Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

2006-03-01T00:41:00.001-05:00

Eugh, it's been a long time. Sorry about that. I've been seriously busy. We're talking...no chance of ever getting any free time. People, I seriously missed you. And I will be catching up on *everything* I missed. I love you guys. All right. Something funny, just to lighten up your days. Google search "failure." Yeah, I know what the first result is, but ignore it. Instead focus on the second and third results. That should make you chuckle. Hey, 2/3. We win.

So anyway. What I'd like to talk about in this post is schools. Can you really trust the schools nowadays? The answer, sadly, is a resounding "no." In numerous ways, the government has let us down, time after time, yet still the solution to all is more taxes, but the word is instead cleverly disguised as "funding." I bet they think we don't know where the money comes from. Don't take this as me saying we shouldn't spend money on giving our children good educations. The problem is, they aren't getting good educations. Just visit a public school in the city and you'll know what I'm talking about.

First we'll discuss safety. How are public schools keeping children safe? Interesting question. After Columbine, a lot of states and major cities (such as Philadelphia, Housten, and Baltimore) have been using what is called the "Zero Tolerance Policy." Perhaps you've heard of it. It means that anything, anything remotely close to a weapon found on a student's person gives the school reason to handcuff and arrest a student in school. In Pennsylvania it is mandatory, and the student is to be suspended for no less than a year, yet they are expected to find other means of schooling. It sounds all right if we're talking only students who bring in knives and guns, but I think you might remember the story of the 10 year old girl who brought in art scissors. If you think that's bad, try explaining getting expelled over an earring. Yes, because putting innocent children in handcuffs is really protecting them. (If you are interested in ending this, here is a site you might be interested in.)

Next we have the real reason for being there. Education. What are your students being taught? Well, here's a wholesome lesson. Masturbation. No, I am not kidding. Why are we teaching 9 year olds how to masturbate? Here's a full length article on sex-ed in the classroom. You know, I didn't learn about sex until I was 12, let alone masturbation. And I think I'm doing fine, don't you? Not to mention how teachers tend to let their political views be known to the students. My brother had an English teacher in high school who would have political discussions in his class and your grades would suffer if you didn't write what he wanted to hear. Things might get better in the lower grades if this article is correct, but I'm not holding my breath as far as colleges go.

Lastly, there is discipline. It amazes me what kids can get away with. I went to a private schol until my last year of junior high. If you misbehaved even in the slightest, you didn't get away with it. Not a swear word was spoken, there were no spit balls in class, no paper air planes, the teacher didn't have to struggle to get a hold of her students, and there was definitely no screaming at the teacher. But when I went to a public school, I witnessed swearing that would make a sailor blush, students throwing things around in class, the science teacher bellowing at a particularly noisy group of students basically every day, and a student actually saying the f bomb to the math teacher and attack him...who then proceeded to tackle the student into the lockers. All right, so that was pretty interesting, but the fact remains that only the most strict of teachers there managed to actually have a civil classroom. This is what our increased spending is getting us?!

There is a solution, and it is getting more and more popular. Homeschool. It isn't for everyone, but you know...judging from what I've seen...it's the best for me. That's all for now.

2005-11-26T18:06:00.000-05:00

A little break from my hiatus for a moment to announce two things. First, I got an A in my college course I was taking (No, I'm not in college, I just took one course) called Myths, Legends, and Folklore. That's one of the reasons I was so busy. The second announcement is that I was mentioned on Michelle Malkin's blog. My mother emailed her of a particular incident we experienced when I was in 8th grade and she put it in her column, which you can see here: Indoctrination, Not Education. My schedule is luckily getting back on track and I will hopefully be checking and writing blogs regularly again by the end of the Christmas season. I miss you guys!

2005-10-21T12:09:00.000-04:00

I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but I think it's time to establish a hiatus in my blogging world. It's not for lack of material; I even have this wonderful expanse of liberal idiocy waiting to be ripped apart. However, it is because of complications in my personal life that strip away my time. You know when you fall asleep and don't wake up until 16 hours later that your schedule is a bit too stressful. So, to my regret, I will only be able to check the blogs I normally do whenever I get the time and not daily like I used to. This blog will only be updated when I have a great amount of time, which will hopefully be soon. I can't promise anything, except that, once I finish what I need to do, this blog will start up again and update regularly like I hoped it would. Oh, if only days were 48 hours instead of 24!

2005-10-06T20:22:00.000-04:00

Okay, I've had enough of this. Whoever has been signing me up to insipid Democrat/liberal mailing lists for the heck of it: grow up.

All right, so you don't agree with my opinions. So what? I'm gonna quote Maddox, who has something to say to people who resort to stupidity when they don't agree with someone.

"...did it occur to you that nobody forced you to read anything on my site? Just wondering because I don't remember coming over to your house, typing a malformed query into your search engine, clicking on a link titled "The Best Page in the Universe," and then prying your eye lids open while you read my page."

Think of that, except replace "The Best Page in the Universe" with "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy." Now, see, if you don't like something, you don't have to read it. No one's forcing you to. Reading my webpage isn't a school assignment or anything of that sort. So, here's an idea. Stop being a moron. Subscribing my email to crackpot mailing lists like "anti-war.com" or "michaelmoore.com" isn't going to make me shut down VRWC or "see the light" and become liberal like you. So what's the point? Oh yeah, there isn't one.

So, the next time you lurking liberals decide to subscribe my email to the latest moonbat site, consider this: I can unsubscribe it. And, I can also delete it, you know. Instead of taking the cowardly way out, you can instead argue your point in the comments. Either that, or continue to do what you're doing and giggle with the rest of your liberal friends as you subscribe me, yet again, to a liberal site, as if I'm going to melt like the witch in the Wizard of Oz when she gets wet. "Oh noez, liberal idiocy!" Yeah. Right.

And if you guys really don't want any blood for oil, then you should probably patch that bleeding heart of yours.

2005-10-03T03:04:00.000-04:00

Yet another letter from Michael "French Fries" Moore.

"Dear Friends,

Something historic happened Thursday. For the first time since 1877 a member of the House and a member of the Senate stood up together to object to a state's electoral college votes."

And we're supposed to be happy about this?

"This is the first step on a necessary road toward making sure that everyone is allowed to vote and that every vote is counted (something we did not see in 2000 or 2004). The next time around all of us must be confident that when the election results come in, they reflect the will of the people, not the whim of mechanical error and human obstruction."

By "the will of the people," you mean "the will of Hollywood," and by "the whim of mechanical error," you mean "the opinion of the majority of Americans." Oh, and is "human obstruction" like people voting under a dead person's name? Oh wait, that's good human obstruction.

"Unlike the 2000 election, when the black members of Congress were told to sit down and shut up, this time a senator had the courage to stand with them to force Congress to go back to their separate chambers to discuss and debate the issues surrounding the vote count. California Senator Barbara Boxer rose to the occasion and stood with Ohio Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones and 30 other Representatives 'to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now.'"

So wait. The electoral college system is flawed, according to the Dems. What's their solution? A system where the Democrats always win? I don't get how they can't grasp that America doesn't agree with them anymore!

"Representative Maxine Waters took to the floor and said, 'Mr. Speaker and members, I dedicate my objection to Ohio's electoral votes to Mr. Michael Moore, the producer of the documentary 'Fahrenheit 9/11' and I thank him for educating the world on the threats to our democracy and the proceedings of this house on the acceptance of the electoral college votes for the 2000 presidential election.'"

Yes, because a director of a movie that's based only on his skewed political viewpoint is definitely an honor to associate yourself with.

"Actually, it is Maxine Waters who deserves thanks for defending our most basic right."

If "our most basic right" means "the liberal's basic right to win all elections," then yes.

"Coming out of the gates like this in the very first week of session sent a strong message that we are not going to be pushed around. If the Republicans think the next four years are going to be a cakewalk, they’ve got another thing coming."

Honestly, Mike, I'd like to see you try to do anything but sit your fat self on a couch and whine while typing biased and baseless accusations on your website and watch Fahrenheit 911 for the millionth time like a pathetic geek who repeats a good joke over and over to himself, laughing each time.

"Of course the Republicans went ballistic. They blamed me, you, Hollywood and anything else that came to mind. To read some of their more humorous comments, click here."

Yeah, because blaming people is so much different from the liberal tactics. At least the ones we blame have actually *done* something, and we can prove it. Oh, and "humorous" must mean "true" in Moore's Code. Bad pun, I know. But I like it.

"Congratulations to the tens of thousands of you who called, faxed, and e-mailed Barbara Boxer and other senators. You have shown the world, with the strength of your convictions, that the movement toward a truly representative democracy will not be stopped. Thursday’s actions will be marked by history books as a turning point for the electoral process and for a Democratic Party that has for too long sat back and taken it on the chin."

That's what you think. In reality, Barbara Boxer will be looked over and ignored. It's not like she's going to manage to change a system that's been with America since the very beginning.

"Your voices have echoed all the way up to the hallowed halls of Congress and for that, you deserve the thanks more than anyone.

Yours,

Michael Moore"

See, according to Mike, it's people that complain about a fair election and a system that our forefathers thought up to make sure no small state's opinions were ignored that deserve thanks. It's not the soldiers that have bought our freedom with their blood, and given us the right to fair elections. Instead, it's the ones that fight against what so many have died to keep. Those are the ones who deserve thanks?! These people make me sick.

Edit: Yes, I realize this is old, but it was too perfect to not respond to it.

2005-10-02T01:13:00.000-04:00

Sorry to have another advertisement post, but I found yet another blog! Yay! It's Right Wing Alberta. Although it's not about U.S. politics, it's still really fun to read. And, though it's short, the author makes some very good points. Conservative Canadians are few and far between, and we should support and appreciate them. So read it, link to it, comment on it, and encourage him to write more!

2005-10-01T03:23:00.000-04:00

Once again, I'd like to direct your attention to the links section. Yet another link has been added. It is to The Deconstructor, a brilliant blog written by Right_Wing. His posts are long and eloquent, with jokes and sarcasm sprinkled in, making very tasteful and enjoyable read.

If you wonder why I make these posts, this is why. Not only do I really enjoy the blogs I read, but also, I believe it's good to promote other conservative blogs on the net. Each blog has something different to offer. So check out The Deconstructor for some lovely wit and style. If he amazes you with his writing, just wait til you hear this. He's only 13...and a senior in high school. So if you were impressed with me, that situation should put you into shock! :P

2005-10-01T02:01:00.000-04:00

As promised, here is the Bible's idea of what should happen to ol' Mikey. You remember when he was endorsing Al Sin Dee? Here's what the Bible says about knowing when someone's breaking a law and doing nothing about it.

"For I told him that I would judge his family forever because of the sin he knew about; his sons made themselves contemptible, and he failed to restrain them," so says 1 Samuel 3:13. Doesn't look good for Moore, or Al Sin Dee.

The Bible also has more to say about fair judgment. 1 Kings 8:32 states "then hear from heaven and act. Judge between your servants, condemning the guilty and bringing down on his own head what he has done. Declare the innocent not guilty, and so establish his innocence." Put guilt where it is meant to be put.

For lawbreakers, like the one he endorses, Al Sin Dee, Romans 2:12 says "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law." This also applies to fair judgment. The Bible does not say anything about telling the poor that they are victims and that everyone owes them.

Lastly, the Bible gives an example of what you should do. As said in Psalm 7:8, "let the LORD judge the peoples. Judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness, according to my integrity, O Most High." Now, who was the only one who asked for judgment when he believed it was due? That's right. President Bush. I rest my case.

2005-10-01T00:13:00.000-04:00

All right, I confess, this is long overdue. No excuse. But I'm gonna make one, anyway. Lots of English work (ugh) and now I'm enrolling in a college course called Myths, Legends, and Folklore. That's gonna be a lot of work, too. But anyway, to the good stuff.

It appears we have a letter from ol' Michael Spring Offensive Moore. I like that nickname. Just like the German offensive, he's doing his best to destroy the United States and her allies. Anyway, continuing on...

Let's begin.

"To All My Fellow Americans Who Voted for George W. Bush:"

The shudder I got from reading that was the worst I've ever gotten in my life. Please, Mike, don't group me with you ever again. Ever.

"On this, the fourth anniversary of 9/11, I'm just curious, how does it feel?"

Well, I'm having mixed feelings, really. I'm sad it happened, mourning for the loss, feeling respectful for the dead, proud of the sacrifice the firemen, policemen, and those on Flight 93 made, angry at the terrorists, glad my parents elected the right man, and I'm really loving my country.

And let me guess, you're feeling giddy it happened so you can blame it on Bush, celebrating in the midst of the loss because of political gain, feeling respect for the dead terrorists for fighting the evil United States, proud of the sacrifice the terrorists and bin Laden made, angry at America, sad that Bush was elected, and you're really hating your country.

I'm right, aren't I?

"How does it feel to know that the man you elected to lead us after we were attacked went ahead and put a guy in charge of FEMA whose main qualification was that he ran horse shows?

That's right. Horse shows."

Really? So that Bachelors of Arts undergrad degree, that Juris Doctor post-grad degree in public administration/political science, the job as an administrative assistant to a city manager, and the other job as a Finance Committee Staff Director doesn't cut it? So what does it take in your mind, Mike, to run FEMA? Do you have to be a drop out or something?

In an interesting note, the real story about him running horse shows is this:

"Before joining the DHS/FEMA, Brown was the Judges and Stewards Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association, (IAHA), from 1989-2001."

That's not quite running them, Michael. And I have a source. Trumps you! (Hint, Mike: you don't count as a source.)

And what's so bad about horse shows? I like horse shows. My sister does them, but she was born in New York. Does that degrade her any, Mr. Michael Moore Food? If you can make jokes about horse shows, I can make fun of your body weight. Glad we're even.

"I really want to know -- and I ask you this in all sincerity and with all due respect -- how do you feel about the utter contempt Mr. Bush has shown for your safety?"

Give me one example where Mr. Bush has shown contempt for my safety and I'll answer that. See, when you're trying to persuade someone, you don't just ask them vague questions that hint at something sinister. You claim to be a person who gets to the bottom of things, so stop pulling your punches! Fill me in on the facts; all those lies you seem to know about, all those horrible crimes...I'm waiting! Hit me with 'em!

If you need a few decades, I'll be here reading a bunch of magazines.

"C'mon, give me just a moment of honesty."

Only if you do the same with me, bucko. All right, I know, I know...lies are all you have.

"Don't start ranting on about how this disaster in New Orleans was the fault of one of the poorest cities in America."

Now, I never said that. The disaster in New Orleans was mainly due to things no human could help, not even Mr. George Mage Bush, and that's sarcasm right there for all you libs. Now then, as you've heard a million times on TV, New Orleans is like a bowl. So that's where the flooding came in. Then, Katrina destroyed the levees, and until you have solid and concrete evidence to prove otherwise, I'll stick to that, thank you very much. Lastly, if you have to blame anything on a human, blame it on the local government, not the city. As Rush likes to call him, Mayor Ray Schoolbus Nagin didn't stick to the evacuation plan, and Governor Blanco, who is ironically named after the state of her mind, didn't request the national guard as quickly as she could. Name one thing Bush did personally and I'll give you it, but only if you can prove it. Come on, you can do it...

"Put aside your hatred of Democrats and liberals and anyone with the last name of Clinton."

So long as you put aside your hatred of Republicans and conservatives and anyone with the last name of Bush or Reagan. It's a two way street, you know. Give a little, take a little.

"Just look me in the eye and tell me our President did the right thing after 9/11 by naming a horse show runner as the top man to protect us in case of an emergency or catastrophe."

Again with the horse show runner label! Get it right! He had credentials. You don't. So stop talking like it's reversed! Plus, I really doubt I could look in your eyes without screaming in pure terror and running away.

"I want you to put aside your self-affixed label of Republican/conservative/born-again/capitalist/ditto-head/right-winger and just talk to me as an American, on the common ground we both call America."

Oh wow. This is coming from the man trying to get me to stop hating Dems and libs. You're not helping yourself here. And the day I do that is the day you stop trying to destroy said America.

"Are we safer now than before 9/11? When you learn that behind the horse show runner, the #2 and #3 men in charge of emergency preparedness have zero experience in emergency preparedness, do you think we are safer?"

Mike, do you have a horse obsession? Are you worried that Brown might mistake you for a horse and stick you in a show? Though that would be highly amusing, it's also highly improbable. But that is what you call entertainment; not some stupid Fahrenheit 911 crap that rips the name off of a book that's trying to prevent what Moore stands for.

"When you look at Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security, a man with little experience in national security, do you feel secure?"

Well, let's dive into his history, then, to see how "little experience" he has.

"[Michael Chertoff] later attended Harvard University, graduating in 1975. He then graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1978, going on to clerk for appellate judge Murray Gurfein for a year before clerking for United States Supreme Court justice William Brennan from 1979 to 1980. He worked in private practice with Latham & Watkins from 1980 to 1983 before being hired as a prosecutor by Rudolph Giuliani, then the U.S. attorney for Manhattan, working on mafia and political corruption-related cases."

I don't know, he seems pretty smart to me. How many people can say they graduated manga cum laude? Certainly not drop out Moore.

"When men who never served in the military and have never seen young men die in battle send our young people off to war, do you think they know how to conduct a war? Do they know what it means to have your legs blown off for a threat that was never there?"

Oh wow. This logic is so flawed! Okay, Mike, have you ever served in the military? Have you ever seen young men die in battle? Do you know what it means to have your legs blown off? No, I'm not talking about people in movies. If only people who have served in the military can decide to go or not to go to war, then your opinion isn't valid. So shut up already.

Also, how do you know the threat wasn't there? Did you do actual research? Do you know all the information that our government knows and our intelligence knows? I'm guessing your answers were all big fat "no's," just like you are, Michael.

"Do you really believe that turning over important government services to private corporations has resulted in better services for the people?"

As opposed to a big sprawling morass of corrupted government bureaucracies? Yes.

"Why do you hate our federal government so much?"

Maybe because something so big with so much paperwork can never be efficient. You need businesses, since businesses thrive on efficiency. That's how they operate, because that's how you make money, and it also helps the economy since businesses create jobs, jobs get people money, the more money people make, the more they can spend, and thus the cycle continues. Basic economics. I didn't even need to take a class for it.

"You have voted for politicians for the past 25 years whose main goal has been to de-fund the federal government. Do you think that cutting federal programs like FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers has been good or bad for America? GOOD OR BAD?"

Hmm, am I mistaken, or was that not the fault of tax cutting...

It's my understanding that they were given money to fix the levees and the environmentalists got in the way, and also the money wasn't used right. But hey, I'm a Republican. That means you can't trust me, even if I tell you the sky isn't green.

"With the nation's debt at an all-time high, do you think tax cuts for the rich are still a good idea? Will you give yours back so hundreds of thousands of homeless in New Orleans can have a home?"

According to you, Mike, I'm "rich." That means, with my parents' combined income, we have over $100,000 a year. Except for the fact that two siblings of mine are going to an expensive private college and we have many other expenses that eat away at that money. Trust me, we aren't living like kings and queens over here. So yeah, tax cuts are nice. And don't give me that about "giving yours back." My parents give a lot to charity, and we donated to Katrina victims already. At least we know our money was actually used on the victims, and not on media equipment.

"Do you believe in Jesus? Really?"

Actually, no, I don't. Yes, I am a conservative...who isn't Christian. We do exist. But for the sake of argument, I know the faith enough to counter him.

"Didn't he say that we would be judged by how we treat the least among us?"

Hmm, let me look that up for you. Nope, I didn't find it, but if anyone can find it for me, I'd be appreciative. Here's a Bible search engine for you to use.

Now, sorry Mike, I didn't find your verse. However, I did find some other interesting verses. For one, God told Moses in Leviticus 19:15, "'Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.'"

Another interesting verse is Isaiah 11:4, which reads "but with righteousness he will judge the needy, with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth. He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked." This means that, regardless of if you are poor, needy, or not, you will be judged according to what you've done. The poor don't get special treatment here. As a matter of fact, Jesus says something to contradict that completely.In Matthew 26:11, "The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me" when the disciples accused the woman who poured expensive perfume on Jesus' feet of wasting something that could be sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus didn't despise the wealthy; only those who made it an idol in their life and who adored money.

Not to belabor the point, Mike, but this is what the Bible says you'll be judged by, courtesy of Revelation 20:13. "The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done."

More on the Bible's idea of what should happen to Moore later.

"Hurricane Katrina came in and blew off the facade that we were a nation with liberty and justice for all. The wind howled and the water rose and what was revealed was that the poor in America shall be left to suffer and die while the President of the United States fiddles and tells them to eat cake."

Actually, I think you're confusing the President with Marie Antoinette, who actually didn't say that line, according to a book I read called An Underground Education. Also, when you come up with a way to single-handedly stop a hurricane in its tracks due to your immense girth, be sure to go public so you can hope to get a Nobel Prize.

"That's not a joke. The day the hurricane hit and the levees broke, Mr. Bush, John McCain and their rich pals were stuffing themselves with cake."

What's wrong with cake? You obviously like it. Please, don't lecture me about rich people. For the love of God, look at Hollywood and then say the Republicans are the rich ones.

"A full day after the levees broke (the same levees whose repair funding he had cut), Mr. Bush was playing a guitar some country singer gave him. All this while New Orleans sank under water."

I already addressed the repair funding. Also, what was he supposed to do? He couldn't be there, bailing out the water with a bucket, now could he? He's not in charge of FEMA. He did his job, and even more than expected.

"It would take ANOTHER day before the President would do a flyover in his jumbo jet, peeking out the window at the misery 2500 feet below him as he flew back to his second home in DC. It would then be TWO MORE DAYS before a trickle of federal aid and troops would arrive. This was no seven minutes in a sitting trance while children read 'My Pet Goat' to him. This was FOUR DAYS of doing nothing other than saying 'Brownie (FEMA director Michael Brown), you're doing a heck of a job!'"

Again, Presidential visits aren't just "Hey, let's pack up and go! Road trip!" And another thing, wasn't the national guard in before the hurricane hit? That was all over the news. And I'm sorry, but this doesn't look like peeking to me.

"My Republican friends, does it bother you that we are the laughing stock of the world?"

AUGH! I AM NOT YOUR FRIEND!

And no, it doesn't. I'd use France as toilet paper, but...France is so dirty...

"And on this sacred day of remembrance, do you think we honor or shame those who died on 9/11/01? If we learned nothing and find ourselves today every bit as vulnerable and unprepared as we were on that bright sunny morning, then did the 3,000 die in vain?"

We would shame them if we listened to you and your psycho liberal babbling.

"Our vulnerability is not just about dealing with terrorists or natural disasters. We are vulnerable and unsafe because we allow one in eight Americans to live in horrible poverty. We accept an education system where one in six children never graduate and most of those who do can't string a coherent sentence together. The middle class can't pay the mortgage or the hospital bills and 45 million have no health coverage whatsoever."

I guess you were one of the six, hmm, Mike? There will always be poverty. It's sad, but it's life. Accept it already. And maybe the middle class could pay their mortgage if the taxes were low. Same with hospital bills. Hospitals would be less costly if they, too, had less taxes to pay. The more they pay, the more they charge to make a profit. Again, simple economics.

"Are we safe? Do you really feel safe? You can only move so far out and build so many gated communities before the fruit of what you've sown will be crashing through your walls and demanding retribution. Do you really want to wait until that happens? Or is it your hope that if they are left alone long enough to soil themselves and shoot themselves and drown in the filth that fills the street that maybe the problem will somehow go away?"

They do that because of the victim mentality you feed them. Maybe if they thought to themselves, "I'm going to live a good life on my own merits because I'm the only one responsible for my failures, and so I will improve my faults," then they wouldn't be shooting each other in the ghettos. I live next to them, Moore. I know how they think. Can you say that?

"I know you know better. You gave the country and the world a man who wasn't up for the job and all he does is hire people who aren't up for the job. You did this to us, to the world, to the people of New Orleans. Please fix it. Bush is yours. And you know, for our peace and safety and security, this has to be fixed. What do you propose?

I have an idea, and it isn't a horse show.

Yours,

Michael Moore"

Awww, do you want a tissue? Cry me a river. Gore was the one who wasn't up for the job. I can't imagine the horror that would be Gore's speech after 9/11. We are much safer with Bush as the President, and I have a feeling that you don't exactly like it that way.

I'm such a big, bad Republican. Do you want things done the liberal way? Go to glorious Cuba. That's what I propose. Seriously, we won't be missing you.

2005-09-28T12:51:00.000-04:00

I'm very, very sorry I haven't gotten to write any new posts! I've been busy with school and the like, sadly. Since I've been behind, I've been doing school practically all day. After September, I'll most likely post more, as the amount of catch up work will be far less than what I'm used to. I look forward to a time when I won't be behind! See you guys then.

2005-09-22T14:11:00.000-04:00

Once again, a new link! I'm discovering more and more people from S&L's blogs. Sorry if this is boring to some people. The newest blog to the mix is Jeremiah Stoddard. If my old social studies teacher were to describe it, she'd use her line "short and sweet." Though the entries aren't long (like mine, which seem to go on into infinite :P), they are to the point, and the author manages to somehow get his opinion into those few words. Not a lot of people can do that. Jeremiah, let me tell you, if you ever go to get a PHD, get one in math. For those whose parents weren't getting their PHD when they were in their teens: in mathamatics, the shorter and simpler dissertation, the better. And, as for his views...if you don't mind the pun, he couldn't be more right.

2005-09-20T13:05:00.000-04:00

Yes, another announcement post. I'm going to be out of town until Thursday this week. I may update, or I may be too busy to do so. Either way, I'll see you all on Thursday!

2005-09-19T19:51:00.000-04:00

More liberal nonsense from the ~~patron saint of lying~~ infamous Michael Moore.

"They wanted the fresh recruits, the ones they believed had been seduced by video games and government lies, to see the blood and think about those destined to shed it: the Iraqi people and American soldiers. They refused to leave and prayed while they waited to be arrested."

Whoa, whoa, stop right there. Stop RIGHT there. First of all, what is this? "Seduced by video games and government lies?" This in itself could make an entire blog entry. Now, I want all of you out there to listen up, and listen good. These liberals are whining about what now? Where to begin? Maybe with their word choice. The word "seduced" is a very interesting word to use, Michelle. The connotations of that word are usually associated with sex, even though the word was used properly. So, unless these video games in question include "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" (which includes a patch you can download that actually allows you to "have sex") and these "government lies" include naked prostitutes, I think you should use a different word. After all, it's people like you that want to be loose about sex. Choose your words carefully.

Another thing. I am sick to death of people blaming video games for violence. People have been violent since the human race was born, both young and old. You think that, at a certain age, the idea of murder, mayhem, and malice just pops into our head and we say "oh, I never thought of that before?" Let this sink in. Playing a video game is no worse than reading a violent book, watching an intense movie/play/musical, or listening to someone describe vicious acts. Video games have not gotten to the point where your physical body can enter a digital world where everything looks and feels real. So, until they have those kind of simulators, calm down. Anyone that claims video games are responsible for violence should not allow their kids to watch anything but rated G movies (no, really, don't do that). It's the same thing! Movies are even more realistic! Now that that is out of the way...

"Jesus of Nazareth inspired them, they said, as did their parents and several well-known Vietnam-era protesters, including the brothers Daniel and Philip Berrigan."

Don't even go there. This is an example of liberals realizing Americans respect the Christian religion, and thus try to masquerade as Christians. No one's buying it, yet they still try. It's the liberal way, praise ~~Allah~~ Jesus. Sorry, I slipped. D'oh.

"In an unusual move, the protesters are now facing federal prosecution and harsher potential penalties after a jury deadlocked in state court. 'It's a clear attempt to raise the stakes for those contemplating civil disobedience around the country,' said William P. Quigley, a law professor at Loyola University who is a friend of the defendants and their legal adviser."

I'm sick and tired of hearing about "civil disobedience." There is such thing as bad civil disobedience, you know. Example: Earth First! has done many acts of civil disobedience, including acts of sabotage.

"The group — which calls itself the St. Patrick's Four because the protest took place on St. Patrick's Day in 2003 — faces charges including damaging government property and conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States. Their trial is set to begin Monday in federal court in Binghamton."

And this is bad that they're being stopped...why? Also, I really doubt Jesus ever said anything about there being glory in damaging property and conspiring to impede a government officer. As a matter of fact, the Bible stands behind the idea of government and leaders, and respecting them as well. Take a look, and you can even read it in context. (Click the third button at the top that says "expand") Also, if you want a quote from Jesus about respecting government, here you go.

"The case did not automatically end up in federal court. The protesters were first charged with felony criminal mischief in Tompkins County, which includes Lansing, the Ithaca suburb where the protest took place."

And well they should be! Basically any crime could be considered "civil disobedience." Here is the dictionary.com definition:

"Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means."

So, in other words, if I don't think that a law against stealing is a good idea, if I steal government property, then it's covered by this "civil disobedience," so long as I don't knock a bunch of people unconscious while doing so. Awesome!

"The District Attorney there, George M. Dentes, offered a plea bargain under which members of the group would receive no jail time if they pleaded guilty to a reduced charge. The protesters — Daniel J. Burns, 45; Clare T. Grady, 46; her sister, Teresa B. Grady, 40; and Peter J. De Mott, 58 — refused. 'Millions of people all over the world were saying the war would be a mistake and would result in a large loss of human life,' De Mott said. 'We were a part of that.'"

So wait, let me get this straight. They damage government property and conspire against a government official, they know they did it, and yet...their logic for not pleading guilty is the reason they protested. What? That doesn't have to do with anything! You can protest the war without destroying things. If you claim to be for peace and cause destruction, you are creating what you detest. How is this so hard to figure out?

"All have some experience with the workings of the criminal justice system stemming from previous arrests. They opted to take the case to trial, acting as their own lawyers. 'They wanted a soapbox,' Dentes said."

Oh great. So this isn't the first time they've done this. Joy. Come on, put them in jail already.

"During the April 2004 trial, Tompkins County Judge John Sherman allowed the protesters to explain their motivations, and to testify at length that they felt compelled because of their political and religious beliefs. 'The moment I learned of that, I knew it was a hopeless case,' Dentes said. 'This case was about damaging government property. It was preposterous that the trial was not about whether they broke the law — they completely admitted they did — but a philosophical debate about the war.'"

Okay, good! It's admitted! JAIL THEM!

Liberals have this hard time with sticking to the matter at hand. If someone asks why they did something, it's always gonna be some other weird subject, as seen here, in this dramatic and very fictional example.

Dorothy: Jimmy! Did you pour water all over my stuff? Your mom told you to stop destroying people's things.
Jimmy: Racist!
Dorothy: What?
Jimmy: Your family is racist! They didn't come to the multicultural night!
Dorothy: Jimmy, someone broke into my house that night.
Jimmy: I bet you were gonna say it was a black man! Racist!

The sad thing is, I can actually imagine this happening.

"During the weeklong trial, the defendants also spoke at length about their lives. Teresa and Clare Grady grew up going to the trials of their activist parents. Most notably, their father, John Grady, was among the Camden 28, a group of protesters who were acquitted of stealing and destroying draft records from a federal building in New Jersey in 1971. The acquittal was a major victory for antiwar protesters after five years of draft-record scuffles."

Oh, so insanity runs in the family. At least, their attorney had better hope that's what they're pleading, otherwise they're going to lose that case.

"De Mott is a former Vietnam veteran and a seminary student who testified that he was gradually moved to become an activist after he left the military."

I wonder if he'll run for office someday? The dems will support him and try to use his war record to get Americans to like him. Oh wait, they already tried that...and FAILED.

"Burns is the son of a former mayor of Binghamton, whose family was also involved in antiwar protests."

Maybe they were the people that egged my uncle's friends who were soldiers.

"The jury deadlocked, with nine members voting for acquittal. Dentes said he believed that the protesters had gotten away with a crime, that the outcome created 'a system for chaos' and that the spattering of blood had been potentially dangerous. But fearing a similar outcome if he retried the case, he referred it to federal authorities."

He's right. We shouldn't let crazy people get away with crimes because of their insane ideas of what's right.

"If convicted, the protesters would face up to six years in prison and a $250,000 fine."

Only six? Awww...

"Assistant U.S. Attorney Miroslav Lovric, the prosecutor in the case, did not return repeated phone calls for comment."

No surprise to me. Since this is on Moore's site, he'd get swamped with liberal idiocy. I'd do the same, too,if I were him. Ahh, caller ID...

"As with the state trial, the outcome in the federal case will most likely be determined by how much leeway the judge gives the defendants to explain their state of mind, Quigley said. "There's a network of lawyers who are worried this case will set a precedent" and nonviolent protesters across the country will now be charged with federal conspiracy, he said."

Why not? And last time I checked, doesn't "nonviolent" usually mean that they don't destroy anything?

"The judge will also determine how much the jury will learn of their arrest records. In 1984, Clare Grady was convicted of charges similar to those she faces today when she was among a disarmament group called Plowshares that hammered and poured blood on a B-52 bomber at Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, N.Y. She served 15 months in prison. De Mott has been in and out of jail since 1979 for civil disobedience. He cannot remember the exact number of times he has been arrested, but said he usually 'rounds it off to two dozen.'"

Whoa there. They poured blood? Where'd they get this blood? Did they kill an animal? Steal from a hospital? That's very creepy. It's clear that these aren't ordinary crazies, no, these are practically criminally insane. Don't let them out!

"All are members of the Catholic Worker movement, an activist group that encourages civil disobedience, and they model themselves on the Berrigan brothers, two priests who were among the most aggressive and recognized protesters of the 1960s and 1970s."

Oh joy. Here's something from Wikipedia about these ~~frightening~~ fine men:

"In 1969...A local high school physics teacher helped to concoct homemade napalm. Nine activists, who later became known as the Catonsville Nine, walked into the draft board of Catonsville, Maryland, and removed 378 draft files, which they brought outside and burned. The Catonsville Nine, who were all Catholic, issued a statement..."

That's right. See if you can think about these Berrigan brothers, then say "They were non-violent" with a straight face.

"'We understand protests and people exercising their right to free speech, but when it comes to the point of interrupting the operations of the recruiting stations, it's unacceptable,' said S. Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the U.S. Army Recruiting Headquarters in Fort Knox."

Liberals, just because you don't like the military doesn't mean that you can prevent people from using their free will to join it!

"'Generally, Americans are reluctant to send protesters to prison for such actions,' said Lawrence S. Wittner, a history professor at State University of New York at Albany who studies peace movements and public opinion. 'It's part of the tradition of nonviolent resistance in the United States, and it doesn't just date back to the civil rights movement and Vietnam,' he said, 'but to the Quakers and to Henry David Thoreau, who refused to pay taxes to show his resistance to the Mexican War.'"

Hey, I don't care about sending them to prison. The Quakers may have not paid taxes, but that's nothing compared to torching draft files, pouring blood on government planes, and destroying government property.

"'The St. Patrick's Four has a better chance for an acquittal or a hung jury today than shortly after their arrest,' he said, 'because of increasing unfavorable opinions over the war.'"

Maybe in New York City, yeah, but not the majority of Americans. Man these are some crazy people in this world...

2005-09-19T02:05:00.000-04:00

This is going to be another small advertising post. I added one more link to the links section. The O'Reilly Briefs is a blog by Shapter that centers mainly around comments about the Talking Points on Bill O'Reilly's popular show, The Factor. Though sometimes profane and perhaps even offensive to some (but is that so wrong?), it is a very amusing blog, and I encourage all of my readers (yes, all 3 of you :P) to check it out.

Edit: I added another blog. Need A Light? has just begun, but the posts are long and informative. The writer is Fizzy, and she is absolutely brilliant, shining light into a dark room and exposing the liberal ugliness inside. Take a look, it's worth it!

2005-09-19T00:50:00.000-04:00

Now what you've all been waiting for!

For The Last Time; It’s Not About The Oil

An essay by Nephthys

Once upon a time, a father read a bedtime story to his little girl. In many ways he was an ordinary American; his eyes were a soft milk chocolate brown and his smile was full of love for his daughter as he kissed her cheek and whispered “goodnight” into her ear. But there’s something different about this man who tenderly tucked his daughter in one night. His thoughts of this night aren’t the same as everyone else’s. He was thinking of how he was going to miss her, because the next day, he was going off to war in Iraq. He was filled with comfort as he looked at his reason for joining the fight right in the eyes, and smiled as she said “I love you, daddy.” He was going to protect her.

Though this story isn’t based on anyone I know personally, it most likely happened in many houses while our brave men and women prepared to leave for Iraq. There is much opposition to this war, and any person who supports it is usually written off as a “warmonger.” However, though you wouldn’t know it from the media’s coverage of the war, there are other reasons for the Iraq war besides weapons of mass destruction (WMD’s).

Saddam Hussein was a very frightening and powerful man. He specifically insulted America and dismissed Americans as “weak.” “‘I will now tell you my opinion,’ Saddam said calmly, confidently. ‘Iran will never interfere. Our forces will put up more of a fight than you think. They can dig bunkers and withstand America's aerial attacks. They will fight for a long time, and there will be many casualties on both sides. Only we are willing to accept casualties; the Americans are not. The American people are weak. They would not accept the losses of large numbers of their soldiers.’” This quote came from an article called “Tales of the Tyrant.” (1) How appropriate.

His threats did not stop there. In a meeting with a foreign minister from Qatar, “Saddam jumped up in rage. He shouted at the foreign minister. According to the CairoQatar was prepared to be an agent of the USA and, on the side of the enemy, strike against the Arab nation. Should the small Gulf emirate ‘allow the US army to attack Iraq from al-Udeid,’ he would ‘completely annihilate’ the country.” This threat was not only to Qatar, but also to the Americans that would be in it when the he attacked it. This also hints to him having advanced and powerful weaponry to be able to make such a threat. (2)

For whatever reasons, both known and unknown, the fact is that the United States Intelligence pointed to Iraq having WMD’s. And I quote, “Iraq has long had NBC weapons and missile efforts…it had a known chemical warfare capability and a demonstrated willingness to use it (Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian troops and its Kurdish population during the 1980s) a suspected biological warfare capability, and an ongoing nuclear weapons development program…” This was a quote from The Office of the Secretary of Defense in January of 2001. (3)

England also agreed with us. “…we have no doubt that the threat posed to United Kingdom forces was genuinely perceived as a real and present danger and that the steps taken to protect them taken were justified by the information available at the time…The Iraqi regime was repeatedly found to be acting in bad faith, doing the minimum necessary to give a semblance of co-operation and making admissions only when it was certain that UN inspectors had uncovered the truth…Iraq continued to hide substantial information about prohibited programs and probably continued to develop them.” This is also a direct quote from the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee in 2002-03. (4) Even if Iraq did not have actual weapons, it is clear that they had programs to make such weapons, and due to the nature of Saddam, it would have been only a matter of time until he managed to develop them. Both England and the United States saw Saddam as enough of a threat to not want to risk being wrong. Better safe than sorry.

If, for some reason, the threat of WMD’s is not enough, Saddam has other sins that warrant war. From 1990 to 2002, Saddam has broken at least seventeen different United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR’s). Rather than list the seventeen, I will quote instead some of what Iraq was to do. “Iraq must not commit or support terrorism, or allow terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq” and “Iraq must declare fully its weapons of mass destruction programs” are both under UNSCR 687, April 3, 1991. “Iraq must immediately end repression of its civilian population” is a demand from UNSCR 688, April 5, 1991. “Iraq must halt nuclear activities of all kinds until the Security Council deems Iraq in full compliance,” and “Iraq must make a full, final and complete disclosure of all aspects of its weapons of mass destruction and missile programs” are from UNSCR 707, August 15, 1991. In October 11, 1991, UNSCR 715 required that “Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors.” UNSCR 1051, March 27, 1996, ordered “Iraq must report shipments of dual-use items related to weapons of mass destruction to the UN and IAEA.” (5) You get the picture, and it’s not even 2000 yet. Even the UN thinks he has weapons, and his violations prove that diplomacy will not work with him.

There are also strategic reasons we attacked Iraq. If you were to look at a map of the Middle East and locate Iraq, there is one thing you would notice. It is right in the middle, as seen here. (6)

Also, please note all the countries around it that are potential enemies of the United States, or have known terrorists hiding in them. The map clearly shows that the locations of Iraq and Israel are very important in case we need to defend ourselves from terror threats. There are other benefits, too. The Iraqis, once freed, will be powerful allies to the United States, and it will bring its people freedom and democracy.

However, if this evidence is not convincing, there is one more point that must be made. That is what would have happened, had we not attacked Iraq. George Santayana once said “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” (7) This is very true. The war protestors do not realize that their ideas of how to deal with a malevolent dictator have been put into practice before. This is the case of Kim Jong Il.

According to Wikipedia, “Kim's relationship with the United States has been equally difficult. During the Clinton administration, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited Pyongyang in 2000, and extracted a promise from Kim that the DPRK would not pursue its nuclear weapons program if the U.S. would agree to pay for a nuclear energy facility for the DPRK. This deal never came to fruition: the DPRK continued to develop nuclear capabilities, and the U.S. never paid for the substitute facility.” (8) In other words, diplomacy failed. The United States did nothing, but we can be sure the Koreans were not sitting idly by. The Koreans have threatened America numerous times. The Daily Cardinal reported on March 4^th, 2003 that “Yesterday, in a particularly blunt attempt at provoking the United States, four North Korean fighter planes followed a U.S. reconnaissance plane into international airspace. The U.S. plane returned safely to its base, but the incident was symbolic in its resemblance to a 1969 incident during which North Korea downed a U.S. reconnaissance plane and its crew.” (9) Though Korea did not attack, the threat was clear. It was if Korea was telling us “We can and will take you down if you cross us.” If left unchecked, that is what Saddam could and most likely would turn into, and perhaps he would even be much more dangerous.

Saddam was an example to all the enemies of the United States. Instead of backing down from threats, America met them. This time, America would not let a tyrant slip by. The only way to convince violent countries that the United States is strong is to not allow them to insult or threaten this country. Otherwise, countries like Korea and Iraq will continue to disobey UNSCR’s, make bold messages of malice to other nations, and attack and kill citizens without fear of retaliation.

This war was not for oil, or for Halliburton, or for lies as some claim. This war was to save civilian lives, both in Iraq and the United States. This war was to prevent Saddam from funding or creating a safe environment for terrorists, attacking innocent people with WMD’s, breaking more UNSCR’s, oppressing Iraqi civilians, and destroying lives. If that still does not satisfy those who are against this war, nothing will. It is not certain how many lives the Iraq War will save in both America and the Middle East, but I am sure of this; I am glad that we will never have to find out.

Sources:

1. “Saddam’s Heart of Darkness,” quoting “Tales of the Tyrant,” September 26, 2002

Note: I apologize, but you need to register to view it. It is free to register.

2. “Saddam’s Heart of Darkness,” quoting “Der Spiegel,” September 26^th, 2002

Note: See above.

3. “Proliferation: Threat and Response,” Office of the Secretary of Defense, January 2001

Note: This is a PDF file. It may take some time to load. There information on page 33 about Iraq, which is where the quote is from, and also more on page 38-41.

4. “The Decision to go to War in Iraq,” House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, 2002-03

Note: This is also a PDF file. It may take some time to load. The quotes I used are conclusion 3 on page 3 and point 9 on page 9.

5. “Saddam’s Defiance of UNSCR’s,” U.S. Embassy in Latvia, 2003

6. “Middle East Map: Strategic Threat,” 2004

7. “History Quotations,” quoting George Satayana, 2004

Note: I realize I didn’t have to source this, but I want to be thorough!

8. “Kim Jong-il,” Wikipedia, September 2005

9. “N. Korea’s Continued Threats Demand Attention, Not Apathy,” Mari Armstrong-Hough, March 2003

2005-09-17T18:33:00.000-04:00

Well, I saw a picture of Michael Moore on Sweetness&Light, and it dawned on me that his expression was very familiar. So, I give you this! My creation! And it was good.

2005-09-16T15:28:00.000-04:00

Just a small post for now. I would like to take this time to direct you to my links section. Firstly, we have Ann Coulter's website. I really don't have to explain that. Same with Fox News. Then, there are three blogs. Sweetness & Light is a wonderfully researched blog, mostly about either Hurricane Katrina or Cindy Sheehan and her gang. It's a worth while read, I can assure you. Then, we have The Badge of Humility, a more sarcastic blog about anything that strikes The Apologist's fancy. His wit is unmatched. Lastly, we have Modern Commentaries, another blog from someone who comments on S&L, EnglishQueen01. It's a perfectly patriotic blog that uncovers the truth. I encourage you to check all these links out!

One last thing before I wrap this sort of advertisement type post: I found out that no one could comment on my posts, and I fixed it. Comments are now allowed (I didn't realize I disabled them!) so feel free to do so!

2005-09-15T21:59:00.000-04:00

Moving right along on our big blog spree, we have the MoveOn.org campaigns and a few snippy comments from me.

"Sandra Day O’Connor, a widely respected and moderate justice, has resigned from the Supreme Court. Now, in anywhere from a few hours to a few days President Bush will nominate a replacement—and what happens next will either destroy or protect our most basic rights for decades to come. This is an absolutely critical moment for our senators to hear directly from the people—and our message is clear: PROTECT OUR RIGHTS! We’ve launched an urgent petition to take your voice straight to your senators in this critical time to show Congress, the president and the media that the American people are engaged and ready to fight for our rights."

Moderate? MODERATE? Give me a break. And doesn't the President chose the justices? And I thought he already did. Justice Roberts. As for our "rights," you mean abortion, gay marriage, and the like, right? Well, it's obvious from the election that most of the nation doesn't agree with you, MoveOn.org. If you don't like it, that's too bad. We've had enough of your kind in the Clinton years.

"We are delighted that we were able to help restore some of the cuts made to NPR and PBS. MoveOn.org members sent in more than 1 million comments and made more than 40,000 calls to tell Congress to save Big Bird and Mr. Rogers. We are glad to have helped protect such an important service."

Yes, because the Sesame Street cast, including the muppet with AIDS, is so much more important than fixing levees in NO was. Glad to see our money's going to a good place. Too bad it's not in my wallet, but...big bird!

"MoveOn PAC is a proud member of this new coalition which brings together groups like the AFL-CIO, the Campaign for America's Future, AFSCME and USAction. Together, we're matching every move made by the Republicans—sending organizers to cities Bush visits days before he arrives, highlighting local community members who are opposed to gutting Social Security, and running ads which expose what the Republican plan for Social Security would really do."

You mean...fix it? Yeah. Because the liberal beaurocracy WANTS your money to be in their possession. This is so they can use it for good causes. Like saving big bird. How about saving real people, liberals? That doesn't seem to strike your fancy. The Iraqis would really appreciate it, though! Oh. That would require real effort, and throwing money at the problem won't work. Fiddle sticks.

"Turning our country around will take more than phone calls and emails. That's why we've launched Operation Democracy, a national network of neighborhood teams to take our progressive message to every town in the country. We work on critical issues like Supreme Court nominees, Social Security and the war in Iraq. And as the 2006 elections draw closer, we'll reach out to our neighbors to craft a positive agenda and start to focus on winning back Congress."

Hmm, how are you going to work on electing Supreme Court nominees? I thought that was the President's job. Oh wait, right, I'm not with the times here. You mean you want to elect democrat senators to BLOCK republican nominees! I get it now! And stop pretending to be progressive and call yourselves what you are, you commies.

Also, a side note: I looked over the first NY Times article that I commented on. I don't think it needs any more commenting, and the other article is basically the same thing, blaming Bush for not responding enough and other liberal garbage on the same subject. I'm really sick of Katrina coverage. So ends this really long blog entry, and there soon will be another, once I finish the Iraq War essay!

2005-09-15T21:38:00.000-04:00

Now we go on to the stuff you guys have all been waiting so long for, and so patiently. The part where I rip liberal ideas to tiny little shreds, and then cut those into pieces as well.

Warning, the following quote from PETA is not work safe, nor is it safe for younger or sensitive audiences.

"Vegetarians Make Better Lovers, Says Couple

San Francisco — In a public display of passion that’s bound to raise a few eyebrows and turn lots of heads, two PETA members—a U.S. marine and Iraq War vet wearing only boxer shorts and a raven-haired beauty decked out in sexy lingerie—will passionately make out in a bed set up on the sidewalk at a prominent intersection in order to make the point that vegetarians are better lovers. While the comely couple is 'getting it on,' activists holding a banner reading, 'Vegetarians Make Better Lovers,' will pass out free vegetarian starter kits to let gaping onlookers know how they can spice up their own sex lives. It’s all part of PETA’s 'Live Make-Out Tour':

Date: Friday, July 30
Time: 12 noon
Place: Southeast corner of Market and New Montgomery streets

Why do vegetarians have it all over meat-eaters in the bedroom? For one thing, vegetarians are, on average, more fit and trim and have more energy and stamina than people who stuff themselves with fat-laden meat, dairy products, and eggs. And vegetarians don’t have to rely on chemical potions like Viagra to be up for any task (the cholesterol in meat and other animal products causes hardening of the arteries, slowing the flow of blood to all the body’s vital organs, not just the heart). And speaking of heart, there’s nothing sexy about someone who turns a blind eye to the daily suffering of the billions of animals who are raised and killed for food each year.

'What could be more of a turn-on than snuggling up to someone who’s both passionate and compassionate?' asks PETA Director of Vegan Campaigns Bruce Friedrich. 'Try a veggie burger in the kitchen for a whopper in the bedroom!'

Where to start, where to start...oh this is just so incredibly moronic. Okay. Now that my brain is done spinning from all the idiocy, let's begin at their beginning. If this is taking place in a public place, are they not worried about the children? Come on. If little kids see that, don't you think they'll have very uncomfortable questions at a very young age? Do we really need them seeing this? THIS ISN'T EUROPE. GET OVER IT. There's a reason the Revolutionary War took place, people, and I think this is part of it.

Secondly, if vegetarianism was the ultimate diet plan, you wouldn't hear of the Atkin's diet everywhere. Also, did you ever hear of the expression "it's not the equiptment, it's the operator?" If someone doesn't know what they're doing in bed, they could be the most athletic and physically fit person in the world and still be bad at it. What they need is *not* a vegetarian diet. They need a teacher, that's what. Some have talent and some don't. A "great bod" won't do anything for someone who lacks talent, just as voice lessons are lost on someone who can't hit a note. And if vegetarianism was the cure to erectile disfunction, I'm sure doctors would be recommending it over Viagra, since Viagra and other pills can cause damage if an erection lasts over 4 hours. How do I know? Their stupid commercials are always on! And please, don't give me that "animal suffering" crap. More animals die from machines that harvest wheat, you idiots. I'm pretty sure there's a Maddox article on that somewhere. And that slogan is simply lame.

Here is another thing on PETA.

"The Anti-Defamation League has denounced a campaign by an animal rights group that compares slaughtering animals to the murder of 6 million Jews in World War II.

The graphic campaign and exhibit 'Holocaust on Your Plate,' devised by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, juxtaposes 60-square-foot panels displaying gruesome scenes from Nazi death camps side by side with disturbing photographs from factory farms and slaughterhouses. One shows a starving man in a concentration camp next to a starving cow.

The exhibit opens Friday in San Diego, California, and went up Thursday at the University of California at Los Angeles. It also is posted on a PETA Web site, www.masskilling.com, which calls for support for the campaign from the Jewish community.

The comparisons prompted an angry statement from Abraham Foxman, Anti-Defamation League national director and a Holocaust survivor.

'The effort by PETA to compare the deliberate, systematic murder of millions of Jews to the issue of animal rights is abhorrent,' the statement said. 'PETA's effort to seek approval for their 'Holocaust on Your Plate' campaign is outrageous, offensive and takes chutzpah to new heights.'

Lisa Lange, PETA's vice president of communications, told CNN's 'American Morning With Paula Zahn' on Friday that the idea for the public relations effort came from the late Nobel Prize-winning author Isaac Bashevis Singer, who, she said, wrote: 'In relation to them [animals], all people are Nazis; for them it is an eternal Treblinka' -- a death camp in Poland.

Lange said the campaign is appropriate because 'Nazi concentration camps were modeled after slaughterhouses.'

The Singer quote, which the group draws upon in its literature as well, was not spoken directly by him but rather comes from his novel 'Enemies: A Love Story,' when the main character muses on the plight of animals. Singer was a vegetarian who believed strongly in animal rights.

'It's shocking, it's startling, it's very hard to look at,' Lange said of the exhibit. 'We're attacking the mind-set' that condones the slaughter of animals.

'The very same mind-set that made the Holocaust possible -- that we can do anything we want to those we decide are 'different or inferior' -- is what allows us to commit atrocities against animals every single day,' PETA representative Mark Prescott wrote in a statement, which added that members of Prescott's family were murdered by Nazis.

The Anti-Defamation League statement, however, counters that abusive treatment of animals should be opposed, but cannot and must not be compared to the Holocaust.'"

Wow. Just wow. I don't understand some of these people. How can you compare the death of an animal to the death of a human? We are omnivores for a reason! We can digest meat because we were meant to digest meat and vegetables. If we were not meant to do so, then the vegetables that we would need for a complete diet would be available everywhere and be native everywhere, and they aren't. My guess is that vegetarians forget that humans didn't always have supermarkets where they could simply get any fruit or vegetable, regardless of where it actually grows.

Now then. For them to compare the death of animals to the Holocaust is just tasteless. The Holocaust was genocide. It was malicious, hateful, and countless numbers of people suffered during it. And I'm sure that the Jews just love being compared to cows and pigs.

On a related note, this next article will be linked to, due to how large it is.

"Humans 'Bear All' at London Zoo"

This is so wrong, in so many ways. "The basic theme was that humans are slowly crowding out the planet's other inhabitants." Oh, so what do you expect us to do? Are these the sorts of people who cheer when Hurricane Katrina came in so that all the evil humans who are greedily and malevolently stealing away the animal's habitats are gone? Okay, so there are a lot of humans. What do these lunatics want? For us to all die out?

I have one thing to say. If you think humans are eating up all the resources, are a cancer, and don't deserve to live; start with yourselves. I'm sure after the vegetarians, tree huggers, aging hippies, and animal worshippers have done their part in lowering the population, animals will be a lot happier. Practice what you preach.

2005-09-15T20:10:00.000-04:00

Well, I've procrastinated long enough, don't you agree? Sorry for the delay AGAIN. I've been visiting another city since Sunday. Anyway, on to the big big big blog posting spree, a special treat for all who have been missing it.

First, we have linkage. I got an email that included a link to a site for conservative students. I haven't checked it out yet, but it may be promising. Here you go. Check it out, and I hope it's good.

Now then. Next on the schedule, we have a beautiful joke that my mother has sent me.

"The Irish Times, September 08, 2005 -- "Ill Wind May Not Blow to the Whitehouse"
By Newton Emerson
As the full horror of Hurricane Katrina sinks in, thousands of
desperate columnists are asking if this is the end of George Bush's
presidency.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that every copy of the US
Constitution was destroyed in the storm. Otherwise President Bush will
remain in office until noon on January 20th, 2009, as required by the
20th Amendment, after which he is barred from seeking a third term
anyway under the 22nd Amendment.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if the entire political agenda of George Bush's second term
will not still be damaged in some terribly satisfying way.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that the entire political
agenda of George Bush's second term consists of repealing the 22nd
Amendment. Otherwise, with a clear Republican majority in both Houses
of Congress, he can carry on doing pretty much whatever he likes.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if the Republican Party itself will now suffer a setback at
the congressional mid-term elections next November.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that people outside the
disaster zone punish their local representatives for events elsewhere
a year previously, both beyond their control and outside their remit,
while people inside the disaster zone reward their local
representatives for an ongoing calamity they were supposed to prevent.
Otherwise, the Democratic Party will suffer a setback at the next
congressional election

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if an official inquiry will shift the blame for poor
planning and inadequate flood defences on to the White House.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody admits that
emergency planning is largely the responsibility of city and state
agencies, and nobody notices that the main levee which broke was the
only levee recently modernised with federal funds. Otherwise, an
official inquiry will pin most of the blame on the notoriously corrupt
and incompetent local governments of New Orleans and Louisiana.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if George Bush contributed to the death toll by sending so
many national guard units to Iraq.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody recalls that those
same columnists have spent the past two years blaming George Bush for
another death toll by not sending enough national guard units to Iraq.
Otherwise, people might wonder why they have never previously read a
single article advocating large-scale military redeployment during the
Caribbean hurricane season.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnist
are asking how a civilised city can descend into anarchy.

The answer is that only a civilised city can descend into anarchy.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if George Bush should be held responsible for the terrible
poverty in the southern states revealed by the flooding.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody holds Bill Clinton
responsible for making Mississippi the poorest state in the union
throughout his entire term as president, or for making Arkansas the
second-poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as
governor. Otherwise, people might suspect that it is a bit more
complicated than that.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists
are asking if George Bush should not be concerned by accusations of
racism against the federal government.

The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody remembers that
Jesse Jackson once called New York "Hymietown" and everybody thinks
Condoleezza Rice went shopping for shoes when the hurricane struck
because she cannot stand black people. Otherwise sensible Americans of
all races will be more concerned by trite, cynical and dangerous
political opportunism.

As the full horror of that sinks in, this columnist is simply glad
that everybody cares."

All I can say is: brilliant. I laughed so hard...

2005-09-11T01:58:00.000-04:00

Sorry for the delay in posts recently. I've been very busy, and I can't write out a full entry. However, I have a treat for all of you. First, I'm writing a very sourced essay on the reasons for the Iraq war which will be posted as soon as it is finished. Also, I have commentary on an article from the Times, then I'll finish my rant on the other article from the Times, and lastly, I'll talk about a few of the campaigns MoveOn.org is doing. Sounds good? Great! Catch you all later, and I hope I get less busy fast!

2005-09-08T20:37:00.000-04:00

Just a small entry for now. I got something in my email that is so completely hilarious, I couldn't help but post it. Go to this link.

2005-09-08T17:55:00.000-04:00

If there was one thing I thought I'd never see on moveon.org, it would be a book about 50 ways to love your country.

"With section intros by Gail Sheehy, Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore, an inspiring collection of 50 call-to-action essays from MoveOn members around the country.

With more than 2 million members, MoveOn.org Civic Action is at the cutting edge of a new model for political activism and is able to mobilize thousands of volunteers and millions of dollars. Just in time for the election season, MoveOn takes its message offline with MoveOn's 50 Ways to Love Your Country in an effort to jumpstart an even broader civic dialogue and inspire all to become involved in our political process."

Stop right there. I can't take it anymore. First, let's take a look at the people they chose to do the intros. I went digging on google, and I'm surprised that anyone would choose these people to comment in this book unless they were in the "Do Not" section.
We have Gail Sheehy. From my first google search, I knew she was a feminist, and a radical one at that. She contributed to the book The W Effect, which is a book by feminists which is about "Bush's war on women." Draw your own conclusions. Also, here are a few quotes circulating around.

"It is a silly question to ask a prostitute why she does it. These are the highest-paid "professional" women in America."

"There is no more defiant denial of one man's ability to possess one woman exclusively than the prostitute who refuses to redeemed."

"When men reach their sixties and retire, they go to pieces. Women go right on cooking."

If that doesn't scream "radical feminist," I don't know what does. Lastly, I went on Amazon to look at the comments of one of her books, which is called "Middletown, America: One Town's Passage from Trauma To Hope." Here is a comment by someone who read it. The overall rating for this book was 3 stars. Seven out of sixteen people who commented gave it below 3 stars. "I was disgusted at her prying into (and psycho-analyzing!) private grief, early-on clearly from an elite-left perspective. It was disconnected, biased and just plain horrid." Another commentor called it "Creepy."

Now we go to Nancy Pelosi. She is a House democratic leader from California. One google search later and I had a quote from her about the Hamdi case, which is this, according to the Supreme Court Brief Research Center, which can be accessed here:

"Petitioner Hamdi, an American citizen whom the Government has classified as an “enemy combatant” for allegedly taking up arms with the Taliban during the conflict, was captured in Afghanistan and presently is detained at a naval brig in Charleston, S. C."

The Supreme Court overturned the previous court's decision.

"JUSTICE O’CONNOR, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE KENNEDY, and JUSTICE BREYER, concluded that although Congress authorized the detention of combatants in the narrow circumstances alleged in this case, due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decisionmaker."

This is what Nancy Pelosi had to say about it:

"The Supreme Court's decisions in the Hamdi case and the case involving the Guantanamo detainees are triumphs for the rule of law. The notion that the President has the unchallengeable authority to define the circumstances of a person's detention, especially that of a United States citizen, is contrary to our nation's history and experience."
"The right to counsel and the right to contest government actions in court are among our most cherished liberties. We cannot, and we must not, allow our civil liberties contained in the Constitution to become a casualty in the war on terrorism."
"The Supreme Court's decisions today are a timely reminder of the constant need to evaluate actions taken in the name of national security, no matter how well-intentioned those actions may be."

Do you really want to hear these people tell you how to love your country?

2005-09-08T02:10:00.000-04:00

Postponing my next rant on the same subject, something has come up. Apparently, Hanoi Jane has risen from the media grave and has been planning an anti-war bus tour. However, luckily for America, she's cancelled it. Why? Because Al Sin Dee, the newest ~~fallen~~ flying media star, has planned the same thing which is "gaining support," and Unfaithful Fonda doesn't want to take away from it. Translation from liberal speak:

"We don't have enough support, so I'm cancelling mine to give Al Sin Dee a larger crowd so we can fool America into thinking we are the majority."

Whenever liberals don't send out a million bus tours at once denouncing a conservative president, it's because they realize they're the minority. Don't let them fool you with their vague numbers, like "thousands," that Al Sin Dee claims. That's liberal speak for "the crowd looks big to me, but objects in liberal mirror are smaller than they appear."

2005-09-08T01:04:00.000-04:00

Well, hello, all ye who have stumbled upon my ~~rant spot~~ blog. I hope you enjoy your stay. I bet you'll all be wondering what my first topic will be. I am, too. We'll both find out soon enough. Now, as you can tell, this blog will be for politics only, and if you don't like my opinions, whatever, but just so we're clear, there won't be any whining about my life here. There's enough about that on the net. Moving on.
The first thing that I think needs addressing is this: the "racism" involved in New Orleans. For the last time, if you liberals want to blame the lack of attention to minorities, BLAME YOURSELVES. Here is how government works, for all you who ~~skipped~~ missed civics class.
When a disaster is headed towards a city, it is first addressed by the city government. The city government has to take procedures to protect its citizens. Then, there is also possibly the county (parish) government, and then the state government. One of these officials has to call in the national guard in order for aid to come from the federal government, unless it has been labeled a national disaster. Then, the feds can come in.
However, your precious elected officials did not do their jobs. Bush had to ask them to call in the national guard. He also declared it a national disaster, which allowed much more relief to come in. He could not help any of your people before that happened. And, usually, the national guard doesn't come in until after the disaster has struck. In other words, the president did more than he was expected as president.
Now, before you ask me what this had to do with racism, I'll tell you. Here is the mayor of New Orleans:

(In case my picture doesn't work, here's a link.) As you can see here, the mayor is indeed black. And, using a thing called logic, since Bush did everything in his power and the mayor and local governments were slacking, it was this black democrat that was to blame. See, he could have used the buses to get the African Americans out before Katrina struck, and indeed, that was part of the evacuation plan. Please, liberals. Keep up here. You're getting sloppy. Now, just so you know, this is what I am addressing (more on this later):

Edit: The person to call in the national guard would have been this lady over here, the governor of Louisiana. Wanna know the funny thing? She's a democrat! Betcha didn't see that coming.

What Happens To A Race Deferred
The New York Times

The white people got out. Most of them, anyway. If television and newspaper images can be deemed a statistical sample, it was mostly black people who were left behind. Poor black people, growing more hungry, sick and frightened by the hour as faraway officials counseled patience and warned that rescues take time.
What a shocked world saw exposed in New Orleans last week wasn't just a broken levee. It was a cleavage of race and class, at once familiar and startlingly new, laid bare in a setting where they suddenly amounted to matters of life and death. Hydrology joined sociology throughout the story line, from the settling of the flood-prone city, where well-to-do white people lived on the high ground, to its frantic abandonment.

The pictures of the suffering vied with reports of marauding, of gunshots fired at rescue vehicles and armed bands taking over the streets. The city of quaint eccentricity - of King Cakes, Mardi Gras beads and nice neighbors named Tookie - had taken a Conradian turn.

In the middle of the delayed rescue, the New Orleans mayor, C.Ray Nagin, a local boy made good from a poor, black ward, burst into tears of frustration as he denounced slow moving federal officials and called for martial law.

Even people who had spent a lifetime studying race and class found themselves slack-jawed.

"This is a pretty graphic illustration of who gets left behind in this society - in a literal way," said Christopher Jencks, a sociologist glued to the televised images from his office at Harvard. Surprised to have found himself surprised, Mr. Jencks took to thinking out loud. "Maybe it's just an in-the-face version of something I already knew," he said. "All the people who don't get out, or don't have the resources, or don't believe the warning are African-American."

"It's not that it's at odds with the way I see American society," Mr. Jencks said. "But it's at odds with the way I want to see American society."

Last week it was how others saw American society, too, in images beamed across the globe. Were it not for the distinctive outlines of the Superdome, the pictures of hovering rescue helicopters might have carried a Somalian dateline. The Sri Lankan ambassador offered to help raise foreign aid.

Anyone who knew New Orleans knew that danger lurked behind the festive front. Let the good times roll, the tourists on Bourbon Street were told. Yet in every season, someone who rolled a few blocks in the wrong direction wound up in the city morgue.

Unusually poor ( 27.4 percent below the poverty line in 2000), disproportionately black (over two-thirds), the Big Easy is also disproportionately murderous - with a rate that was for years among the country's highest.

Once one of the most mixed societies, in recent decades, the city has become unusually segregated, and the white middle class is all but gone, moved north across Lake Pontchartrain or west to Jefferson Parish - home of David Duke, the one-time Klansman who ran for governor in 1991 and won more than half of the state's white vote.

Shortly after I arrived in town two decades ago as a fledgling reporter, I was dispatched to cover a cheerleading tryout, and I asked a grinning, half-drunk accountant where he was from, city or suburb. "White people don't live in New Orleans," he answered with a where-have-you-been disdain.

For those who loved it, its glories as well as its flaws, last week brought only heartbreak. So much of New Orleans, from its music and its food to its architecture, had shown a rainbow society at its best, even as everyone knew it was more complicated than that.

"New Orleans, first of all, is both in reality and in rhetoric an extraordinarily successful multicultural society," said Philip Carter, a developer and retired journalist whose roots in the city extend back more at least four generations. "But is also a multicultural society riven by race and class, and all this has been exposed by these stormy days. The people of our community are pitted against each other across the barricades of race and class that six months from now may be last remaining levees in New Orleans."

No one was immune, of course. With 80 percent of the city under water, tragedy swallowed the privilege and poor, and traveled spread across racial lines.

But the divides in the city were evident in things as simple as access to a car. The 35 percent of black households that didn't have one, compared with just 15 percent among whites.