You Can Run, But You Can't Hide

The liberal loudmouth who calls himself "Atrios" has been going crazy lately with jealousy over the Washington Post's hiring of Ben Domenech. Nevermind that Ben is the founder of a great blog and was a good enough writer to be hired by the Bush Administration, the left just hates him because he had the temerity to be conservative and successful. Washington is the only place in America where job qualifications are seen as a liability.

Of course it's easy for "Atrios" to talk trash about Domenech when he doesn't use his own name. Pity the poor liberal blogger who thinks he can spew garbage just because he's hiding behind a pseudonym. Too bad Atrios, or should I say Duncan Black, has never heard of Google. Sorry to have to smoke you out of the shadows my friend, but your readers deserve to know that the left's favorite blogger is a former economist. Not a journalist or a lawyer, but some number cruncher in Philly.

Even worse, after doing a lot of research and making a few phone calls, a little birdie told me that Mr. Black is an employee of - get ready for it - Media Matters for America. Suddenly it all makes sense that "Atrios" is on George Soros' payroll. What's wrong, Duncan? Were Michael Moore and Fidel Castro not hiring?

Colors that sometimes run

For the last few years I've had a bumper sticker on my jeep with a picture of the flag and the slogan "These Colors Don't Run", but after seeing this I had to remove it :



I thought it was the flag of Texas, but it's not. That's the flag of France! I don't know how they got away with copying America and using red, white, and blue, but if they appear on the French flag, those colors do run.

After praying on it, I noticed a way out of this quandry. You see, the french colors aren't "red, white, & blue", they're "blue, white, and red". It's like in chemistry how there are some chemicals that you can mix together and they'll be good for you, but if you mix them a different way they're poison. The colors are the same way. When I see those bold colors waving gently in the wind, I still get a tear in my eye...as long as they're in the right order.



God bless the red, white, and blue.

Still Right After All These Years

People who have been reading my stuff for a while now know that I'm not just some blind apologist for the current Administration. I'm pretty sure that I've had my quarrels with George Bush in the past, but I've never put those disagreements in print because I won't criticize my leader while we've got men in the field. I'm a patriot first. We'll have plenty of time to argue amongst ourselves once the war on terror is over.

As my pastor is fond of saying "question your questions and doubt your doubts", but the concept of impassioned restraint and putting your faith first is foreign to the "too clever by a half" squad on the left. The neo-stalinists at FAIR (False And Inaccurate Reporting) have cherry-picked some pre-war quotes to boost the egos of their traitorous brethren :

"Maybe disgraced commentators and politicians alike, like Daschle, Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich, and all those others, will step forward tonight and show the content of their character by simply admitting what we know already: that their wartime predictions were arrogant, they were misguided and they were dead wrong. Maybe, just maybe, these self-anointed critics will learn from their mistakes. But I doubt it. After all, we don't call them 'elitists' for nothing."

(MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, 4/10/03)

I'm scratching my head about exactly what this quote is supposed to prove. These guys were saying that Saddam Hussein doesn't have weapons of mass destruction but he did. That's why we had to take him out. Sorry FAIR, but you're going to have to work harder than that to convince me that the world is better off with Saddam Hussein running the middle East.

Beyond that, let's assume for the sake of argument that some of the liberal talking points turned out to be right, that doesn't prove anything. You don't win points with me by accidentally being right if you make all your decisions based on how much you hate the PResident. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, but you know who's right the rest of the day? We are.

Wars civil and uncivil

What we're seeing in Iraq, however, is nothing more than a bunch of angry Islamists (is there any other kind?) that think blowing up children is an acceptable form of dissent. I dunno what it should be called, but in my book it's a very uncivil war.

I think this is a great point, O in C, and I've been thinking about this ever since P-Zero kicked off our new site by pointing out

how can there be a Civil War in Iraq when you do not have two sides wearing different uniforms (blue and grey, for instance)? Gettysburg is not just a big field, you know. Our brave troops fought and died there to preserve the Union. The Liberals dishonor their memory with their specious comparisons to a Civil War in Iraq, when there is not one at all, in Iraq.

It may be that a lot of liberals are confusing the American Civil War with the Vietnam War, because of the fact that in both cases the North side attacked the South and divided the country in two. That would explain why they keep wanting to call Iraq a "quaqmire." (In reality, of course, almost none of the land in Iraq is soggy. It's physically impossible!) But has it occurred to anyone to tell the liberals that you don't only need different uniforms for a civil war, you need different national anthems and a whole different currency too? The South had them. The Confederate states even had a capital! So did South Vietnam! In fact, many South Vietnamese didn't even speak the same language as the North Vietnamese. Nothing like that is happening in Iraq today. And the sooner the MSM realizes these facts, the readier they'll be to begin broadcasting the good news from Iraq.

Damned If You Do

When are the Republicans going to realize that it's useless to try to please the Democrats? No matter what they do, the mommy party will throw a fit. Case in point, last year they were all up in arms about Talon News reporter Jeff Gannon having a clearance into the WH press room, which was really just an excuse to rake the guy across the coals for the sin of being gay and conservative, but now that the Bush Administration is actually doing something about it, they're still angry.

The Bush administration last year quietly rewrote the rules for allowing gays and lesbians to receive national-security clearances, drawing complaints from civil rights activists.

The Bush administration said security clearances cannot be denied "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual." But it removed language saying sexual orientation "may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance."

The White House sought to play down the changes, approved by President Bush in December, as an effort to ensure the security clearance rules are consistent with a 1995 executive order about access to classified information.

Make up your minds liberals! Do you want gay people to have access to the White House or not??

Slate Plays Dumb

Why do they even pay John Dickerson to write junk like this?

The way some of the speakers talked about Washington, you'd never know Republicans were in charge. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, who represents eastern Memphis, complained about the "40 years of Democratic Congress," and described Washington as a "monument that Democrats have built for themselves." Sen. George Allen complained about senators in their "cushy seats" and championed austere legislation that would "bring accountability to Washington." He called for a balanced budget amendment and legislation that would withhold senators' pay if they didn't complete the budget on time. Who are those nameless, faceless senators?

Is he really so stupid that he doesn't know the Senators that Allen is referring to? Has he never heard of Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, John Murtha, Harry Reed, Howard Dean, Paul Wellstone, John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, and Al Gore?

An Act of God

Tiem for the liberal media to start issuing some corrections and apologize to the owners of the SAGO mine :

An explosion that killed 12 workers at the Sago Mine likely was caused by a massive lightning strike that ignited methane gas in a sealed-off area, the mine's owner said Tuesday.

The company's own investigation turned up three pieces of compelling evidence of a lightning strike, all from 6:26 a.m. on Jan. 2, said Ben Hatfield, chief executive officer of International Coal Group Inc.

See?? It doesn't matter whether or not the owners were fined for safety violations because this couldn't have been prevented. Just like Hurricane Katrina or 9/11, this was an act of God (or in the case of 9/11, terrorists). What are you going to do? Stop believing in God or stop trying to kill terrorists? Of course not. What we need to do is just put all of this behind us and move along with our lives. It's what God would want.

Stop Calling It That!

I've been saying for a while now that the tensions in Iraq aren't a civil war and it looks like my man Rummy agrees with me :

U.S. intelligence analysts are examining possible civil war scenarios and responses, Rumsfeld said.

Rumsfeld said today Pentagon analysts are trying to establish criterion for distinguishing between sectarian violence and a civil war and trying to answer questions such as ``what would it look like and what might be its progression?''

"It's a hard thing to do," he said. "Until I've had a chance to think more about it, I will say, I don't think it will look like the United States' Civil War."

Even if the situation in Iraq worsens, there are a lot of differences between that conflict and the civil war. In the war of Northern Aggression, the battlefields were filled with brother fighting brother. In the end, patriots on both sides put aside their differences in order to free the slaves. What we're seeing in Iraq, however, is nothing more than a bunch of angry Islamists (is there any other kind?) that think blowing up children is an acceptable form of dissent. I dunno what it should be called, but in my book it's a very uncivil war.

The Power of the Fist

MSNBC's Head Moonbat, Keith Olberman, had this to say on Sunday:

There are people I know in the hierarchy of NBC, the company, and GE, the company, who do not like to see the current presidential administration criticized at all.

You got that much right, Olberman! Five years ago, the hierarchies of NBC and GE would have towed the liberal company line. But thanks to Powerline and Instapundit, the Army of Davids have spoken!!! And the hierarchies of Goliathland have changed their minds!!!

Advantage, blogosphere.

the Claude Allen "scandal"

Wouldn't it be great if for once the media would take the time to add a little context to their news coverage? Case in point, the way they've made a mountain out of a molehill in regards to this Claude Allen thing. Have they ever heard the term "overhead" in their ivory towers? The fact is, retailers routinely anticipate losses and build those costs into their pricing model. In short, everything costs a little more to make up for stuff they expect to be stolen. The question we should be asking is "If it's already been paid for by you and me, how can you use the word 'stolen'?".

I don't know all of the facts here, but I think we can all agree that to call what he's accused of doing "theft" is a mighty big stretch. At Christmas, I recieved an extra copy of "The Closing of the American Mind" and took the this (brand new, unopened, unread) copy to Barnes & Noble for store credit. Everything went fine, but as it turns out, my brother actually picked the book up for me at Amazon.com, not B&N. Uh-oh! Isn't that the same "crime" that Claude Allen is accused of?

That sad part is nobody will try to haul me off to jail because unlike Allen I'm not black. Once again we see the true racist colors of the reactionary left. Preaching tolerance with one breath and doing everything they can to trash a guy whose only crime was trying to get a refund the next. Every time you think they've reached rock bottom, they find a way to sink even lower.

New low for leftist media

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse! So John McCain asks people to support President Bush in 2008, and the MSM try to spin this as "mischief making" and "a sign of weakness"? Since when is simple loyalty to the President a sign of weakness or mischeif? And what will it take to get moonbats like Chris Matthews to report the news objectively for a change?

Controversial Opinion

I know this isn't going to make me any friends around here, but this makes me almost respect Hillary Clinton. I always pegged Hillary as a far-leftie, but serving on the Wal-Mart board makes her seem shockingly...sensible. Of course, being a Clinton, she's done her damndest to distance herself from the one good thing about her past. Typical. Doesn't matter much anyways. The good will Billary earns with me for being part of the world's most prosperous company is more than canceled out by the former rapist-in-chief being in bed with the Arabs. Then again, who isn't Bill in bed with?

RE: Friday Animal

If we're choosing the animal based on how delicious it is, I'm in favor of cows. I wouldn't mind having an eagle or a bear either. Or maybe a shark?

It Doesn't Get Any Clearer

This is how a White House official recently explained why the President has taken such bold steps in the War on Terror:

The powers of the presidency have been eroded and usurped to the breaking point. We are engaged in a new kind of war that cannot be fought by old methods. It can only be directed by a strong executive who alone is not subject to the conflicting pressures that legislators or judges face. The public understands and supports that unpleasant reality, whatever the media and intellectuals say.

I hope he said it really slowly for the libtards, because I don't see how it can get any clearer than this. The public understands and supports the President. And speaking personally for myself, I've never been so proud to be the public.

But then check this out. The Washington Post writer says,

These words came from a White House aide defending U.S. policies on Guantanamo Bay prisoners, secret renditions and warrantless eavesdropping in a conversation with me. A few days later, I heard a Russian official use nearly identical terms to defend his country's coercive merging of private energy and media companies under state control.

Do you beleive this???? The Post reporter gets a straight-up explanation for American policy, and he compares it to Russian Communism? Could there be a more twisted example of far left media bias?

It don't see how it can get any clearer than this. We might as well start calling the Post the "Washington Prada."

Another Positive Indicator

Shhh....don't tell Paul Krugman. If he finds out the economy is doing this well, his head might explode :

As emerging stock markets surged during the past year, 102 wealthy people around the world won a much-coveted title along with their stellar gains — they all became billionaires.

The number of billionaires around the world rose by 102 to a record 793 over the past year, and their combined wealth grew 18 percent to $2.6 trillion, according to Forbes magazine's 2006 rankings of the world's richest people.

People are getting richer and the stock market is soaring, but I'm sure the shrill one will find a way to twist this in a negative way. Krugman may be an "economist" who makes his living trashing capitalism, but in my eyes he's a lunatic even by the Times' dismal standards.