his videos contain several references to Christianity. The only thing his videos reveal is that he was troubled and a loner, not by any means a Jihadist. The upshot of it all is that evil people commit these crimes and we may not ever figure out the reasons why. As great a milestone as it was to have my first bigotry accusation on the 7-month anniversary of my first posting, I will delete my previous two postings because their evidence has checked out either inconclusive or red herring.

The Bigotry Accusation

2007-04-19T17:16:00.000-05:00

After my last posting, a fellow blogger has accused me of bigotry, predictably enough. My question mark in the title, to which I called attention, stressed my lack of certainty, but the central points of the posting stand: Cho used the Muslim spelling for "Ismail" and his video called Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold "martyrs," as he criticized American "debauchery," both of which Jihadists do. His videos, which came out after my posting, show him saying he is going to "die like Jesus," so he appears to be borrowing metaphors from both religions to some degree. My critic questions whether any Muslim traditions have Abraham wielding an ax. The source for my posting, came from an article to which Melissa Drosjack, Paul Wagenseil and the Associated Press contributed, posted here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266523,00.html. The exact source of the ax reference was one who spoke to the Chicago Tribune. I had not heard that story previously either, but trusted the authority of the AP, Fox News and the Tribune.
One minor element of my posting was slightly inaccurate. Christians believe that the Dome of the Rock marks the spot where Abraham almost sacrificed Isaac. Muslims do not, placing the location near Mecca. The religions differ, but my posting was correct for the Christian version of the site. If you really want to split hairs, the Dome of the Rock is a shrine, not a mosque, and the Al Aqsa Mosque is near it. Muslims hold that the Dome of the Rock marks the spot on Mount Moriah where Mohammed ascended to Heaven.
Perhaps we should define bigotry. Bigotry is promoting some unflattering and inaccurate image of a person or group. It is not bigotry to call the French surrenderers based on their war record, but it would be bigotry to warn, for instance, that French people have voracious sexual appetites and want to rape American women. In view of the violence that Muslims have perpetrated in terrorist fashion over the last several years, it is not bigotry to ask a question when a mass murderer uses Muslim spellings for a Muslim icon, uses Jihadist terminology, and tapes himself taunting the outside world with the violence he is preparing to perpetrate. Jihadists make video tapes of themselves delivering messages routinely. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but so many terrorists are Muslims that my question had a historical foundation.

Cho Seung-Hui Murders 32 at Virginia Tech

2007-04-17T09:18:00.000-05:00

For the record, the Virginia Tech murderer's name was Cho Seung-Hui, a South Korean resident alien who took the lives of two students in the dormitory West Ambler Johnston Hall, prompting a 911 call to the police at 7:15. While the police began their investigation at the dormitory, Cho proceeded at some point to Norris Hall, a classroom building, and chained the front door shut, opening fire there over two hours later. A 911 phone call to police at 9:45 alerted them to his rampage in the classroom building, where he took 30 lives, and after breaking the doors down, the police found him dead with his victims at 9:55. As of now, ballistics tests have matched the 9mm handgun he carried to the shootings in both buildings. Cho Seung-Hui also carried a .22 caliber pistol, but it is not certain now whether he used it.
Now that we know the basic details, which will get updated when the victims have all been identified, we should keep our terminology straight: the VT incident is a crime, not a tragedy. Tragedy implies a mishap without a perpetrator, such as a storm. The death toll of this crime is 32, not 33 - good riddance to the murderer whose life justice would demand anyway. The killer in this situation is sin, not weapons. The evil in men's hearts will find fruition in actions by whatever means they can obtain. We must pray for the families of the victims, that God will provide them comfort and that they will seek Him in this very difficult time of grief.

Stem Cell Watch IV

2007-04-12T14:04:00.000-05:00

Stem cell discoveries are starting to hit close to home for me. The Times of London reports here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article1637528.ece that diabetics have been able to stop taking insulin after undergoing treatment with stem cells harvested from their own blood. That gives a whole new meaning to the saying, "Physician, heal thyself!" Now, it's more like, "Patient, heal thyself." The developers estimate that it will be five to eight years before this treatment is available to the public for use by Type 1 diabetics like my wife, but this news is extremely encouraging.
The Times article, of course, puts in a few blistering words, bashing President Bush for opposing the destruction of human embryos, but, like all other treatments using stem cells, this advance employs adult stem cells. I do not know the precise score of treatments that have been developed, but it stands close to this:
Adult stem cells: >100
Embryonic stem cells: 0
Bear in mind that with last year's bill, Congress did not ban embryonic stem cell research. Anyone in the private realm who thinks embryonic stem cells furnish all of the cures to all known diseases (as Arlen Specter has said they do) may sponsor funding for them at any time. Congress prohibited the spending of public funds on embryonic stem cell research; nothing more and nothing less than that. Cheers for another great medical advance!

The Duke Witch Hunt Has Ended

2007-04-11T09:00:00.000-05:00

Today at 2:30, Attorney General Roy Cooper of North Carolina will announce that all charges are being dropped against the three Duke Lacrosse players. It might be unfair to the Salem witch hunters to call Mike Nifong's travesty a witch hunt. Now Nifong is under indictment by the state bar for a long rapsheet, including withholding excupatory DNA evidence from the defense and lying to both the court and the bar. He will stand trial in June and face disbarment, after which time I hope the three students sue him for defamation for every penny he has. I don't know what the law says about suing frivolous prosecutors, so I do not know whether they can do that. I would love to see false arrest charges brought against the accuser, but Attorney General Roy Cooper has announced that he will not bring charges against her, Crystal Gail Mangum, because she may have believed the stories she was telling. I wish his brand of justice had been applied to Scooter Libby. At Foxnews.com, her family chose to remind all of us that they are poor and black. I suppose it was poverty that influenced Mangum's attempt to run over a policeman with a car in 2003.
Nifong never had a case to begin with. If we need to rehash it, here are the small problems he faced from the first moment of the investigation: 1) the accuser, Crystal Gail Mangum, described her attackers as heavy-set, 270-280 pounds, which is 100 pounds heavier than any Lacrosse player. 2) Mangum repeatedly failed to pick out Lacrosse players from the lineups that policemen furnished 3) one indicted player had an airtight alibi supported by a taxi driver and ATM recoeds 4) Mangum changed her story more times and in bigger degrees than Britney Spears has changed her hairstyle, 5) the other stripper said that the accuser was never alone with anyone, and 6) Crystal Mangum had DNA from several men on her, but none matched a Lacrosse player. Other than that, it was a good case. From Day 1, Nifong did not have a single piece of evidence other than the word of the accuser, who had made similar frivolous accusations before. I hope the bar throws the book at Nifong. This case has thus far resulted in the resurgence of the New Black Panther Party, the reelection of Mike Nifong, and the defamation of three students, who were unwise to hire strippers but completely innocent of rape and kidnapping.
Also, those 80+ professors at Duke who signed a document condemning the players need to apologize, but that probably is not going to happen this side of eternity either.

Popejoy and the Speaker

2007-04-10T21:44:00.000-05:00

Private Popejoy was a soldier who literally shot himself in the foot while performing the arduous combat task of climbing off of a HUMMV. As his Executive Officer, I was awakened at 2:00 in the morning to attend the momentous event of helping carry his stretcher as we loaded him onto an ambulance and sent him off by chopper out of our base in Scania, Iraq.
Speaker Pelosi and he share a number of things in common, as she has now committed another gaffe that in tennis would be called an unforced error. If Republicans could have enumerated their dream scenario of her first four months as Speaker, I am not sure they could have improved on her present performance. After losing her first battle, the internal squabble over her Murtha-for-Majority-Leader stance, she passed a few insignificant bills and announced victory in the First Hundred Hours. In the supplemental bill for the troops, Pelosi put every Democrat in the House except two on the record voting to attach strings to funding for the troops in Iraq. Even President Bush found his voice for fighting words, which he has almost never managed to do on domestic issues, and threatened to discover that he has veto power. That vote will haunt dozens, especially the so-called Blue Dogs, who might better be termed Blue Gelded Dogs because I have never seen them break ranks at voting time.
Now, she has acted on her Messiah complex - the same impulse that led her to ask the Air Force for her own private 757 - and appointed herself Secretary of State of Israel. While in Syria recently, she announced that the Israelis had sent her to deliver a message: Israel is ready to negotiate peace and the road to peace in the Middle East leads to Damascus. Of course Ehud Olmert immediately contradicted her because what she said was not true. Of course it was not true - Israel would never use a foreign legislative leader as a diplomat; the very idea is absurd - but don't you see that it should have been true. Can't these people understand that Nancy Pelosi wanted it to be true?!! She wants peace in the world so badly!! I am not being sarcastic when I observe that clearly our Speaker has taken to heart and tried to apply the words of the song:
Let there be peace on Earth
And let it begin with me
Children sing that song at kindergarten graduation to express their desire that the future of the entire world will be better than the past because they will be peaceful. Unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi still believes the trite, simplistic, naive message of this song. She believes that her mere appearance on the soil of foreign lands should bring about instant and perfect peace because she is so good, tolerant, understanding and compassionate. She said the gavel would be in the hands of the children, so should it surprise us that she is now acting like one? We have yet another reminder of why we need adults running our government.

BBC: No Heroes Allowed!

2007-04-09T20:05:00.000-05:00

It pays to know at the outset that the Victoria Cross is the highest award a British soldier can earn. The VC has occupied the same place as our Medal of Honor for British soldiers ever since Queen Victoria occupied the throne. In May 2004, Private Johnson Beharry drove a Warrior armored personnel carrier (which looks much like our Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle) through heavy enemy fire to rescue a foot patrol from an ambush. Insurgents fired several rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and pummeled the vehicle, but Beharry managed to secure the foot soldiers and led a group of five Warriors through the ambush. After clearing the immediate line of fire, he climbed out of his vehicle and administered first aid to his wounded crew members while under fire. On a later date, Beharry was again driving the lead vehicle when an ambush hit his vehicle with a number of RPGs, wounding the vehicle commander and injuring Beharry in the head. Although his wounds would later require brain surgery, Beharry drove the vehicle out of the kill zone and reached safety just before losing consciousness. In these two instances, his cool conduct under fire with total disregard of his own safety saved several lives. The consensus to bestow the Victoria Cross on him must have been unanimous because the medal arrived quite promptly.
Recently, the BBC has cancelled funding for a movie about Beharry's courage, allegedly because it portrays the War in Iraq in too positive a light. London's Daily Telegraph reports the story here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/08/wiraq308.xml
Spokesmen for the BBC will not confirm exactly why they have pulled their funding from the project, but they have seldom been shy about expressing their hostility to the war effort. All good news must be censored at all costs. I have to give the Brits credit: at least they started making this movie, and if another distributor signs on, they can complete it.
Our media does the same thing, of course. While I was in Iraq, my father and I separately exchanged a series of tense emails with the Atlanta Journal/Constitution, whose reporters could never seem to find any successful missions to report on. I wrote to inform them about a number of successful raids in which troops captured large stocks of enemy weapons - over one ton of explosives on a few occasions - and they informed me that they do not print news about anything combat-related other than deaths of soldiers. We are still waiting for the movies about our heroes from the last two wars. Sergeant Smith earned the Medal of Honor four years ago, but we are still waiting for the film about his life. Personally, I'd like to see a film about Captain Brian Chontosh of the Marine Corps, but I'm not holding my breath. None of the movies about Desert Storm has shown true-life soldiers doing heroic deeds. When will our movies show soldiers as heroes again?

Persecution Watch: Close to Home

2007-03-27T17:52:00.000-05:00

Well, now it isn't just anti-Christian fanatics in California using the ACLU to ban all crosses from Blue States. The persecution arena has arrived in the South. This time, the outrage is happening here in Georgia. According to Cybercast News Service, Savannah State University has expelled a Christian group called Commissioned to Love from campus for doing what it calls "hazing" of new members and "harassing" other students, then for violating its suspension. What lewd and inappropriate behavior invited this branding? Foot washing. This school has defined as hazing, literally, what Jesus did. The members of the group apparently shared their faith with other students, which the school labelled "harassment." How far behind can it be for liberal colleges to start defining corporate prayer as "harassment?" Foot washing earned them a suspension and a strict warning. When members of the group attended a Christian music concert off campus, the school authorities announced that they had violated the terms of their suspension and expelled them from campus. Does the Constitution protect freedom of peaceable assembly? I am certain the private peaceable activity of students on their own time off campus is legal in this state. Commissioned to Love is suing the college, and well they should. Add a lion's den and Savannah State could fit the bill for Babylon perfectly.

Movie Review: The Prestige ****

2007-03-15T05:48:00.000-05:00

There are three steps in magic: the pledge, the turn and the prestige. The magician promises to do a trick, makes something disappear, and brings it back. Only the bringing back - the prestige - makes the show worth the cost of admission. A movie filled with twists of the plot and flashbacks, "The Prestige" is a movie that you must see straight through from beginning to end without interruption or you will be confused eternally. At the outset, a tragedy makes bitter enemies of former friends in late-19th Century London. A British magician (Christian Bale) and an American magician (Hugh Jackman) engage in a fierce duel to perform the most amazing trick possible and to sabotage one another. As one magician sits in jail for murder, flashbacks inform the viewers how he came to that point.
Michael Caine gives a characteristically excellent performance as the ingeneur to a number of magicians. The ingeneur is the brains of the operation - the man who knows the secrets to the magic tricks and teaches the magician how to perform them. A magician really is just a performer - a man entertaining the audience with the tricks that his ingeneur has developed for him. Scarlett Johansson plays the assistant to one of the magicians, who changes sides but may be either a double agent for her first boss or a turncoat. Despite their similarity of profession, the two magicians are not alike or cliched in their roles. One plays the confident master and the other an obsessive pretender, determined to discover the secret to the trademark trick of his adversary. Obsession leads him to America, to Colorado, where Nikola Tesla might hold the answer to his need for the greatest trick of all. The questions persist: who is the better magician, and what happens if the audience sees a feat of real magic? Does the audience want real magic, or would they prefer to be fooled?
In terms of content, "The Prestige" is rated PG-13 for disturbing images. There are some death scenes, including one suicide, so the kids definitely do not need to see this one. The language is relatively clean, however, and there are no naughty bits. You will want to see it more than once to try to catch the things you missed the first time. Most importantly for a cloak and dagger thriller, they tie up all of the loose ends at the conclusion. No matter how muddled you are at times, you will be able to understand exactly what happened and why.

Appeasement Watch

2007-03-13T16:29:00.000-05:00

We remember the Day that will live in Infamy, 3/11/04, when terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda bombed the train system in Spain, killing 191 and wounding 2,000. Some observers thought optimistically that the Spanish people had just endured their own 9/11 and would redouble their efforts to fight alongside our troops against the threat that both nations faced from Islamofascists. Instead, we saw that enormous parade of Spaniards holding signs reading simple "paz," Spanish for "peace" and demanding an immediate retreat from Iraq. The terrorists timed their bombings perfectly, inflicting carnage only weeks before national elections. Al Qaeda spokesmen made it quite clear that they had attacked Spain because of Spanish troops in Iraq. Therefore, the Spanish people ousted Aznar's government in favor of Zapatero's Socialist Party, which immediately withdrew all Spanish forces from Iraq. Overnight, the Drive-By Media changed its alarmist mantra from "We're going it alone in Iraq!" to "We've lost one of our most important allies!" and thereby acknowledged for the first time that the United States had allies in Iraq.
Today, the Los Angeles Times reports that terrorists with links to Al Qaeda are training in Morocco for redoubled efforts at staging attacks in Spain. The story is here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-spain10mar10,0,5527219,full.story
After Spain kowtowed to Al Qaeda, the menace has not left her alone. Simon Cowell once advised a contestant on American Idol, "When someone is down, kick them," which is exactly the strategy that these terrorists employ. Concessions only show weakness to these terrorists, which the intend to exploit. Three years ago they attacked Spain because of her troops in Iraq. Today, they will attack Spain because they want an active hand in Spain's government and tomorrow they will attack Spain until all of Spain's non-Muslims pay the Jizya (the tax on non-Muslims) or convert to Islam. Appeasement will not save the non-Muslim world from the terrorists who kill in the name of Allah. These people will not agree to coexistence with us unless we assimilate to them and accept an inferior position. Just because you may be a tolerant pluralist Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Sikh, Hindu, skeptic, atheist or agnostic, do not suppose that you will be able to persuade the leaders of Al Qaeda that you mean them no harm. All who have not converted to Islam or agreed to pay the Jizya are targets for their wrath.

Oscar Awards

2007-03-07T12:16:00.000-05:00

By popular demand, I'll furnish a short review of the longest night in Hollywood. Now that I am an old married man, I actually pay attention to some of the fashion on the red carpet. This was a distinctly good year in that regard, with Jennifer Hudson's aluminum foil vest the biggest fashion problem. Meryl Streep with tacky beads and a dress that looked like a bathrobe was a bit on the Hippie side and the way Kirsten Dunst did her bangs mader her look younger than Abigail Breslin. Other than that, it was a good evening, with Best Dressed notices going to Penelope Cruz and Reese Witherspoon.
Ellen DeGeneres did one thing right and one wrong as hostess: she succeeded in her attempt not to steal the show from the nominees, but she tried way too hard not to steal the show. It would not kill her to dress formally and actually crack some better-than-lame jokes. She was not actively bad, but was passive in every regard. Is it just me, or do we hear every year that the show is TOO STINKING LONG(!!!) and then the next year they make it just as long again. Why can't they cut all of the elaborate introduction bits and just get on with the awards that no one cares about?! Jack Black and Will Ferrell were mildly amusing bemoaning the lack of Oscars for comedians, but that stunt should be scheduled for Saturday Night Live on the night before the Oscars show. Fundamentally, if they put the emphasis back on the actual winners of the awards, (and nominated more movies that people have actually seen) the Oscars could again rival major sporting events for popularity.
I watched part of the "Dogfights" marathon on the History Channel, but I could flip back every fifteen minutes or so and catch the next award presentation. Al Gore was actually funny as he did the botched presidential candidacy announcement. The straightest of all straight men has learned to laugh at himself - good job. The surprises for which the Oscars are famous hit us again this year in a few ways. First, how is it possible for the only foreign language movie with other nominations to lose the Best Foreign Language Film award? "Pan's Labyrinth" won - WON, mind you - Best Makeup, Art Direction, and Cinematography, but lost the trophy for Best Foreign Language Film. Stupid is the only word for that voting. The biggest other surprise was Alan Arkin's victory for Best Supporting Actor. Eddie Murphy was the sentimental favorite, but we have learned the lesson countless times that sentimental favorites do not win anymore.
After completing my German homework for the next day, I tuned in again to see the last four awards of the show. Had I not been suffering insomnia, I would not have seen the predictable outcomes of the big awards. Scorsese got his trophy at last, Forest Whitaker and Helen Mirren added the most coveted award to their trophy cases, Peter O'Toole will have to try again, and "The Departed" won Best Picture. This will be a trivia question year akin to last year. Nothing swept the awards and the biggest box office hits were not in the running. The Best News is that Babel lost everything, so we will not see a string of devastating, depressing movies all vying for Best Picture next year. Hua.

Justice Miscarried: Libby is Guilty

2007-03-06T15:03:00.000-05:00

Scooter Libby has been found guilty after ten days of jury deliberations on four of five counts, including the count of obstuction of justice. How can a man obstruct justice in a case where no crime was committed? Why does it matter who told Scooter Libby about Valerie Plame's non-secret, non-covert, and non-protected identity? Even if he really did lie when he recalled how he found out about her status, he could only obstruct justice if the trail led somewhere, which it did not.
Take his place for a moment: As a prosecutor, I ask "Who was the first person that told you about the death of Anna Nichole Smith?" I am interrogating you because she might have been murdered. Let us suppose you tell me that you saw Shepard Smith on Foxnews covering the case, but he was not on any Foxnews shows that day or the next. In reality, it was a different reporter who you saw, but you mistakenly stand by your story of Shepard Smith. Later it turns out that she was not murdered, so I press no charges for the crime. Have you committed perjury and obstruction of justice? If you are a Republican, you have.
There are two lessons here. This verdict vindicates forever the Clinton strategy: when questioned under oath, claim to have a completely uncertain recollection about everything. Tell prosecutors that you remember nothing at all and laugh at them because they cannot prove you wrong. Claim that everything is privileged: attorney-client privileged, executive-privileged, etc. and take the 5th Amendment even when you are not under investigation. When given immunity, admit to everything and exonerate everyone else. That strategy enabled them to evade justice almost completely. Jim Guy Tucker and both McDougals faced convictions, but dozens of others got away scot free.
The second lesson here is that a judge can get whatever verdict he wants. The judge made no secret of his partisanship, denying the defense a key witness and expressing outrage that the defense did not call Vice President Cheney to testify. So much for a blind bearer of the equal scales of justice. Libby faces up to twenty-five years in prison for a conflicted memory about a non-crime, which the judge refused to say was a non-crime. The judge instructed the jury repeatedly not to take into account whether or not it was a crime for Valerie Plame's identity to be publicized, allowed the prosecution to portray her falsely as a covert agent to the jury, and claimed not to even know whether a crime had been committed in the case. Washington DC juries are notoriously partisan, so this conviction may be overturned on appeal, as was Oliver North's conviction, but this day's mischief is awfully upsetting.

Movie Review: The Guardian ***

2007-03-06T10:37:00.000-05:00

For this review, I need to furnish full disclosure at the outset: I am a major anti-fan of Kevin Costner. Ashton Kutcher is not much better in my book, but for at least once in their lives they managed to put together a good movie. "The Guardian" celebrates the elite rescue swimmers of the Coast Guard. Yes, the Coast Guard actually does have elite personnel and they richly deserve the label. These are the swimmers who jump out of helicopters into frigid waters in Alaska to rescue fishermen whose boats have been wrecked. The helicopter crew lowers a basket or a cable and the rescue swimmer puts the survivors in the basket and sends them up to safety. There are 300 rescue swimmers currently, three of whom are women.
In "The Guardian," Kevin Costner is an old rescue swimmer who accepts a slot as the head trainer at the Rescue Swimmer course and Ashton Kutcher is the maverick hot shot from college who thinks he walks on water. Costner has marital problems, of course, (when was the last time you saw a happily married military man in a movie) Costner and Kutcher both have a tragic past and in time they discover how much in common they share. The trainer reinforces the themes of teamwok and self-sacrifice constantly as the young swimmers attempt to complete an extremely difficult 18-week course. The training sequences furnish the highlights of the movie. Recently in real life, the course started with twelve trainees and all of them washed out in the first week. The current class has condensed in number from twelve down to four. Needless to say, the course is unforgiving.
"The Guardian" is very long, 139 minutes, it suffers from anti-climax, and several subplots are completely unnecessary. Costner's marital issues do not advance the plot, nor do Kutcher's trysts with a local girl. I guess getting into bed on the second date is standard operating procedure now. The language is not bad, however, and the message is good overall. I would say it is worth seeing once.

Ire from both sides

2007-03-05T08:15:00.000-05:00

Everyone by now has weighed in to criticize Ann Coulter for characterizing John Edwards with the other "F" word. I found the headline interesting, however, "Coulter draws criticism from both sides of the aisle." Every time you see a headline like that one, it tells you two things: 1) the object of wrath has committed a politically incorrect act and 2) the offender is a Republican. Isn't it interesting that only Republicans get criticized from both sides? Republicans express offense when anyone says something offensive; Democrats are offended only if Republicans say an ill-advised word.
A quick google search for "William Jefferson Criticism" turns up two headlines that both use the phrase "GOP criticizes Jefferson..." What? No outrage from the party that was hot to trot to rid Congress of the Culture of Corruption? Jefferson had $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer. Not only that, but in 2006 his seat was so safe that the next two finishers after him were also Democrats (in Louisiana, they do not have primaries). Nancy Pelosi is getting Jefferson placed on the Homeland Security committee now so that he can have access to classified documents. Can we identify the next Sandy Burglar? Why defend a man who is obviously guilty of a crime when his seat is completely safe?
The first reason is that Jefferson is black and the descendant of slaves. All of the Democrats feel the guilt of several generations on their shoulders when they look at him. Under the doctrine of Social Justice, no black man will ever truly be guilty of any crime until poverty has departed forever from the black community. The second reason they defend him is that Democrats never criticize one of their own, admit to any wrongdoing, or concede any point to their political opponents, whom they style enemies. They only oppose corruption when Republicans have red hands, and then they only oppose the Republicans who are corrupt. They couldn't lose Jefferson's seat if they tried, but more importanty to them, they will not suffer the indignity of seeing a Democrat forced out of office.

Pelosi Promises Watch

2007-03-01T12:08:00.000-05:00

As we observed the campaigns for Congress last fall, the Democrats propelled their party to a narrow majority in both houses on a number of promises. Chiefly, they told us that all Republicans are racist, child molesters and corrupt money-grubbers itching for lobbyists' money. These caricatures each had patron saints, but Congressmen Foley, Ney and Cunningham all resigned voluntarily whereas William Jefferson, (D, LA) who was caught with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer got reelected and sits in Congress today. Even if all of the Democrats' charges were true, they ran on a surprisingly small number of agenda items. In addition to promising not to be George W. Bush, they ran on raising the minimum wage and possibly doing something about the war, but they were seldom in agreement about what. Since taking office, they have raised the minimum wage and taken decisive action on the war by passing a non-binding beauty contest resolution saying that they do not like the surge.
How is Speaker Pelosi doing on her principal promises? She vowed to end lobbyist corruption, allow the Republicans to participate in all debates and to make contributions to bills, and she decried the three-day workweeks that Speaker Hastert had allowed, vowing to make the five-day workweek a hallmark of the 110th Congress. Speaker Pelosi broke her promise of inclusion for the Republicans before the first gavel convened the House. She announced when she unveiled her 100 hours plan that no Republican amendments would be permitted. The majority party can do this, and no one was surprised that she did, but the fact that she had promised not to makes her a hypocrite. The fact that she broke this promise before the first piece of legislation also shows that she never had any intention of keeping her word. This story from the Politico is here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2908.html
As far as lobbyist money, the Washington Post details here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301978_pf.html that the Democrats are using their various committee chairmen in the House to head fundraising events involving lobbyists. No one is surprised by this turn of events, but they did promise a change. For the final promise, in eight weeks, Pelosi's Congressmen have managed to log one five-day workweek, so that vow has not been a total bust.
Are you disillusioned by all this? I'm not because this is what I had expected to see happen. If any independent voters are watching, however, they might realize that their votes against an apparently incompetent party and for a change in 2006 have not had the desired effect. Instead, we have more of the same and a hypocritical new Speaker who thinks she needs a 757 provided by the Air Force at taxpayer expense.

Economics 101: Wages

2007-02-23T10:05:00.000-05:00

Congress recently broke an arm or two patting itself on the back for raising the minimum wage. About a month later, Chrysler announced the approaching cuts of 13,000 jobs. Are the two events related? What does it mean that now, as Chrysler cuts jobs, Toyota's car factories are increasing their output and hiring more workers? The answer to the first question is "yes." A higher minimum wage enables unions to negotiate higher wages for their skilled workers. The fundamental difference between Chrysler jobs and Toyota jobs begins with a U: unions. Toyota's flourishing factories are powered by non-union workers, whereas Chrysler's labor is largely unionized, especially in the Detroit area. The car industry in Detroit is declining in part because unionized labor refuses to go the way of the horse and buggy. At the root of this problem are the most basic elements of economics.
In high school, we learn that capital is made of goods and services. Those two commodities are the sources of all value. Land, gold, cars, and clothing are goods. Farm labor, grass cutting, house work and industrial work are services. In the free market, goods are worth what people will pay for them. Labor is worth what a boss will pay for it.
What do union bosses always (and I mean ALWAYS) ask for? "A living wage," is what they want, right? If I've heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times: wages must increase to match rates of inflation and costs of living. Is labor a service? Of course! Labor is a unit of capital that is worth what a boss is willing to pay for it. What should wages for labor have to do with the cost of living? In the free market, nothing. Toyota pays market wage, and manages to fill its employment rolls with workers. Because Toyota pays market wage, they have no worries about a minimum wage hike, whereas Chrysler will be hamstrung with huge increases in the costs of production due to wages getting raised artificially. The economic lesson in all of this is clear: market labor is beating union labor in competition. The days of industrial labor unions are numbered, as their decline continues.
To be fair, Chrysler has multiple problems aside from labor costs. They need to produce more desirable cars and might consider cutting some salaries, but those are decisions for the company to make internally. By raising the minimum wage, the government raises the price of labor artificially, which will only hurt the ability of American workers to compete in a global market.

With young men like these...

2007-02-22T10:17:00.001-05:00

I went to National Guard Drill two weekends ago and realized that after eight years in the organization, I am finally looking noticeably older than the seventeen-year-old privates who have just finished Basic Training. I asked one fresh-faced youngster if he had ever shaved in his life. Visibly dismayed that an officer would doubt his skills with a razor, he asked, "Is it growing back already, sir?" I laughed and responded, "No, your face is fine. I meant, 'Are you old enough to shave?'" When I was one of them, a new recruit age 17 in the year 1998, I used to muse that if there were a war, I would serve willingly. Since that time, we have had a war and I have served a year in Iraq, as have countless others.
What impressed me at last Drill was the comments I heard from the kids who were too young to go with us in 2005. Some of them, knowing that American soldiers are facing enemy fire in two theatres, still make comments that are identical to mine: If their nation calls them to war, they will go willingly. This current war against Islamofascism has thus far mainly sought to prevent the next terrorist attack on the United States. At that, we have been successful in preventing the attack and disarming three formerly hostile regimes at a cost of 3,000 men. (The third regime is Khaddafi's Libya, which disarmed peaceably.)
Are we winning? With the Iraqis looking less likely to democratize in fact as well as form, we may not achieve the peaceable ally for which we had hoped. Yet, if we in the future face a war for our own survival, rest assured we will have a willing populace to enlist and fight. As long as we have young men like the ones in my National Guard Unit, the people of this country need not fear any enemy. Hua!

RUSH IS BACK ON TV!

2007-02-16T09:36:00.000-05:00

The Fox News Channel is about to air a satire on the news, a show titled, "The Half Hour News Hour," which premiers Sunday, February 18 at 10 p.m. EST. They have done the first two episodes as pilots, but the show has not gotten picked up yet, so it needs an audience to earn a spot on the air. I have seen a preview of "The Half Hour News Hour" on Hannity and Colmes and it is side-splitting. The jokes are witty and highly amusing, as two liberal news anchors give enthusiastic coverage of America's love affair with Barack Obama. I understand that YouTube carries a few other clips, involving messages from the President and the Vice President, played by the Harmless, Lovable Little Fuzz Ball and the Diva of the Right.
Yes, you read that last sentence correctly: Rush Limbaugh is the President and Lady Ann Coulter is the Vice President. I could not have cast it better myself. I know where I will be at 10:00 on Sunday evening. Hua.

The Crime that Never Happened

2007-02-15T09:26:00.000-05:00

The situation was far from ideal: a criminal case driven by liberal talking points. Every liberal politician, blogger, opinion columnist and news reporter pronounced the defendant or defendants guilty before some of them were even indicted. Democrats fantasized about watching the defendants getting incarcerated. A prosecutor decided to do whatever it took to gain convictions no matter how much evidence he had to conceal. In the end, everyone who paid attention to the evidence doubted that any crime had even been committed.
Am I talking about the Duke Lacrosse players' rape frame-up by Mike Nifong, or the current trial of Scooter Libby by Patrick Fitzgerald? Actually, both cases match the above description. While it appears only a matter of time until the state drops all charges against the Lacrosse players, Libby is on trial charged with perjury for up to 30 years of his life and may get convicted. The judge in Libby's case has mandated that the jury not be told whether or not Valerie Plame was a covert agent or whether her "leaking" constituted a violation of the law protecting covert agents' identities. Fitzgerald has indicted no one for the leak because the law protects agents' identities until they have been out of covert service for five years. She had been a non-covert employee of the CIA for over six years and therefore was not "outted." No matter how many times MSNBC says she was outted, it is not true. The "leaker," by his own admittance, was Richard Armitage of the State Department. He has not been indicted because no crime was committed. After learning that Armitage was the source for the Robert Novak story on Valerie Plame, Fitzgerald continued his investigation hoping to get someone to commit perjury or to find another underlying crime. He failed in the latter, so the former was all that was left to him.
Why is Scooter Libby charged with perjury, when there was not a crime in the case? Libby is on trial because he said that Tim Russert was the first person to tell him that Valerie Plame was Joe Wilson's wife and the reason for his assignment on the mission to Niger. A year after the fact, Libby identified the specific conversation in which Russert mentioned the Plame-Wilson connection and Russert remembers that conversation. Russert denies that he mentioned the Plame-Wilson connection and the prosecutor believes Russert over Libby. That's it. Never mind the total irrelevance of how Libby learned a non-criminal piece of information; the other question is, "What possible evidence is there to prove Libby guilty?" This is a, "he said, he said," case in which two men remember the same conversation differently. Without some sort of supporting documentation, Fitzgerald has no case - and everything they said or did not say in that conversation was perfectly legal to say. We have a witch trial on our hands, ladies and gentlemen. I intend to contribute to Libby's defense fund.

Movie Review: Dead Man's Chest *

2007-02-04T13:28:00.000-05:00

To make a long review short, "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" should not have been released. If you have seen the first movie, you will be sorely disappointed. (if you have not, then go and see it now and pretend that no sequel was ever made) All films of this sort need good special effects, which this one has in spades, but it boasts nothing else to recommend it. Good acting, writing, editing and direction will cover a multitude of special effects shortcomings, but the balance seldom works the other way round. For this film, the non-technical side of the ledger is empty. The characters are wooden compared with their forebears from "Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl" and the plot is as thin as a sheet of notebook paper. Davy Jones gives Captain Jack Sparrow the black spot and a struggle for colonial power prompts a search for a chest containing the beating heart of Davy Jones. Some swordfights, cannibals, a seamonster and a Jamaican fortune teller make appearances. Somehow, this movie manages to consume well over two hours of time dealing with this quest. The plot is also confusing, as the monster who is supposed to attack ships bearing a man with the black spot attacks other ships instead. Jack Sparrow gains and loses the black spot for no apparent reason. Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley give decent performances, but they get very little help from the screenwriter. It makes no sense in the least for a girl of any era to decry her deprivation of a wedding night more than the loss of her wedding. Johnny Depp, whose performance in the original movie garnered him an Oscar nomination, extends and exaggerates Captain Jack Sparrow's mannerisms. His trademark swagger - sort of a sailor swing - becomes almost effeminate in this latter installment. At the end, as the captain appears set to die, we receive the "intriguing" assurance that a third movie is on the way. How surprising.
Two or three subplots, five or six characters and thirty or forty minutes could be cut from "Dead Man's Chest" completely, and the movie would benefit considerably as a result. I think I'm being generous giving this film one star - the special effects are all that can recommend it. Do not waste your time on this movie.

Movie Review: Invincible **1/2

2007-01-31T11:12:00.000-05:00

As fans of sports and movies, Americans never seem to grow tired of Cinderella-type underdog stories. The formula is standard: the hero emerges from the gutter to reach the heights of professional and financial success. Horatio Alger became famous as an author by writing over 100 novels with this exact plot. The farther down in the gutter he starts and the higher he climbs, the better. Football is our favorite game in America and every fan dreams of playing in the NFL, maybe even as a walk-on. Amazingly, a man named Vince Papale walked on to play three seasons for the Philadelphia Eagles in the 1970s. Not only did he walk on, he did so at age 30, having not played college football. In the movie, he drives a clunking car, works as a part-time bartender, his wife just left him and her parting note told him he would never amount to anything. At the outset, then, "Invincible," the story of a real man living the Horatio Alger dream, has every element of a good and even a great movie. Mark Wahlberg apparently engaged in some sleight-of-hand by lying about his fictional college football playing days in order to get this role. He saw a good part and did not want to let anything get in his way. A determined star is always an asset to an underdog movie. Greg Kinnear does a pretty good job as Dick Vermeil, who was coaching his first NFL season after a successful stint at UCLA. Unfortunately, the writing, editing and directing leave some to be desired.
When sports fans watch movies, they want to feel as though they are on the front row of a game. The speed and finesse of a running back, the impact of a hit, and the thud of the ballcarrier hitting the ground are all features they enjoy. This is the experience that "Miracle" offers its viewers. In that movie, they filmed real hockey players doing real hockey plays and almost never used slow motion. In "Invincible," Mark Wahlberg's lack of a football carrier did not hurt his believability because anyone could have played Vince Papale in this movie. The frequent use of slow motion and the multiple cuts during scenes will leave you convinced that you have never seen one play all the way through. Even in movies, the viewers want to see feats of athletic prowess, which we do not see here. The script is unimaginative - I do not believe that a coach would chide a player, "I stuck my neck out for you," because that attitude leaves the coach much too vulnerable. In a number of respects, the makers seem to have just let the script write itself around their plot formula and ended up with an unremarkable product. There are some good training scenes and for their sake "Invincible" is worth seeing once, but it is not destined to be a classic that people watch on an annual basis.

Victory in Najaf

2007-01-30T18:08:00.000-05:00

In Najaf, a militia attempted to attack the site of the holiest Shiite mosque during Ashoura, the most sacred Shiite festival and the Iraqi Army troops held them off successfully. American air and armored support contributed, but all of the infantry were Iraqis. At the cost of five IA soldiers and two American servicemen, who died when their helicopter crashed, the Coalition held the city and killed 200-250 hostile militiamen, among them 30 Afghans and Saudis. By any standard, this battle was a victory. The apocalyptic militant sect Jund al-Samaa (Soldiers of Heaven) was nearly wiped out, but more importantly the Coalition killed their leader who claimed to be the long-awaited Mahdi. The IAs stood their ground, the casualty numbers were almost incalculably skewed, so of course the New York Times came out with the headline "Missteps by Iraqi Forces in Battle Raise Questions." This would be the equivalent of raising questions about Stonewall Jackson's competence after First Manassas, where he "stood like a stone wall," except that he lost more men in proportion than did the Iraqi Troops. The Times justified its pessimistic headline by remarking that American forces had aided the Iraqis more than was previously disclosed. That is BS, plain and simple.
We've known at least since the New York Times tipped off the terrorists on how they could protect their finances from us that our "paper of record" wants the United States to lose this war. This is a personal vendetta at the Times: the war in Iraq is Bush's war and Bush is Hitler, so there is no such thing as good news. When good news materializes in defiance, it is to be edited out or covered up, as was the case with this story.
Make no mistake about it: this is a milestone for the IAs. In one of their first major tests of will and fighting ability, they passed and protected a holy site, which they failed to do less than one year ago in Samarrah. Hua.
By the way, The New York Times has also just reprimanded their chief military correspondent, Michael Gordon, for speculating that the new troop surge might enable American forces to win the war. I kid you not.

Free Speech Saved from/by the Senate!

2007-01-20T08:49:00.000-05:00

It seems to be a rare occasion when the Legislative Branch saves us from its usurpations of power, but yesterday was one such time. Thanks to an ammendment by Senator Bennett (R) of Utah, a restriction on political speech failed to pass along with the new ethics bill. Both houses of Congress have been touting the new standards of ethics that they will champion in this new congress, so the classic busy-body notion took effect: if a little ethics reform for Congress was good, wouldn't a lot of ethics reform for everyone else be even better? This notion, ladies and gentlemen, is one reason why our founders protected the right to bear arms.
Section 220 of the ethics bill, S1, provided for the regulation of all broadcasters, bloggers, preachers, grassroots interest groups, and political communicators of every kind with an audience of 500 or more. If they ever called on their readers or listeners to call Congressmen and advocate for or against a bill, they would be classified as lobbyists and have to report their financial transactions to Congress for oversight. Failure to report to Congress would result in fines of $100,000 and 10 years in prison. In other words, this blog that you are reading would be subject to federal scrutiny if the audience ever ecclipsed 500 people. If I refused to take time out of my day to report my financial transactions, I could be put in jail and fined. This is tyranny, plain and simple. There should be no barriers blocking our right to petition Congress. When I was in Iraq, I emailed several Senators on a few occasions and our founders wanted the right to petition the government to be unabridged as the cornerstone of consensual government.
Thankfully, Senator Bennett (R) of Utah proposed an amendment that struck the offending section from the bill. His amendment passed 55-43 with two abstentions. Seven Democrats crossed the aisle to vote for free political speech: Baucus of Montana, Bayh of Indiana, Conrad and Dorgan of North Dakota, Landrieu of Louisiana, Nelson of Nebraska and Salazar of Colorado. Guess who voted for government regulation of speech like this blog you are reading? JOE LIEBERMAN (D) of Connecticut. Do not be deceived: he is a dyed-in-the-wool Big Government Liberal on everything but the War. For the moment, our speech is free. I shall advise when the next threat arises.

Al Qaeda Down III

2007-01-19T11:00:00.000-05:00

As President Bush has always made clear, the War on Terror is a global one to be fought on many fronts against all terrorist enemies who mean us harm. Any organization linked to Al Qaeda will find itself in American crosshairs or under fire from our allies. Abu Sayyaff, the Filipino terrorist group allied to Al Qaeda, has taken some lumps this past week. On Wednesday, they netted one of the biggest fish available. Abu Sulaiman, a militant wanted by the United States for kidnapping a number of tourists and beheading American citizen Guillermo Sobero, met his end fighting Filipino Special Forces troops 60 miles south of Manila. Last Saturday, Filipino forces also killed Judnam Jamalul, an Abu Sayyaff terrorist wanted for other attacks on American tourists. The last seven days have yielded seventeen Abu Sayyaff scalps. Hua.
Currently, there are four fronts where the fighting in this war is hot on a daily basis: Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and the Philipines. Tellingly, American lives are only at risk on the former two fronts. Our troops in Djibouti are training the Ethiopian Army to fight the Somali terrorists, which they have been doing effectively, and our Special Forces operators in the Philippines have enabled the armed forces there to gain the upper hand on Abu Sayyaff. Who says America has no allies? Whoever says that is lying. The truth is, we are unpopular in the increasingly impotent Western Europe, while Eastern Europe - Poland and Ukraine for example - supplies us in the Middle East with troops. In the Pacific, the Philippines, Japan, and Australia provide us key strategic allies. In view of these recent developments in the Philippines and Somalia, coupled with our freedom from terrorist attacks for five years, President Bush will etch his place in history as a successful fighter against terrorists worldwide.

Veterans to be Forgotten in New Jersey

2007-01-16T13:25:00.000-05:00

The New Jersey legislature has passed a bill unanimously that will remove the requirement that schools teach about Veterans Day, Columbus Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Commodore John Barry Day. Commodore Barry was a Revolutionary War naval hero. All of our servicemembers have volunteered to do their duty to protect Americans from the enemies that would attempt to kill us. Veterans have by definition taken one more step and gone into harm's way, possibly risking their lives and enduring the trials of family separation. In return, veterans do not ask anything more than recognition three times a year on Memorial Day, the 4th of July and Veterans Day, and the honor of having their coffins draped with the flag for which they have served, fought and in many cases, died.
This action by the New Jersey legislature reflects the liberal worldview built on white guilt. Under this interpretation of history, white people, especially Americans, have caused all of the hardships of the last several centuries and abused all other racial groups. Columbus Day and Thanksgiving honor some of the earliest pioneers who began the process by which this land became the United States of America. To our friends on the Left, these were two of the saddest days in history. By withdrawing official recognition from two days honoring veterans, the liberals who govern New Jersey are setting the stage for teaching their kids that war is never necessary and all soldiers are either blood-thirsty war-mongers or the stupid dupes of an exploitive government.
We know that veterans by and large are patriots worthy of honor and respect - that they serve at the call of our government and that the overwhelming majority of them have done so honorably. No one loves peace more than a soldier, but he has offered his services to the country at her hour of greatest need. Commodore John Barry, father of the American Navy, who captured twenty British prizes, taking some time off to fight on land in the battles of Trenton and Princeton, can now testify with many heroes that all glory is fleeting.

The First Black Oscar Winner

2007-01-15T16:34:00.000-05:00

On this day, when we remember a leader of the Civil Rights movement, it pays to take note of the first major barrier that African-Americans broke down in 1939. Hattie McDaniel won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her performance in "Gone With the Wind," an epic film about the fall of the Old South and the struggle of one family in Georgia for survival during Reconstruction. Many of the Civil Rights leaders of today wish that "Gone With the Wind" had never been made and they marvel at the complicity of several black actors and actresses in the making of such a film. The movie depicts owners with kindly attitudes towards slaves and portrays three slaves out of a full plantation who choose to stay with their owners after the war. Historically, it is true that some slaves stayed with their former owners, although it is not PC to admit it. When asked why she played a number of roles as a maid, Hattie McDaniel retorted, "I'd rather play a maid than be one."
"Gone With the Wind" was a pioneering film in another way. Although not the first epic about the Civil War - that distinction belongs to "The Birth of a Nation," a silent film made in 1915 - "Gone With the Wind" was one of the first films in which all of the actors and actresses playing black characters were actually black people - not white people in black face. The answer to the question about the performers' complicity in playing slaves and carpetbaggers is simple. "Gone With the Wind" provided employment for a host of black actors and actresses near the end of the Great Depression. Rest assured, if you were to ask any of the performers at the time, they all would express their sincere appreciation for a movie with so many roles for them. Hattie McDaniel, Butterfly McQueen, (as the unforgettable Prissy) and the actors who played Pork, Uncle Peter, and Big Sam, as well as the extras playing field hands and carpetbaggers all benefitted materially from the making of this movie.
The controversy surrounding "Gone With the Wind," which stresses the indignity of the portrayals of black characters, would place the hypothetical dignity of the community above the material financial benefits for real members of the community. Fitting as it is to note, those actors and actresses who chose the indignity of playing slaves in order to gain employment showed exactly the same spirit as Scarlett did when she chose repeatedly to profit at the cost of her dignity. Scarlett's vow could speak for them all, "I'll never be hungry again!"

14 Card-Carrying Carterites Jump Ship!

2007-01-14T13:11:00.000-05:00

14 prominent Democrats have resigned from the advisory board of the Carter Center in Atlanta. Among the resigning parties are Michael Coles and Cathy Steinberg, both of whom ran spirited races for Congress against Republican incumbents in the 1990s. President Jimmy Carter, Iran's favorite object of ridicule, has written a book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, which, has attracted a great deal of negative attention to the Carter Center. As the title suggests, Mr. Carter blames the Israelis for the 60-year strife in Palestine/Israel and accuses the Israeli regime of establishing an Apartheid-like society treating Palestinians as second-class citizens. By Carter's recollection, every problem that the Israelis and Palestinians have encountered was somehow the fault of the Israelis. The Palestinians have elected Hamas to power, a party that vows the total destruction of Israel as a Jewish state and uses suicide bombers to kill women and children in market places, but Israelis have sometimes searched Palestinians for weapons at the border and thereby inconvenienced them. In view of these two tactics, some observers would say that the side which does the bombing is the bad side. The letter of resignation is here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009510
Carter has built his post-presidential reputation on helping Habitat for Humanity, attacking Ronald Reagan and defending the legitimacy of Banana Republic elections. (ie. third world elections that MIGHT have been rigged inasmuch as the incumbent candidate got 99% of the vote) Now, he justifies his detractors who criticize him for opposing American support for democracies around the world. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East (Iraq and Afghanistan are working on it.) so we support her efforts and the right of Israelis to live. In order to side with the Palestinians fully, as Carter appears to do, one must support or overlook their incendiary rhetoric and their complete rejection of compromise solutions to their disputes with Israel.
Please do not start asking, "Is Carter an anti-Semite?" That question is as irrelevant as it is unprovable. Truly, it does not matter what the state of his heart is. We Conservatives hate being called "racist, bigot, homophobe" every time we make a statement against Affirmative Action, so slinging incendiary labels at our opponents is the wrong tactic for us to employ. It is sufficient to say that Carter is wrong on this issue. His facts concerning the history of the conflict are incorrect, his perspective clouded, his impression of the benevolence of Hamas naive. In short, he makes an inept Unofficial Assistant Secretary of State for Peace in the World and I wish with all of my heart that he could be fired from his current self-appointed position. 14 of his former advisors now agree with me.

The Speaker's First Scandal

2007-01-12T10:03:00.000-05:00

We are told that the gavel of the Speaker of the House is now in the hands of The Children. Nancy Pelosi proclaims that everything she does is for The Children, who now have an advocate who can claim the impressive credentials of mother and grandmother. As is the case with everything else, the approaching minimum wage hike is for The Children, whose parents work for minimum wage to feed and clothe them. The Children will eat better food and have warm clothes and reliable shelter everywhere in America and in our territories. Everywhere, that is, except one territory. Somehow, although the North Mariana Islands are covered under this minimum wage increase, American Samoa alone is exempted. I guess The Children don't live there.
Actually, two companies with major interests in American Samoa have their headquarters in Nancy Pelosi's district. Del Monte, which makes canned fruit, and Starkist, which produces canned tuna, both have interests in American Samoa and Representative Pelosi is doing them a favor by exempting their territory from this minimum wage hike. So, the Speaker's new motto is: "This gavel is in the hands of The Children, unless they are the children of the employees of my constituents."
The story on Foxnews.com said that the lowest-paid workers in America will get their first pay raise in a decade. This is not true. If any worker who started at minimum wage ten years ago is still earning minimum wage, he probably has an incarceration or a history of misconduct to blame for it. 0.6% of our workers make minimum wage - most of them teenagers working their first jobs. As a result of this bill, all of us will face higher prices at fast food restaurants and retail stores - anywhere with employees making minimum wage. Companies will face an across-the-board increase in costs of production because labor is one of their biggest costs - usually THE biggest. Consequently, there will be fewer jobs available to teenagers because employing them just got a lot more expensive. This minimum wage increase is a favor to the Labor Unions that have contracts coming up for renewal this year. As the minimum wage for unskilled labor goes up, they will make lofty demands for increases in their skilled workers' wages. Thus, we'll have higher prices everywhere. As they begin by fixing the price of unskilled labor, this Democrat-led Congress is en route on a project of detriment to the American economy. Drug price-fixes are next.

Strike in Somalia

2007-01-09T17:30:00.000-05:00

A raid in Somalia by an American AC-130 gunship (one of the deadliest air-to-surface weapons in existence) attempted to kill the Al Qaeda leader Fazul Abdullah Mohammed. Although he was not killed, other Al Qaeda operatives likely were. Fazul Abdullah Mohammed occupies the FBI's Most Wanted List as the chief suspect for the mid-1990s bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. (Remember those terrorist bombings that President Clinton ignored?) The U. S. Air Force conducted this raid in Somalia with the full cooperation and permission of Somali Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Gedi, which is a positive sign in at least three areas.
First, it is good to know that President Bush has maintained his resolve to kill Al Qaeda leaders wherever they may hide on the face of the earth. Understanding Al Qaeda to be international enemy #1, he saw no reason to delay this attack for the sake of another game of asking the UN for permission and being told to grab his ankles. Second, it is extremely encouraging that a Muslim such as Mr. Gedi would allow Americans to conduct these strikes in his country. Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan is often much more critical of American activities. Third, it is clear that President Bush has avoided the pitfalls of politically correct warfare that hamstrung Bill Clinton's campaign in Somalia. The AC-130 was the specific gunship that General Garrison requested for his Mogadishu operation in 1993. President Clinton denied his request, explaining that, like armored vehicles, the AC-130 would, "send the wrong message" to the Somalis. The Somalis, of course, only interpreted a message of weakness when American forces went into battle unable to clear streets from the air.
The only message that the U.S. military ever needs to communicate to other nations is this: You can make no better friend - you can pick no worse enemy. Hua.
On the grand scale, Somalia is slipping out of the grasp of the Islamists who shelter Al Qaeda operatives. The United States Armed Forces have trained the Ethiopian Army, which has recently driven the Islamists out of Mogadishu and the other major cities of Somalia. Not only have our advisers prevented Al Qaeda from establishing another safe haven, but they have done so without the loss of American lives. Our next president will be hard-pressed to prosecute this Global War on Terror as effectively as has President Bush. W clearly grasps the concept of a global front involving the sea and the air as well as land. Read Shadow War by Richard Miniter for details.

A Pioneer in College Football

2007-01-09T15:46:00.000-05:00

Tim Tebow, the backup quarterback for the University of Florida, who scored one touchdown and passed for another one last night against Ohio State, comes from a minority group that gets a very small share of attention. Tebow was home-schooled through high school, but still managed to get recruited by a prestigious Division I-A team. He was fortunate to live in Florida, where the law allows home-schooled students to play on public school squads. The parents who choose to educate their own kids at home pay the same taxes that parents of public-schooled students pay. Home schoolers have a right to reap some benefits for the taxes that they pay.
Sixteen states give home-schoolers equal access to public school sports programs, and the Alabama legislature recently considered and tabled (postponed indefinitely) a law that would have made the count 17.
The NCAA is notorious for refusing to grant home-schooled students academic eligibility. A gymnast in the mid-'90s applied and got accepted to a college in Illinois, but the NCAA refused to recognize any of her high school work. They made her take the GED, but she persevered and managed a 4.0 GPA for her first year of college. I'd say she was a few notches above illiterate. Jason Taylor currently plays Safety for the Miami Dolphins. He was home-schooled, but played football in the public school system and got accepted to the University of Akron. The NCAA revoked his scholarship over the academic credit issue, but after some litigation the organization relented and permitted him to play. Now, he makes a living playing football.
The transformation by which home-schooled students can gain recognition for academic work and gradually near a state of equal footing with their public-schooled counterparts will continue to be slow and cumbersome, but Tim Tebow has just given us an excellent icon that everyone will recognize. Hua.
I can't resist: one more story. My best friend in high school applied to Berry College in Rome, Georgia, with a deadly SAT score, (1400+) but the school refused to recognize his high school work and made him take the GED. He graduated from Berry four years later as the VALEDICTORIAN of his class. Obviously, not all home schoolers reach such heights, but those who can do so seldom get the benefit of the doubt.

Movie Review Superman Returns ***

2007-01-07T15:52:00.000-05:00

I found the latest installment of the Superman franchise entertaining and action-packed - well worth seeing. All such long-range sequels face at least three daunting challenges: casting actors who can equal the original stars, developing a new plot that increases the depth of the characters, and if possible, adding new special effects that the originals did not include. In all three challenges, "something new" is the imperative for the creators. In all three areas, "Superman Returns" delivers.
The new Superman, amazingly, lives up to Christopher Reeve's standard. Brandon Routh makes no changes at all to the character of Superman and the director clearly arranged several scenes to mimic the previous movies. Perry even says, "Great Caesar's Ghost!" which was his favorite expression from the old TV series. Kevin Spacey is a villain equal to Gene Hackman in both charisma and sense of humor. Jarel is only a voice among the crystals, so the late Marlon Brando manages to reprise as Superman's father. Kate Bosworth was less-than-inspiring as Lois, but she was the cast's only weak link. Having seen only the first two Superman movies, this film picked up where they left off and never attempted to do too much with action, characters or effects.
The basic plot involves Superman's arrival on earth after a five-year disappearance. Naturally, Lex Luthor has a new diabolical scheme that is, amazingly, bigger and more sinister than any he has tried before. The personal tensions between Superman and Lois over his abandonment of her without explanation gets some treatment, but avoids tedium, which is extremely important for an action movie. The sudden re-appearance of Clark Kent after five years goes unexplained, which is the only real weakness in the plot structure. On the other hand, he is so unremarkable to his co-workers that no one really notices him, so the few brief words of "welcome back" that his fellow journalists say are understandable.
Finally, the special effects in "Superman Returns" are spectacular. The scenes of Superman using his X-Ray vision look exactly as I would imagine X-Ray vision and provide the new feature for which sequels always strive. When he flys, he uses his arms to steer himself, which makes his flying more dynamic and realistic than were flying scenes in previous movies. The typical earthquake/explosion/storm effects seem routine now, but the creators did them all very well also.
On the moral front, it is definitely 2006. In this world, people date, but don't necessarily get married, and have children with or without plans for marriage. The film also communicates a positive message about self-sacrifice. Lois questions whether the world needs a "savior" and Superman daily risks his life to save the world. His climactic self-sacrificial deed is not one you will want to miss.

Cleveland Imam Deported

2007-01-05T18:57:00.000-05:00

The story is that an Imam from Cleveland, OH, Fawaz Damra, was convicted of a crime in 2004 and has now been deported to Palestinian territories. For those of you in Metter, GA, an Imam is a Muslim religious leader. Now, why do you suppose and Islamic leader would be deported? If you just thought, "he had ties to terrorist groups," you need sensitivity training for your Islamophobic racism. (You say Islam is not a race? details, details.) You are correct, of course: when he applied for American citizenship in 1994, Damra lied about his ties to Palestinian Islamic Jihad. His indictment specifies multiple Palestinian groups that he had failed to disclose on penalty of perjury in his naturalization paperwork, as well as an assault charge from 1991 that he witheld. The US State Department has listed the PIJ as a terrorist group since 1989. A tape of Damra's 1991 speech in Chicago calling on all Muslims to kill, "the sons of monkeys and pigs, the Jews," also gained prominence recently. Incidentally, he had also signed his paperwork on penalty of perjury claiming that he had never incited violence for reasons of race, religion, code or creed. Convicted of perjury in 2004, Damra has now been deported.
Damra had worked previously at a mosque in Brooklyn, New York, and his successor, Abdel Rahman, is a man you might have heard of. Abdel Rahman now sits in prison convicted of plotting to blow up New York City landmarks in 1995. That mosque in Brooklyn is a very wholesome civic institution.
Ironically, this deportation happened on the day our first Muslim Congressman, Mr. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, took the oath of office with his hand on a Quran. Interestingly, his biography at his website makes no mention whatsoever of his Islamic faith.

The Most Powerful Woman

2007-01-04T16:24:00.000-05:00

The most powerful woman in America today is Oprah Winfrey. Nancy Pelosi may hold the top post in the House of Representatives, but ask yourself how many people actually pay close attention to what goes on in Washington. Oprah, by contrast, motivates her audience to action on a daily basis. There are two women in this nation who can produce best-selling books with 100% reliability: Ann Coulter and Oprah Winfrey. Coulter hits the best-seller lists with every book she writes, but Oprah enjoys far more influence. Every book Oprah publicizes in her book club hits the best-seller lists. Her endorsement has turned several authors from obscure people into best-selling successes. That is real power, ladies and gentlemen.
Due to the popularity of her show and the loyalty of her viewers, Oprah is very wealthy, but she neither boasts about her wealth nor lectures all of us about how greedy we are. A generous philanthropist, Oprah simply walks the walk of giving to those in need and leaves most of the talking to the pundits. You don't see her going on everyone else's show to plug for causes. She advocates causes on her show and puts her money where her mouth is. I don't have to agree with everything she says to admire her ethic.
Recently, Oprah has invested $40 million into a school for girls in South Africa. This academy provides excellent living facilities, a good education and encouragement for girls to excell academically in a nation troubled by rampant AIDS. Into a hopeless place, Ms. Winfrey is introducing hope for poor girls out of her own pocket. I only learned of this project when Americans raised objections on E-News last night. "The facilities are too nice, they don't need this much space," some were saying. With smaller facilities, they could accomodate more students, etc. The comments at Hip Hop News ranged from the cynical to the hysterical: http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/news/id.4767/title.oprah-builds-40-million-school-in-south-africa
Instead of applauding her generosity, Oprah's critics question her methodology, or complain that she spent the money over there instead of over here. Oprah counters that she wants to give these South African girls the best education and assistance in growing up that she can. Her critics think they can tell her better ways that she can spend her own money. When they make $40 million, they will be free to decide how to spend it.
The betrayer Judas once criticized a deed of generosity because he was a thief and envied the loss of wealth. What motive do you suppose animates Oprah's critics?

Victors in Defeat

2007-01-02T12:44:00.000-05:00

The Michigan Wolverines have completed a very difficult season. Counting the Rose Bowl, Michigan's record of 11-2 is respectable, although well short of the hopes of the players and fans of the Maize and Blue. Southern California, coming off of an annoying defeat at the hands of UCLA, had the motivation to dominate the game.
In another way, this season has proven emotional and disappointing to the Michigan community. On their helmets for the Rose Bowl, Michigan players wore a decal inscribed with the number "48" over the name "Bo." President Ford, whose number 48 Michigan retired, died the week before the Rose Bowl, the big game in which the Wolverines hoped to make their case for a #2 final ranking. The legendary Coach Bo Schembechler, who coached Michigan to several Big Ten titles and one undefeated season in 1963, died earlier this season the week before undefeated Michigan challenged undefeated Ohio State. Thus, both of Michigan's losses came after the death of a man significant in their storied history.
Michigan's loss caps a disappointing bowl season for the Big Ten. Even after Ohio State wins the National Championship next week, the Big Ten will have a record of 3-4. I expected Iowa to lose, but Purdue and Michigan both performed well below their expectations. Minnesota yielded to a record-setting comeback by Texas Tech. As a conference, the Big Ten needs to give a better account. Next year, I predict that the Big Ten will not repeat the mistake of finishing its regular season by Thanksgiving weekend. Several teams looked stale and played with less brilliance than they had displayed earlier. Michigan is supposed to have one of the best defenses in the NCAA, but they showed little justification for their reputation last night. Mike Hart will return next season, so Michigan will still have a good running game. We'll wait for next year eagerly.

Tookie and Saddam

2006-12-29T17:45:00.000-05:00

In yet another impressive demonstration of his understanding of how the American media react to meaningless symbols, Saddam Hussein has adopted the Tookie Williams strategy as an attempt at avoiding the gallows. His act of writing a letter telling the Iraqi people to renounce hatred mirrors the stunt by Tookie Williams in which he wrote a few children's books about not joining gangs. For the record, Tookie Williams founded the Crips Gang and videotaped himself killing four people with a shotgun. His guilt for murder was not in doubt, so that even the State of California executed him last year. Two of his adherents who attended the execution immediately shouted upon his death, "The State of California just killed an innocent man!" In this case, "innocent," means a man demonstrably as guilty as sin itself, but remorseful and deserving of a second chance.
Now, with his letter, Saddam is apologizing for the myriads of people whom he oppressed and killed, using poisonous gas in some cases. But he says he is sorry and calls for reconciliation! That has to count for something, doesn't it?! In fact, Saddam's letter has gained him exactly the prize that Tookie's children's books earned him: Today, Jesse Jackson has declared that Saddam should not be executed in a story carried by the Associated Press.
Congratulations, Saddam, you have succeeded in your use of the Tookie Strategy and you will soon be another martyr of the Left, a victim of the two-headed monster American Imperialism, whose faces look remarkably like those of George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. For those of us with functioning brains, we will know that the world is a safer place at the moment your neck snaps.

Our Most Athletic President

2006-12-28T13:09:00.000-05:00

Gerald Ford has died at the very ripe old age of 93 and some change, just a few weeks older than the age Ronald Reagan had reached when he departed this mortal coil. What do our two longest-living presidents have in common besides both being Republicans and running head-to-head in the last close primary race in 1976? Answer: they both played college football, but that is barely half of the story. Reagan played for Eureka College and cut a strong enough figure to play the Gipper, whose name he wore for the rest of his life, in a movie. Ford played center for no less a powerhouse than the Maize and Blue of the University of Michigan. As their center, he starred for Coach Harry Kipke as the Wolverines rolled to consecutive undefeated seasons and National Championships in 1932 and 1933. As a senior in 1934, he earned the honor of team MVP and played in the college All-Star game. Michigan has only retired five numbers in its history, but #48, in honor of Gerald Ford, is one of them. I had heard, "He played college football," but did not know until now that Ford turned down offers to play for the Detroit Lions and the Green Bay Packers so that he could go to Yale Law School, where he finished third in his class. Do not be in doubt. When people call Ford, "one of our most fit presidents," they are paying him an insult out of ignorance or by intention. Gerald Ford was completely peerless for physical fitness among presidents, as his longevity can testify.
How is it that a bona fide star athlete developed an image as a klutz and a man who made distinguished marks at Yale Law as a dunce? The answer is very simple: he ran for president from the wrong party. Chevy Chase with his Saturday Night Live bits taught us a lesson about the power of mockery. Rest in peace, Wolverine. You are free of mockery now.

NCAA Football Re-alignment

2006-12-25T16:50:00.000-05:00

Technically, there are two undefeated teams in this year's season of NCAA Division I-A football. Ohio State will either clinch its National Championship against Florida on January 8, or we will watch highlights of the greatest upset in history for decades to come. Boisie State has a record of 12-0, but every commentator expects the Broncos to lose to the Oklahoma Sooners on New Year's Day. The trouble with Boisie State's record is that their schedule lacked a truly challenging opponent. The best opponent that the Broncos beat was Hawaii, which is now ranked 23rd. Hawaii defeated the unranked Arizona State Sun Devils in the Hawaii Bowl, which highlights a schedule problem that plagues both Hawaii and Boisie State. Even a so-called bowl victory for Hawaii does not solidify a case for the Warriors to be ranked in the top 25. How many ranked teams has Hawaii beaten this year? Zero. How many ranked teams has Boisie State beaten? Counting Hawaii, One. Providentially, the big conference that suffers from the worst case of mediocrity lives next door to these two over-achievers. The PAC-10 is a mere hop, skip and a jump from the WAC. Currently 0-2 in 2006 bowls, having suffered one defeat and one utter massacre, (BYU had Oregon Duck Soup for dinner on December 21, 38-8) the PAC-10 is in need of more competitive teams. Boisie State, having won the WAC for five years running, but still gets labelled, "untried," is in equally desperate need of competitive opponents. Fortunately, the PAC-10 has one team that would never be missed except at other schools' homecomings.
I propose a trade of Boisie State to the PAC-10 in exchange for Stanford, who has a record of 1-11 this year, but they have never been good in football, even in distant memory. Stanford likely suffers from higher academic standards than those enforced by a number of other teams. The trade would give the PAC-10 another competitive team to compensate in the years (like this one) when few PAC-10 teams are good. It may be unlikely that the NCAA and school and conference officials would accept this trade idea, but this much is certain: if Boisie State had gone undefeated while playing USC and CAL this year, they would be playing Ohio State for the National Championship on January 8.

Taliban Down and Al Qaeda Down II

2006-12-23T08:51:00.000-05:00

We have heard troubling news about Pakistan growing linguini-spined in the face of Taliban warlords who have taken full control of a Pakistani province directly adjacent to Afghanistan. While the Taliban may hope to use this safe haven to raid into Afghanistan, one leader did not get very far over the border on this past Tuesday. An American air strike killed Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani, the treasurer of the Taliban and a military leader, on Tuesday in Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan. He was a member of "co-equals" ranked immediately below Mullah Omar, basically tied with others for second in command. Some commentators are predicting a military disaster in Afghanistan in early 2007, but they were predicting the same debacle in 2001 before our troops went to Afghanistan. Is it possible that our soldiers are better at this job than they think?
In other news, our soldiers in Mosul nabbed an Al Qaeda leader whom they did not identify in Mosul, Iraq. As strange as it sounds, another Al Qaeda leader has been caught in Iraq, of all places. Don't ask me how he got there - it isn't my department.
In the wake of continued violence in Iraq, President Bush has announced that he wants to send more troops to the theatre. Perhaps this move seems like a late one that should have happened a while ago, but a little perspective is in order. President Bush's political adversaries were saying "quagmire," "Vietnam," and "military failure," long before any such thing existed in Iraq or Afghanistan with an obvious eye on political implications. When their nay-saying was proved false in 2001 and 2003 by the extremely rapid conquests of the capitals of Afghanistan and Iraq, they did not change their tune, but instead predicted a disaster that was about to happen. Now that a change in strategy does appear to be wise in Iraq, the Left is calling for unconditional surrender. Is it any surprise that the Bush administration has not listened to its critics very often? They are now celebrating five years of non-stop cheering for our defeat.

Rape Charges on Duke Players Dropped!

2006-12-22T17:32:00.000-05:00

District Attorney Mike Nifong has officially dropped the rape charges on the three Duke University lacrosse players, but maintains plans to charge them with kidnapping and other sex offenses. On March 13, 2006, the team had a party which involved a couple of strippers, one of whom accused Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann of raping and sodomizing her. In the immediate wake of her accusations, law enforcement authorities examined her body and found evidence of sexual intercourse, but no DNA tests matched any of the defendants. Earlier this week, another round of DNA tests became public, which showed that the accuser sported the DNA of five men on her person - none of whom were the defendants. Nifong had originally violated the procedures for photo lineups when he showed the accuser only pictures of Duke lacrosse players. The regulation dictates that lineups for a witness to pick out the perpetrator include some innocent non-suspects in order to judge the reliability of the witness. The way Nifong rigged the deck, every face was a possible suspect, so whichever three faces she pointed out became his rape suspects.
The online Fox News story deserves an "Understatement of the Month" award for this passage:
"In recent months, Nifong has been vilified by some lawyers and members of the community for pressing ahead with what appeared to many to be a remarkably weak case." (Never mind the players whom he has vilified.)
In other words, everyone with a brain except Mike Nifong, Al Sharpton, the New Black Panthers and Johnny Cochran's Ghost can see clearly that Nifong has absolutely no case of any kind against these three players. He did not drop the rape charge until DNA evidence completely removed the possibility that they could have raped the aspiring victim. The word "aspiring" is intentional - she wants to be the new Rosa Parks, but she is a counterfeit.
About the DNA evidence, understand that when you shake hands, you leave some of your DNA on the other person's hand. This latest test means that Nifong cannot prove that the three defendants, whose names he has besmirched constantly for nine months, even touched the stripper. Another stripper who attended the same party has said that nothing happened. One defendant has bank documents showing that he was withdrawing money from an ATM machine at the precise moment that he supposedly raped the stripper. The cab driver who took him to the ATM confirms his story.
The only evidence Nifong has of anything is the accuser's story, which she has changed no fewer than twelve times. She might have been assaulted three times or twenty times, depending on which version of her story she propagates. More importantly, the law since Bible times has held that a conviction can only come from the testimony of two or more witnesses. Nifong has no case and well knows that he has no case, but he has gotten such good press from this "white men rape a black woman" story that he will continue to milk it for all of the PR that he can get.
I do not usually sympathize with guys who hire strippers to entertain them. The players could have avoided this situation easily in the first place, but if they are innocent of crimes then they need to go free, their names need to be cleared and the DA needs to face disciplinary action for his misconduct in the lineup situation, among others.

Honors Pouring In (A Satirical Acceptance)

2006-12-19T15:58:00.000-05:00

I must say that at this time I am grateful for and humbled by the prestigious honor recently bestowed on me for writing this blog. Time magazine has named me Person of the Year, which is probably the highest-profile honor I have ever received. Since I do not affix my name to this blog, the plaque in the Hall of Fame that chronicles the people whom Time honors with this award will note me simply as "Bountyhawk," which is fitting and appropriate. I sent the editor a note to make sure he/she understands that my blog name is one word, not two. As you the reader probably know, the award for Person of the Year is not mine alone. I will point out the distinction of my achievement, however. Of all of my co-winners, how many can say that they won this award after less than four months of blogging?
I would like to thank God, my parents, my teachers and professors in school who taught me how to read and write effectively. I have to thank Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter for the contributions they have made to my style of rhetoric and I must note James Taranto and Jonah Goldberg for their brilliant columns that have informed my opinions and helped shape my worldview. Thanks also to Victor Davis Hanson and Richard Miniter for their excellent works on military history. Last but the opposite of least, a poshumous tribute is due to Ronald Reagan, the Gipper himself, who won the Cold War and gives us cause for hope today. I cannot express how amazing it is to share the honor of Person of the Year with so many of my role models. Thank you very much, and God bless America.

Operation Square Garden

2006-12-17T07:38:00.000-05:00

Well, we had a civil war break out for about five minutes last night in New York. The extreme poverty in which our urban young men are forced to live has prompted another brawl. These poor inner-city boys face such a struggle for survival, which none of us can understand. They are victims of the unforgiving society that devalues and disrespects them. Of course, this script may not work particularly well when it concerns millionaires playing in the NBA, but we all know from drive-be media coverage that violence comes from poverty. These players must have delusions of poverty.
Here is the play-by-play: Mardy Collins of the Knicks threw a flagrant foul on J.R. Smith of the Denver Nuggets with 1:30 left in the game. Smith jumped up showing signs of aggression and the Knicks' Nate Robinson escalated the fight, jumping between Smith and Collins, trash talking and throwing some shoves and faux punches. Smith tackled Robinson into the seats and the two rolled around a bit before being pulled back to their feet and restrained. The fight appeared to be over when the Nuggets' Carmelo Anthony threw a sucker-punched Collins in the face and ran backwards up the court as the Knicks' Jared Jeffries gave chase. NBA officials in suits poured onto the court to restrain the players, which they did using physical force. In a demonstration of NBA Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action discipline, all ten players on the floor were ejected from the game, including the ones did no fighting. David Lee spent the whole time trying to restrain the fighters of both teams, but out he went, ejected just like the thugs.
Knicks Coach Isaiah Thomas blamed the Nuggets' coach for the brawl becaust he kept his starters in the game during a 19-point blowout. Robinson explained, "it escalated," rather than, "I escalated the fight." Thomas evidently will not discipline his own players, but he will likely keep his job because he is the Knicks president as well. Maybe that's why we have separation of powers in government. About those delusions of poverty, Carmelo Anthony, who threw the sucker punch, has been caught in possession of marijuana and made an appearance last year in a drug dealer's video. He had to add brawling to his gangsta portfolio. Now all that remains is for him to bust a cap from his nine in his b- I mean woman. Note to all young women: stay away from Carmelo Anthony.

Casualties in October

2006-12-14T13:17:00.000-05:00

You have probably heard about how bloody October was for our soldiers in Iraq. The liberals said that the high loss of life showed that our mission in Iraq was failing, whereas some conservatives believed that October's violence reflected a surge aimed at affecting our Congressional elections. Now that the casualty numbers from November are in, we see the October surge in violence as just that: a temporary surge. The Coalition suffered 110 deaths of all kinds in October, including 102 from hostile action, which places October 2006 in a tie with November 2003 as our fourth-worst month thus far. September showed 76 losses and November 77, so the spike in October appears to be a surge that the insurgents arranged to influence our elections. Make no mistake about how savvy our enemies are about using our own media against us. They got CNN to air video footage of sniper teams killing American soldiers, so in that case Ted Turner's network did their publicity job for them.
What you haven't heard is that the casualty numbers for 2006 - even if December is our worst month ever - will fall far short of the casualty numbers from 2005 and 2004. As you know, the media calculates casualties by including all deaths, lumping hostile deaths in with vehicle accidents and illnesses. I have been recording casualties noting a separation between hostile and non-hostile causes of death. We have lost so few men to non-hostile causes of death in the last year that the numbers of total casualties are coming down. Our hostile losses are about the same, and could possibly surpass hostile losses from 2005, but the total is all you ever hear about, so it looks as though the insurgents are killing fewer of our troops. Ironically, the favorite tactic of the anti-war drive-by media is backfiring.

A Criminal Re-elected, Commemorated, etc.

2006-12-13T16:52:00.000-05:00

William Jefferson, a man caught months ago with $90,000 in bribe money hidden in his freezer (the precise source of that bribe is well-documented) has won re-election to his seat. Any guesses about his party affiliation? Yes, Jefferson is a Democrat from Louisiana who refused to resign his seat when the bribe money turned up in Tupperware containers in his freezer. His constituents did not see his criminal conduct as any cause to oust him. He is a victim of society, the descendant of slaves after all.
In other crime-related news, the House of Representatives passed a resolution days ago, "condemning the decision of St. Denis, France, to name a street in honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal, the convicted murderer of Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner." The motion, which did not carry the weight of sanctions or any other action, produced a landslide 368-31-8 vote along predictable lines. Of the 31 lawmakers who voted for commemorating the murderer, and eight who voted "Present," all were Democrats, naturally. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, an outgoing lame duck who yesterday produced a bill to impeach President Bush, voted for commemorating cop killing and John Lewis, a Georgia Representative who was beaten by police on the Civil Rights march in Selma forty years ago, voted "Present."
Looking at the demographics of the Congressmen favoring commemorations for murderers, none came from South Carolina, I am proud to report, but the plurality reside in New York. Nine of New York's Representatives voted for commemorating a cop-killer, more than the combined total of eight Representatives from the eleven states of the Confederate South. Out of the 39 who voted for commemorating Mumia Abu-Jamal, 1 Representative is Asian by race, 4 are Hispanic, 13 are White and 21 are Black, including 4 of the 5 officers of the Congressional Black Caucus. (CBC) The entire CBC boasts exactly 39 members, which means that over half of the CBC voted to commemorate a murderer of a policeman. I need not mention that this voting pattern is far out of proportion with the rest of Congress. Opposing criminals should not be a partisan issue at all, but evidently a strong majority of one certain group of Representatives cannot find it in their hearts to condemn the murder of police officers.

Book Review: Dereliction of Duty

2006-12-12T08:50:00.000-05:00

I took advantage of my first few days after final exams to finish Dereliction of Duty: Johnson, McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Lies That Led to Vietnam by H. R. McMaster. Counting appendices, this book runs 480 pages with small print, so it is not by any means light reading that you can take in over a weekend. Chronicling the onset of the Vietnam War from Kennedy's administration to the large commitment of troops in 1965, Dereliction of Duty follows the action minute by minute, meeting by meeting as Presidents Kennedy and Johnson installed the generals that would tell them what they wanted to hear and Robert McNamara implemented his new vision of warfare. Of the five members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Kennedy and Johnson replaced all but the Marine Corps Commandant at least once each in order to weed out the opponents of their new and untried (and eventually disastrous) theories.
"Graduated Pressure" was McNamara's brainchild. A quantitative data analyst who had most recently worked for Ford Motor Company, McNamara had absolutely no tactical or strategic training, although he had worked in logistics during World War II. In logistics, the application of certain quantities of food, fuel, bullets and supplies can equip an Army unit: as supplies go up, the soldiers' needs go down. McNamara and President Johnson imagined that they could apply the same principles to warfare. With the right experimentation, as their insertion of troops went up, North Vietnamese support for the Viet Cong would go down. Of course, no wars in history have ever worked this way. When one side raises its commitment, the other side raises its commitment, with victory the prize for which no price is too high to pay. The Joint Chiefs retorted repeatedly early on that the United States should invest enough troops to win the Vietnam War or pull out completely. At one pivotal moment, the Joint Chiefs asked for 500,000 troops and Johnson replied that he would give them 15,000, comparing the Joint Chiefs to a farmer asking for a loan from the banker, "Mr. McNamara."
McMaster does not excuse the Joint Chiefs of blame - placing a little more at their feet than I would - but highlights their complicity in President Johnson's bald-faced lies to Congress about the number of troops required and the cost of the War in Vietnam. Johnson always considered his politics ahead of all else, so he put off any decision on Vietnam commitment in 1964 until after the election. In 1965, he deceived Congress and the American people about his investments of men and materiel in Vietnam until after his Great Society programs had passed.
Dereliction of Duty is an excellent, well-researched, highly detailed history of the beginning of the Vietnam War. McMaster does not belabor the point that Johnson's lies led to the deaths of tens of thousands of American servicemen, but faithfully reports the process that brought about the American commitment of troops to Vietnam. A sobering account for any strategist, the lesson of Dereliction of Duty is that the civilians who control the military have a responsibility to understand the nature of warfare, to learn the lessons of history rather than reading one book, The Uncertain Trumpet, and deciding that everything in the world has changed and history does not matter. Kennedy's unbridled enthusiasm for The Uncertain Trumpet shows the danger of electing presidents because they are young and good-looking.

She Belongs to the Ages

2006-12-11T19:08:00.000-05:00

Jeane Kirkpatrick has died. A former Democrat who, like Ronald Reagan, switched parties when her party proved too affectionate for Communists, Kirkpatrick served as Ambassador the UN under the Gipper. A co-founder with Jack Kemp of the Empower America think tank, she authored a controversial article in the November 1979 issue of Commentary titled, "Dictatorships and Double Standards." Her article delivered a scathing critique of the Carter Administration's foreign policy, in which the President and his State department never applied their normal standards for human rights to Communist dictators. Former Governor Ronald Reagan read the article and contacted Kirkpatrick, eager to appoint her as his ambassador to the UN, should he win election in 1980. When Reagan defeated Carter soundly, he made Jeane Kirkpatrick one of the best and most decisive diplomats to serve as UN Ambassador from the United States.
The most enduring legacy of Jeane Kirkpatrick is probably the phrase she coined that seems extremely applicable today as the Iraq Surrender Group produces its report. Her speech from 1984 highlighted a number of positions the Liberals had taken, blaming American policies of Communist aggression and she observed repeatedly, "With them, it is always Blame America First." As we accept the resignation of John Bolton from the post she held, we observe with some sorrow the loss of one outstanding diplomat and the passing of another great public figure. Kirkpatrick understood the times in which she lived and worked effectively against Soviet aggression, calling an acquisitive agenda by its correct name. We need leaders like her now more than ever. The link to her article "Dictatorships and Double Standards" is below:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.aip?id=6189

Child Molester Gets Probation!

2006-12-09T16:15:00.000-05:00

We all knew that this headline would appear eventually. Months ago in Vermont, Judge Edward Cashman sentenced a serial child molester to 60 days, explaining that he did not believe in punishment for child molestation. A month later, it happened again in Vermont. This week, the news came out of Missouri that Kenneth Slaght, who raped his 6-year-old step granddaughter, received a sentence of 5 years' probation.
Judge Larry Meyer, an elected judge who calls himself a Republican, refuses to discuss his irrational impulse to turn a dangerous child molester loose on the law-abiding community. In truth, Judge Meyer probably fears for Mr. Slaght's life because prisoners have in the past killed such evil people. If only he had the same sympathy for Slaght's next victim. Governor Blunt of Missouri is now campaigning for the legislature to pass Jessica's Law for his signature, which would mandate minimum prison sentences of 30 years for child rape. We need such sentencing guidelines when our judges commit such grotesque miscarriages of justice. Judge Meyer needs to be impeached.
This is the worldview of Social Justice: a crime is a tragedy that is no one's fault and has two victims: the perpetrator and the victim. We enlightened members of society who reject such silly old-fashioned notions as deterence and cause and effect must work for healing for both of them.
Believers in Real Justice hold the perpetrators responsible for their own actions. Real Justice seeks to prevent crimes through deterence. Tough sentences, including the death penalty, can prevent the current perpetrator from committing any crime for several years at least and dissuade would-be criminals from doing what the perpetrator did. For now, we must check our local listings of registered sex offenders and beware.

A RINO's last gore

2006-12-04T11:41:00.000-05:00

One of our most talented diplomats has announced today that he will resign his post as soon as his recess appointment expires in January. John Bolton, who has worked the unenviable job of UN ambassador, has pressed the United Nations body for resolute action as the other members, including Kofi Annan himself, have proven willing only to take bribes from dictators, dispute Israel's right to exist, and to thwart the efforts of the United States in the War on Terror. Bolton has remained diplomatic but firm in his negotiations. No one could have done the job better, in my humble opinion.
Today, the most infamous RINO (Republican In Name Only) in Washington, lame-duck Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, has decided to block a vote on Bolton's confirmation. As you might remember, President Bush nominated Bolton in August 2005. All nominations require Senate Approval and the Senate sends each diplomatic nominee to the Foreign Relations Committee that must vote to submit the nominee back to the floor for a final vote. Every Democrat opposed Bolton, so a single Republican could prevent him from receiving a confirmation vote on the Senate floor. Citing concerns over Bolton's diplomatic abilities, Senator Voinovich (R) of Ohio cast the vote blocking Bolton's nomination from reaching the floor in 2005, but President Bush installed Bolton on a recess nomination while Congress was not in session. About one month ago, Voinovich announced that he had changed his mind, approving Bolton's performance without reservations, and would vote for Bolton to receive a vote on the Senate floor. As soon as Voinovich reversed his stance, Chafee switched his vote from pro- to anti- confirmation, thus preserving the committee's block on Bolton. The Senator from the smallest state, who just got defeated for reelection, has developed a reputation as the most dependable back-stabber in the Senate. He has probably voted with the Democrats more often than he has with his own party. Even today, I am not sure what the Democrats object to about Bolton, aside from his position in favor of American sovereignty. During his confirmation hearings, they unveiled stories of Bolton as a tough boss, which hardly testifies to his abilities as a diplomat. I doubt that we want all of our bosses to be as affectionate to their employees as was our last Democrat president with his interns. Good riddance to Chafee. Many thanks to Bolton.

Profiles in Liberal Tolerance

2006-12-01T11:39:00.000-05:00

I'm sure this is another posting topic that will enjoy several sequels. As I reported on the San Francisco City Council banning JROTC from the city's high schools, similar sentiments are visiting us here in Dixie. The News & Observer of Raleigh, Durham, Cary and Chapel Hill reports here: http://www.newsobserver.com/722/story/510469.html about a new Army Recruiting Office in Chapel Hill. The Town Council of Chapel Hill passed a resolution calling for all American soldiers to be withdrawn from Iraq, which I am sure was more important than the matters of the town budget, policies on pedestrian traffic, and where the new traffic lights should be built.
Now, pacifists are organizing a march to protest the construction of the recruiting office. The News & Observer quotes one of the leaders thus:
"We really tie the construction of this facility [the recruiting office] to the war in Iraq and the difficulties that the military is having recruiting youth and students," said Ben Carroll, who is involved with UNC-CH Students for a Democratic Society, one of the march's organizers. "We are not just saying we don't want military recruiters in Chapel Hill," Carroll said. "We don't want them in our schools and targeting our youth."
I'm sure your reaction was the same as mine: STUDENTS FOR A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY?!?!! Yes, I had also thought that this Vietnam-era cover organization for communists no longer existed. Once again, we see that today's anti-war movement is largely a reenactment for the aging flower children of this country. As a veteran, I resent their portrayal of us as children being targeted for military service. Many of us love our country and want to serve in the defense of the society that gave us birth. Love for country is a motive so foreign from them that they assume we cannot possibly hold it sincerely. How pitiable.

Persecution Watch II

2006-11-29T11:17:00.000-05:00

Brown University has suspended the Reformed University Fellowship group from campus. RUF is affiliated with the Presbyterian Church in America and ministers to students on one hundred ten campuses nationwide, with Bible study, worship, conferences and retreats. The Brown University press release is extremely vague on the reasons for the suspension of RUF. After the usual statements of commitment to religious diversity, the only explanation Brown offers is the citation of a nebulous, "failure to abide by guidelines established for all religious groups on campus." Obviously, that could mean anything.
RUF is a conservative Christian organization and is not inclined to subscribe to Politically Correct notions of "tolerance" that might include acknowledging that all religions are basically the same and have different ways to reach God. From what the Brown press release reveals, there is no way to find out why RUF has lost its affiliation. The RUF page at Brown University contains no information on the subject, but all of the links have been disabled.

Justice in Miami

2006-11-27T11:33:00.000-05:00

The University of Miami has fired Larry Coker as head coach of the Miami Hurricanes, or as they are known to the Miami Police Department, "Mug shots #1,218-1,321." Their 6-6 record probably had as much to do with his firing as the brawl with Florida International earlier this year. After the brawl, Coker suspended thirteen players for only one game. The spectacle of one Miami player, Anthony Reddick, if I recall correctly, swinging his helmet like a club at the heads of his opponents could have brought assault and battery charges easily. The legal authorities refused to treat thugs like thugs and gave them community service as a sentence. Community service is a penance you might get from confession with a priest - it's hardly punishment for assault. Coker chose not to establish even rudimentary consequences for Reddick and company. His basic refusal to enforce discipline on a team that already had a reputation as a Thugocracy destroyed Coker's credibility with his players, his fans, and his critics.
Good riddance to him. His 2001 National Championship victory over Nebraska will soon become nothing more than the answer to an obscure trivia question.

Saddam's Human Rights

2006-11-26T09:37:00.000-05:00

Human Rights Watch has released a 97-page report denouncing the guilty verdict of Saddam Hussein for his killings of 148 people in Dujail, a town north of Baghdad, because of, "procedural and substantive flaws." The sight of Saddam making impromptu speeches in defiance of the judge during his own trial looked like a procedural flaw to me. The Iraqi judges did not conduct his trial in the manner that we in America would recognize, with a jury and the presumption of innocence and cross-examining witnesses, but this was still the most open and transparent trial in terms of justice that Iraq has ever seen.
Seriously, does anyone doubt that Saddam ordered 148 people killed in a town that plotted his assassination? The most rabid haters of President Bush admit that Saddam was an evil man. Does anyone doubt that Saddam used poison gas on the Iranians and the Kurds? Even Bill Clinton criticised him for those gas attacks on the Kurds in 1996 and punished him with missiles hundreds of miles from the action. Fundamentally, Human Rights Watch decided that one execution of a mass-murdering dictator is worse than the mass murders that the dictator committed.
Human Rights Watch complains that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki declared Saddam guilty before the trial started. Earlier this year, Congressman John Murtha (D, NY) said that American Marines killed Iraqi civilians in Haditha, "in cold blood," before the Marines had even been arraigned and indicted. When NYPD officers shot Amadou Diallo, Hillary Clinton declared them guilty of murder before any trial had begun. Diallo was an immigrant from the Caribbean who did not speak English and bore a strong resemblance to a rapist, Isaac Jones, whom the detectives were seeking. Late at night, when the officers ordered him to put his hands up, he instead reached into his back pocket and pulled out something black. The officers drew pistols and fired immediately, killing him. The object turned out to be his wallet. When Human Rights Watch denounces John Murtha and Hillary Clinton, we can take them seriously.

The Iraq Committee: de ja vu Vietnam

2006-11-18T14:29:00.000-05:00

As you know, in terms of the situation on the ground, the casualties, and the style of combat, there are very few comparisons at all between Iraq and Vietnam. In Iraq, there is no Ho Chi Minh Trail, no NVA being supplied and refitted from an area off limits to our troops, no foreign sponsor of the size of China and the Soviet Union outfitting our enemies, and no safe haven where the VC can retreat where our troops are not allowed to go. The guerrilla-style insurgency getting supplied from Iran is drastically smaller and less successful than anything our men faced in Vietnam.
Two things, however, are identical to Vietnam: 1) Hollywood and the Political Left are cheering for our side to lose as the New York Times commits treason repeatedly and 2) the committees in Washington are utterly inept. During the Vietnam War, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara was a quantitative data analyst and nothing more. He had no background in tactics or strategy at all, but he had been a logistical worker for the Army during World War II. His last assignment before his cabinet post had been the presidency of Ford Motor Company. His civilians were clueless about the nature of war, as I have been reading in the book Dereliction of Duty by H. R. McMaster.
At the present day, the Baker-Hamilton joke is supposed to advise President Bush on the situation in Iraq and come up with solutions for the Middle East using our military assets there. The committee has NO, as in ZERO, ZIP military people on it. Chuck Robb, former Senator of Virginia and Sandra Day O'Connor, former Supreme Court Justice and discoverer of the "sundown clause" for affirmative action rulings, are two committee members. With all due respect, they know less about military matters than the average sergeant who just got back from Iraq. I understand the Left's antagonism to military people making military policy, but here is the second punch line: guess how many experts on the Middle East will sit on the committee? NONE, NOT ONE, ZILCH NADA. May God have mercy on this nation. For the record, a tsunami hitting Washington would constitute mercy.

JROTC Banned from San Francisco

2006-11-16T10:27:00.000-05:00

The City Council of San Francisco has now begun a one-year phasing out of Junior ROTC from its high schools, despite the objections of the students who participate in JROTC activities. San Francisco is the most tolerant city in America, as we have long known, and a safe haven for all gender deviants of every kind. The city council has cited the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy of the Armed Forces, adopted by the Clinton Administration, as the reason for this ban of JROTC. The JROTC programs enforce no such policy, however, and do not have any policy on homosexuals. I suppose the surprise in this story is that JROTC was allowed to persist until now in San Francisco. The council members of San Francisco also want their children to earn less money if they enlist in the Armed Forces. A JROTC cadet with two or four years of experience can enlist in the Army at the E-2 or E-3 pay grade instead of E-1. San Francisco, the land of Leftist tolerance proves what that tolerance consists of: they tolerate only people who are Liberal like them.
The council members say that they want their children learning about peace rather than war. In their world view, I, as a war veteran, am morally equal to Osama bin Laden. Both of us are practitioners of war. There are no good guys, bad guys, heroes, villains, just causes or depraved causes. Of course, accusing the Army of being all conservatives while banning liberals from doing JROTC is one of the best self-fulfilling prophecies they could devise.

Stem Cell Watch III

2006-11-15T10:14:00.000-05:00

Well, as we continue to wait for the first treatment using embryonic stem cells (although John Edwards would probably tell us they can raise the dead if he thought it would get us to vote Democratic) another discovery using adult stem cells has come to light.
Doctors in India have begun performing stem cell transplants to restore vision in the human eye. They take stem cells from the patient's good eye, or from a donor, and inject them into the sightless eye. The beauty of this procedure is that in many cases the patient can supply his own stem cells, which removes all of the concerns inherent with donors, questions over supply, etc. The restored vision is imperfect, of course, but the patients have experienced marked improvement.
I saw Michael J. Fox recently in a public even not shaking as noticably as he was in the campaign commercials. When you see this, don't be fooled. Embryonic stem cells have not cured his Parkinson's - he's just gone back onto his normal dosage regimen. For the record, he has admitted to altering his dosage patterns so as to enhance his symptoms during his Congressional testimony.

Iran Claims Victory

2006-11-13T10:46:00.000-05:00

Having used Democrat talking points to good effect - bemoaning our lack of universal health care for one - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has learned to see President Bush as his enemy and the self-described enemies and haters of Bush as friends of Iran. Even now, Ahmadinejad cloaks his argument for nuclear energy in the popular Leftist slogan that one nuclear nation should not deny nukes to the other nations of the world. The Ayatollah has now declared victory for Iran in the recent election results in America.
The Iranians are correct, at least in part, in this belief that the Democrats' victory is their victory. Our friends across the aisle in the House and Senate have not disagreed respectfully with President Bush on policy in Iraq while offering alternative plans. Rather, they have spewed vitriol indiscriminately and professed the most heated and homicidal hatred for the man currently in the White House. Multiple books have engaged in speculation about how to asssassinate President Bush and one movie indulges that theme. Never ones to shy from assassinating their enemies, the Iranians are in love with today's Loony Left and believe that the recent election will guarantee their safety as they develop nuclear weapons.
Nancy Pelosi has given a key sign of her support for Iran's agenda of a weakened America ousted from Iraq by backing John Murtha for Majority Leader. Steny Hoyer, her current Whip, would be the logical leader if investigation of the Bush administration and a legislative agenda were the top priorities for Democrats. With her support for Murtha, a one-trick pony whose only credential is Vietnam service, Pelosi shows that her top priority is cutting and running from Iraq. The Democrats may fail in this endeavor, but we now know that they will try a maneuver that leaves Iraq destabilized and Iran free to develop nukes. President Bush and the Republicans are in for the fight of their lives.
The possibility of freedom in the Middle East and the safety of Americans from terrorist attacks may depend upon the result. Deo Vindice.

Election Lesson #4

2006-11-10T10:21:00.000-05:00

I don't know how many times we will get to re-learn this lesson, but here it is: Scandals involving crimes hurt Republicans and do not hurt Democrats. We are still waiting for a Republican to win re-election after drowing a girl in his car, but that is just the most obvious example.
This past year, when the Abramoff scandal broke, investigators fingered Representative Ney, (R) of Ohio as offender #1. The Republican party leadership informed Ney that he would need to resign or be forced out. He resigned and a Democrat won his seat on Tuesday night. Representative William Jefferson (D) of Louisiana, actually accepted $100,000 in bribes. Agents found $90,000 cash in his freezer. Even Rajun-Cajun James Carville laughed at his protestations of innocence. Naturally, his party leadership did nothing. Today, Jefferson is faced with a run-off election for his seat from a 13-candidate field, but he was the top vote-getter in the general election and will doubtless win reelection. Accepting bribes is a crime and Jefferson should be behind bars, but his fellow Congressmen in his party only see him as a victim because of the color of his skin.
You all know the Foley story: his overly-friendly emails and highly inappropriate IMs with male pages led to his immediate resignation. When Barney Frank paid a male prostitute government money as part of his staff, to do nothing but run a brothel, no discipline was forth-coming. When Gerry Studds committed statutory rape and Congress censured him, he got reelected six more times. At the time of the Studds case, a Republican also seduced a page and faced ouster at the next election. When Representative Patrick Kennedy (D) RI, drove into a concrete barrier while drunk, his constituents reelected him.
It couldn't be more obvious: only Republican voters punish their leaders for misconduct. This is why Democrats are always, not sometimes, but always, soft on crime: they tolerate criminals. Criminals are their friends and colleagues in Congress. They care about redistribution of wealth, racial quotas, and political correctness, what they call "social justice," because they want to ignore real justice. Justice in America is the enforcement of laws to protect the American people. There is no law that says life must be fair or people have a right not to be offended. Life is not fair, but taking bribes, DUI, misappropriation of funds, statutory rape, and negligent homicide are all actual crimes that have not been enforced on Democrat lawmakers. (Affirmative Action is lacking in this posting: Massachussetts and the Kennedy family produced a disproportionate number of these examples of crimes.)

Aftermath of the Election

2006-11-09T08:42:00.000-05:00

We know two things at this point: Secretary Rumsfeld will not be target #1 for the Democrats anymore and we will never have any immigration law enforcement. I heard an advertisement on the radio on Sunday, proclaiming the non-discrimination policy of some company, "We do not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation...or immigration status." These illegal immigrants are now considered protected minorities simply because they broke the law. Does the company discriminate on the basis of the "title status" of a car that used to sit in a lot but now sits in my driveway after somebody hotwired it? I can say I didn't steal the car - it's just an undocumented immigrant. One Congressman who is a member of the Minutemen in Arizona actually lost his bid for reelection last night.
The next lesson from this election: the people who vote are not terribly concerned about immigration law enforcement. Until we get attacked by terrorists who came in over the Mexican border, the American people will not get serious about enforcement.
A few words on Rumsfeld's resignation: it was the best move the Bush White House could make to begin defusing the Democrats' platform. They have forwarded no platform of issues and principles. They can't win elections with "raise the minimum wage, keep abortion legal, don't touch social security and don't enforce the border." Rather, their message is, "Bush is Hitler, Rumsfeld is Himmler and our soldiers are the SS guards at Auschwitz." With Himmler, I mean Rumsfeld, gone, they will probably tone down on their attacks on the military. Thereby, Rumsfeld by resigning removes one plank of their platform entirely and weakens another one.

Lesson #2 From the Debacle

2006-11-08T10:07:00.000-05:00

In his seven years as Speaker, Dennis Hastert has spent like a Democrat. Worse still, he thinks the Democrats would have been so much worse that he wasn't even all that bad. The single silver lining now is that the Republicans will have a new leader. President Bush never asked for a balanced budget, so some of the blame goes to him for this Congress' utter failure to govern responsibly on fiscal issues. Mark Twain famously said that the only officially recognized native American organized crime element is Congress. I can see what he was talking about.
I pressed one name for a Libertarian yesterday, and a couple of my friends who favor smaller government voted straight party for Libertarians. In 2004, the moral base saved the GOP, due largely to initiatives on same-sex marriage, but the fiscal conservative base has been deserted by its party. I haven't had a home in several years, and the agenda of 1994, including the Balanced Budget Amendment, is dead. In 1995, Newt Gingrich led Congress to pass a balanced budget, which President Clinton stalled until the government shut down. Today's GOP would not even consider balancing the budget. Lesson #2: DON'T FORGET YOUR BASE!!

Lesson #1 From the Debacle

2006-11-08T10:01:00.000-05:00

We on the right need not entice ourselves any longer: both Virginia and Montana are lost. Lincoln Chafee, RINO-in chief of the Senate, has been ousted despite a voting record that he touts as Left of Hillary Clinton. The lesson he can take with this bitter pill: Democrat voters do not return favors. It was stupid of him to vote like a Democrat anyway, but obstructing John Bolten for the UN Ambassadorship was a feat of idiotic desperation as he tried to show that he could be a Democrat in all but name. With Chafee's loss, Harry Reid can become the Majority Leader, but nothing of vote substance is lost.

Saddam, Nuclear Builder, Condemned

2006-11-06T12:08:00.000-05:00

It is official now that Saddam will be hanged if his appeal fails. Amnesty International is doubtless incensed because they oppose the death penalty for everyone - even a mass murderer who used chemical weapons multiple times and routinely subjected his political enemies to gruesome torture. I have to recall the second Presidential debate in 2004, when President Bush said, "If Senator Kerry had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power." The Senator quickly countered, "Not necessarily still in power." Now, I am certain, Saddam would, "not necessarily," have been condemned under his authority.
As reported in the New York Al-Treason Times, the Bush administration has made public a number of documents showing that at the time of the 2003 invasion, Saddam may have been within a year or less of possessing a nuclear weapon. The Axis of Evil Speech will doubtless go down in history as a wake-up call to Americans, notifying us of which countries posed the greatest threats. Only five years after that speech, the most dangerous of those three regimes - the one that had actually used WMDs and had sponsored the most terrorists - has been replaced and the other two threaten the world with nuclear weapons that they are trying to develop. One down, two to go. At present, as North Korea returns to six-party talks while China twists the arm of the pot-bellied tin horn dictator, diplomacy seems to be making laboriously slow progress. For real deterrence against North Korea, I say, "Let Japan build Nukes!"

Who Am I?

2006-11-03T09:28:00.000-05:00

I leave my wife and family for a year at a time to go overseas, but not on vacation.
I try to assist people who speak a foreign language, worship a different god, have never experienced freedom and democracy in their lifetimes, and have never met me.

I was angry on September 11, 2001, because the terrorists killed the wrong people.
Michael Moore says they were the wrong people to die because they didn’t vote for President Bush.
I say they were the wrong people to die because protecting them is my job. The terrorists were cowardly and ruthless as they killed my civilians. God help me if I let that happen again.

I have faced mortar fire, small arms fire, and bombs have exploded beside my vehicle as I drove. Some of my fellow Americans appreciate my contributions thus:
In 1972, John Kerry wrote that if my organization were all-volunteer, we would be disproportionately, “the poor and the black and the brown…” and that I would commit war crimes routinely.
Senator Durbin compared me to Nazis or torturers from Pol Pot’s regime, who wiped out ¼ of Cambodia’s population.
Senator Kennedy said that my comrades acted like the torturers of Saddam Hussein’s regime. He has yet to produce evidence of rape rooms.
Johns Hopkins University produced a “study” accusing me of causing 600,000 murders in three years, with a margin of error of 400,000, under the assumption that no one ever got murdered before my arrival.
Seymour Hersh told a crowd of college students in Montreal, Canada on November 2, 2006, that my organization is the most violent and murderous in the history of the American nation.

All of these statements are lies, distortions, slanders, or plainly sloppy work, but not one of these speakers has been stifled. No government raids, threats of revenge or reprisal or unreasonable searches have disturbed these citizens to change their opinions by force. This is America and speech and the press are free of government suppression.

I am black, brown, white, red, and yellow, but I do not see my racial diversity as a bad thing. Green is the only color I see.

I am an American Soldier. If you are an American, my job is to protect you. First you, then my Army comrades, then all other civilians in the world.

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you can read it in English and have enjoyed five years without terrorist attacks,
You’re Welcome.

Stem Cell Watch II

2006-11-02T11:01:00.000-05:00

News from the medical front, where our doctors seek to bring about miracle cures. Scientists have recently used stem cells to grow a small human liver. As has been the case with previous treatments, this did not come from embryonic stem cells, but from umbilical cord blood stem cells. Notwithstanding the hype about embryonic cells, the number of treatments they have produced remains at 0.
As the debate over federal funding for embryonic stem cell research rages, understand the reason why they are seeking federal funding: very few private investors are willing to risk an investment. In areas where success has a track record, private money is easy to come by, but embryonic stem cells are not one of these areas. Michael J. Fox is lying through his teeth that the legislation he stumps for will cure him of Parkinson's Disease. In reality, Amendment 2 in Missouri would make human cloning legal. We are getting cures and treatments from stem cells, but they do not require the destruction of human life.