Being an American means always having to say you're sorry

I posted a link to this column way back in 2004, but in light of President Obama's recent Muslim apology tour, it's as timely as ever: Why Arabs Don't Say Sorry, by Nonie Darwish. For someone who's supposed to be so tuned in to the Muslim world, the O seems as clueless as his predecessor, if not more so.

Save one for me!

Wow, that President Obama is really having an impact. From the NY Times:

Obama Promises Job Creation in Plan

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Monday that he expected his economic stimulus package to save or create an additional 600,000 jobs this summer — including 125,000 for teenagers — as the federal government spends billions to expand care at health centers, spruce up national parks, hire teachers and improve military facilities.

Six hundred thousand? Really? Why not six million? Or sixty million? What the hell, if you're going to make up a number - and "saved" job numbers are purely fictional - why not make up a big one. I'll give him credit, though. He still has the public bamboozled. We'll see how long that lasts once the hyperinflation kicks in.

Dick vs The O

This whole duel between the Prez and former VP Cheney on the terrorism issue has been interesting to watch. Kind of like Dirty Harry vs Barney Fife, with our illustrious President as Mayberry's most famous deputy. The O is still trying to find a way to distance himself from all of Bush's policies, while at the same time continuing many of them, requires some serious intellectual acrobats. While they're fun to watch, I'm not sure they'll pay off in the long run.

The folks on the right know that he's throwing out the baby with the bathwater on some of the changes he's making in how we fight terrorism. And the folks on the left know he's keeping some of the strategies they abhor (military tribunals, for instance). The only people he's likely to fool are the folks in the mushy middle. Of course, if there's a terrorist attack on the O's watch, he can kiss them goodbye as well. All they'll know is that President Obama changed the way we fight terrorism (even if he didn't really change that much), and that an attack (which didn't happen with W at the helm) went down on his watch. And it won't really matter if the attack was due to any changes he made. To the folks who proudly occupy the middle ground, it'll be casue-and-effect, simple as that.

Wanda Sykes: As funny as amoebic dysentery

Free advice: You get what you pay for

I'm kind of confused about all the brouhaha surrounding Colin Powell's recent statements that Republicans need to be more like Democrats. Isn't he the guy who didn't know what his political affiliation was until he was in his mid-50s? And if the Democrats are so much closer to where he is ideologically, then why isn't he a Democrat?

Do they think we're idiots? I know, dumb question

This would be laughable if these people weren't running the country right now:

Democrats: GOP should be more like their party

WASHINGTON – Congressional Democratic leaders said Wednesday that Sen. Arlen Specter's party switch is a sign that Republicans should become more like, well, Democrats.

"I say to Republicans in America, take back your party," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters. "The party of protecting the environment, the party of individual rights, the party of fairness."

Specter stunned the political world Tuesday when he defected to the Democrats, saying there weren't enough moderates in Pennsylvania for him to win a GOP primary.

h/t: Drudge

OK, stupid question for you: If Republicans become like the Democrats, why be a Republican at all? Seriously, what's the point of having two parties, if both parties are the same? They're already too much alike for my taste. Any more alike, and we'll wind up with one party rule. Of course that's the idea, isn't it? And I guess we're pretty much there right now anyway.

Oh yeah, and a quick question for all those folks who say the Republicans have become too extreme, and have abandoned that mythical big tent: Are the Democrats any different? Aren't they the ones that threw a reliably liberal (on most issues) incumbent Senator under the bus because he didn't stand with them on opposing the war in Iraq? Gimme a freakin' break.

Motivation for the Obama-Nation

Click to enlarge.

The Obama Doctrine

As a followup to the Global Apology Tour, President Obama is springing into action yet again. First he released Bush administration memos about the use of coercive interrogation techniques. And now he's talking possible probes and prosecutions for former Bush administration officials. Yeah, that'll make us safer. Once al Qaida sees how "humane" we are, I'm sure they'll abandon their quest for global jihad, and their hatred for those who don't believe as they do.

I have to give President Obama credit for such swift and decisive action. He's wasting no time in taking the fight to the enemy. Problem is, he's not waging war against the terrorists. He's waging war against the Republicans. And for the moment, he's winning.

But what if the terrorists mount an attack on US soil within the next couple of years? There will come a time when the blame-Bush strategy won't work anymore. At that point, Obama and the Democrats in Congress would be finished. Since these folks are so thorough at covering their political backsides, I can only conclude that they don't think there's a risk of terrorist attack. In other words, the people in charge of protecting us don't believe there's really a threat. I don't know about you, but that thought scares the hell out of me.

Tea Party: 2009

Unless you've been living under a rock--or you've been depending on the mainstream media for your news--you've probably heard about the Tax Day Tea Parties that were held across the country today. I went to one in Albany, NY. At it's peak, it looked to me like there were about two thousand people there. That's a pretty good turnout for the bluest of blue states. I took some pictures, a few of which are posted below.




I saw a number of clever signs there, but the one below was my personal favorite.

Do you feel safer?

Joe Biden does. And he thinks you should too:

"I guarantee you we are safer today, our interests are more secure today than they were any time during the [previous] eight years."

OK, so let's review what the Obama administration has done foreign policy-wise:

1. President Obama requested more NATO troops for Afghanistan. Request denied.

2. Secretary of State Clinton gave the Russians a "reset" button that was labeled with the Russian word for "overcharge."

3. President Obama asked the UN to spring into action and issue a strongly worded condemnation to N. Korea's recent missile rocket launch. The UN is reportedly willing to consider it, which doubtless terrifies Kim Jong Il.

4. President Obama gave some cheesy gifts to the PM of the UK and Queen Elizabeth.

5. On a whirlwind tour of Europe, President Obama took a stand and strongly condemned the US for everything it did before he was president.

6. The President bowed subserviently to the King of Saudi Arabia.

Yeah, I'm feeling safer. And to think, they got all this done in less than three months. Imagine what they'll accomplish over the next four years.

Martinez Trial - Verdict

The verdict is in for Alberto Martinez:

Military jury acquits Martinez of all charges

FORT BRAGG, N.C. In a stunning verdict following a three-and-a-half year legal battle, Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez of Rensselaer County was acquitted of killing two superior officers late today.

In the military courtroom on the sprawling Fort Bragg base, family members erupted in astonishment when they heard Martinez had been acquitted of premeditated murder during the court martial.

"You slaughtered our husbands and that's it!?" Barbara Allen, a widow of one of the victims, screamed at Martinez. "You piece of (expletive). You murdered my husband."

Allen, who was married to 1st Lt. Louis Allen, 34, of Milford, Pa., and Siobhan Esposito, widow of Capt. Phillip Esposito, 30, of Suffern, put their heads in their hands and sobbed uncontrollably when they heard the verdict. Esposito and Allen were killed on a military base in Tikrit, Iraq.

Martinez, 41, a National Guardsman from Schaghticoke, showed no emotion as he was escorted out of the courtroom, a free man. He faced the death penalty if convicted.

I don't even know what to say. I don't believe for a second that Alberto Martinez is innocent. But I guess there's nothing left to do but live with the verdict; live with the fact that two good men died, and the guy I believe is responsible for their deaths gets to walk. It's not the first time in human history this has happened, and it sure as hell won't be the last. But it still sucks.

Martinez trial jury deliberations - Day 1

Here's the latest:

FORT BRAGG, N.C. (AP) -- A military jury hasn't reached a verdict in the case against a New York Army National Guard soldier accused of killing two superior officers in Iraq.

Jurors deciding the fate of Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez deliberated for about eight hours Wednesday at Fort Bragg without reaching a decision. The 14-member panel was scheduled to resume its work Thursday morning.

Link

Home stretch - The trial of Alberto Martinez

Here's the latest on the case:

Military panel gets fragging case; soldier faces death penalty

West Point — A military panel will begin deliberations Wednesday to decide the fate of Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez, a soldier accused of killing two local officers from the New York National Guard while the three were deployed together in Iraq.

The case is the first in either the Iraq or Afghanistan wars in which a soldier is accused of killing a superior officer, a crime known as “fragging.”

A unanimous guilty verdict could mean a death sentence for Martinez of Troy, who is charged with the premeditated murder of Capt. Phil Esposito of Suffern and 1st Lt. Lou Allen, a native of Chester. The three were serving together with the 42nd Infantry Division in Tikrit, Iraq, on June 7, 2005, when the killings occurred.

Allen and Esposito died after a Claymore mine detonated just outside Esposito’s room, as the two were playing a game of Risk. In closing arguments broadcast live Tuesday to West Point from Fort Bragg, N.C., prosecutor Maj. John Benson said Martinez was the only one capable of obtaining the mine, as well as the grenades used as a diversion in the attack.

About half-dozen of Allen’s family members watched the live video feed of the trial at West Point Tuesday. Allen’s wife, Barbara, and his parents, Bob and Vivian Allen, were with Esposito’s family in Fort Bragg.

After 3+ years, the end is finally in sight. I hope the verdict provides the Esposito and Allen families with some closure. I think they've been waiting too long as it is. Keep them in your thoughts and prayers.

Attention McCain Supporters

Have you voted yet? If you haven't, go do so ASAP. I've had it up to here with those stupid exit polls. Gallup, Rasmussen, Opinion Dynamics etc. should NOT get to decide this election. Don't be dissuaded by the crap you're seeing on TV. Those polls may be right, but then again, they may not. Let's not let the pollsters, pundits, and news droids convince us to disenfranchise ourselves.

Alberto Martinez case update

At long last, the trial of Alberto Martinez is under way.

Jury selection in Troy soldier's case

FORT BRAGG, N.C. -- Jury selection begins in the trial of a Troy soldier accused of killing two Army officers with a bomb in Iraq. National Guard Staff Sergeant Alberto Martinez is accused of killing New York National Guard officers Captain Phillip Esposito and First Lieutenant Louis Allen.

A military judge rejected three last-minute defense requests to dismiss charges against him Monday. Martinez could face the death penalty if convicted.

The trial is being held at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Opening arguments are set for next Monday.

It's about damned time. This has dragged on for over three years now. His lawyers have apparently grasped at every straw--real or imagined--to get this guy off. Now he'll have his day in court, and the families of Captain Esposito and Lieutenant Allen can finally have a resolution to this nightmare.

Further reading:

Pain lingers for officer's family

Families prepare for start of frag trial

The Audacity of Gullibility

So, Hillary's going to get a vote at the Dem Convention. Isn't this nice?

Dems' Deal: Hillary Gets Convention Vote

A deal has been brokered between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that will allow Clinton's name to be placed in nomination at next week's Democratic nominating convention.

The former rivals announced the agreement today in a joint statement, shedding light on a hushed negotiation between the Clinton and Obama camps over how to recognize Clinton and her supporters without overshadowing or detracting from a convention designed to nominate Obama as the party's presidential candidate.

Is this party unity, or is it something else? I don't know about you, but I can't help but think it's something else. Here's some food for thought: If the Obama campaign somehow derails between now and the end of the convention, there is now a mechanism in place to nominate Hillary. Convenient, isn't it?

But how can Obama's campaign derail at this late date? Hasn't his past been laid bare by the relentless watchdogs of the news media? Absolutely. There won't be any last minute surprises here. After all, they put Obama under a microscope. Just like they do with all candidates. Which would include John Edwards, right?

Funny that the Edwards story wasn't really pushed in the mainstream media until long after Edwards was out of the race. Funnier still that it was broken by the National Enquirer, a publication with a connection to the Clintons. Funniest of all was the recent revelation that some in the Clinton camp blame Edwards for Hillary's loss in the primaries.

Is all of this a coincidence? I can't say for sure, but I tend to doubt it. If there's a major revelation about Barrack Obama in the near future, I guess we'll have our answer. And Barry O will know he got played.

Target Practice: Gas Prices

I'm a little out of practice at this political blogging thing, so maybe I should warm up on an easy target. And what's an easier target than the ridiculously high cost of gasoline?

I think the American public is finally getting fed up with the B.S. they've been getting fed about gas prices. But don't expect the polytishuns to stop dishing out the excrement just yet. Here are my replies to a few of the more popular shit sandwich recipes currently being served:

"You can't drill your way out of high gas prices."
Yeah, so? Granted, drilling won't solve all of our problems, but increasing the supply of oil can only help the situation. That's Economics 101, people. The solution to high gas prices is actually a number of solutions. Dismissing anything that's not a one-off magic bullet is almost too stupid for even Congress to believe. Almost.

"Even if we do drill, we won't see any oil for (insert the number of your choice here) years."
Again, so what? Ten years from now (or twenty, or thirty) is going to get here anyway. We might as well have the oil too. Would you tell a high school kid to quit school and get a job now because education won't pay off for years? Of course not. This "instant gratification or nothing" argument isn't something I want to hear from the people in whose hands we've placed the future of the country. Not to mention what a bad message it sends to "the children"®.

"We need to conserve more."
True enough, but this measure alone isn't a cure-all. Here's a newsflash for the conservation crowd: Oil is used for more than fueling our cars. It's used to heat homes, generate electricity, run manufacturing machinery, and as a raw material in the manufacture of many products. So driving less, or trading in our gas-guzzling SUVs for Smart Cars, isn't going to solve the problem.

"We need to focus on alternative energy sources."
No argument there. But it's ironic that many of the people who push this one are also the ones who argue that drilling in ANWR won't produce oil for ten years. Does anyone really believe that science will provide us with a viable alternative to petroleum in less than ten years. Scientific discovery doesn't follow a timetable. Just ask Thomas Edison. Besides, even if they came up with the new technology tomorrow, it would take years for it to supplant the current technology. Think about it. If GM started selling a car that ran on water (or daffodils, or good intentions etc.), do you really think everyone is going to toss their old cars in the trash, and run out and buy a new one tomorrow? And will their finance companies forgive their car loans? Not likely. It would probably take at least ten years before the new technology became predominant. If, and when, that technology is developed.

The solution to the problem of high oil/gasoline prices isn't any single measure, it's a number of measures. And we need to start them, like, yesterday. Especially the ones that will take time, like alternative fuels (new nuclear power plants would be really helpful), building new refineries, and (especially) domestic drilling. Hell, if Bill Clinton hadn't vetoed an attempt to drill in ANWR in 1995, oil would be flowing from there right now. Thanks, Bill. Good work on that "bridge to the 21st Century" thing. And don't worry, your political descendants are carrying on your work. But hopefully not for long.

Has Anyone Seen My Motivation?

If you're one of the very few people who still checks this blog from time to time, it's probably no secret to you that I've been pretty much devoid of blogging inspiration lately.

So, what's to blog about? Politics? The 2008 election has been going on for seven or eight years now. I've been sick to death of that for months. And the politicians become more politician-like (if that's possible) every day.

How about the military? Waste of time. The situation in Iraq has improved considerably, but the news media has no interest in the story. Unless things suddenly get worse, of course. And besides, people have all pretty much made up their minds about the war in Iraq.

So, what does that leave? The news? Once you get past the politics, all you have left is just depressing: the advance of the nanny state, political correctness on the march nationwide, creeping sharia, open borders, a pop-culture that has degenerated to a point well below the lowest common denominator; somebody please pass me the Prozac.

OK, maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but I do my best blogging here when I'm pissed off. And I've just gotten tired of being pissed off. That being said, being pissed off beats the hell out of being pissed on. And with this election looming, well, the potential for all of us getting pissed on increase by leaps and bounds every day. Yeah, I'm gonna have to say something, even if I can't be sure if anyone will be here to read it.

It's Your Money, and I'm Welcome to It

I caught part of Sen. Hillary Clinton's interview on the O'Reilly Factor last night. It seemed to be much of the same. One comment from her that stood out to me involved raising taxes. She said that she'd only raise taxes on people making more than $250k a year. Her reasoning was that such a tax increase would allow for tax cuts for the people who work for their money.

Um, excuse me? Where does Hillary Clinton, or any politician, get off deciding who really deserves what they make. I've met people with six and seven digit incomes who worked their asses off for every penny they got. And I've met people scraping by on minimum wage who not only didn't even deserve what little they were making, they should've been charged rent by their employer for the space they took up during the work day.

The whole idea that government gets to decide who is more deserving of the money they earn implies that all money really belongs to the government in the first place. Sorry, but there's nothing Democratic about that concept. To me, it sounds more like this.

Outraged! Outraged, I say!

I guess Barack Obama has finally had his Sista Souljah monent.

Obama says he's outraged by former pastor's comments

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. (AP) - Democrat Barack Obama said Tuesday he was outraged and appalled by the latest comments from his former pastor, who asserted that criticism of his fiery sermons is an attack on the black church and the U.S. government was responsible for the creation of the AIDS virus.

The presidential candidate is seeking to tamp down the growing fury over Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his incendiary remarks that threaten to undermine his campaign.

"I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday," Obama told reporters at a news conference.

After weeks of staying out of the public eye while critics lambasted his sermons, Wright made three public appearances in four days to defend himself. The former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago has been combative, providing colorful commentary and feeding the story Obama had hoped was dying down.

Hat tip: Drudge

Let's see, it took him 20 years as a member of Rev. Wright's flock, and another couple months as a Presidential candidate to figure out that Wright is an extremist nut. From where I sit, that can be chalked up to one of three things:

1. Obama is very slow on the uptake.

2. Obama figured it out long ago, but lacked the guts to speak up.

3. Obama is feigning outrage in order to put the issue to rest so he can refocus our collective attention on his mantra of "change."

So, which is it? Is he dumb, gutless, or a slick-talking con man who thinks we're all idiots? Whichever one it is, I wouldn't want this guy in the big chair during a time of crisis. Would you?