First Abu Ghabri prison. Now this. You mark my words; the recent successful Marine assault on Fallujah is going to end up being defined by the main stream media as a reason to stir public outrage over the apparent killing of a critically wounded “insurgent” by a US Marine.
“Not a success” they’ll cry, “it’s a war crime.”
I am really tired of the double standard being applied by the world’s citizens and our liberal media to our war effort. They somehow believe that our solders possess some kind of psychic powers or operate some kind of new high tech equipment that can read the minds of people on the battlefield who are all dressed the same, civilian and “insurgent.”
In earlier times, honorable warriors went to battle shoulder to shoulder, wearing their country's uniform, under their countries’ flag, on a man to man basis. Churches and civilians were left out of the fray as much as was practical. The wounded were cared for as best as they could on the battlefield and the dead were often buried on the spot they fell. Spies and others caught fighting wearing the other side’s uniform or prosecuting the war wearing civilian clothes risked immediant justice by hanging or death by firing squad.
Not any more.
The US is fighting yet the latest in a series of “gorilla wars” that began with the UN lead Korean “Police Action” and as history predicts, the other side refuses to play by the rules of the Geneva Conventions and act as “honorable” men should act. Instead, these bloody killers use schools and hospitals as weapons caches and use their ancient domed Mosques as fortresses. They wear the clothing of religious clerics and average Iraqis and disappear into the population when the odds are not in their favor. They strap explosives on their bodies and hope that if they are killed or wounded they can blow up any member of the coalition forces who hazards to attempt to attend to their wounds or move their dead corpse to ensure a proper burial.
They fight this way because not because they are all cowards, but because they know how the citizens of the US think and what behavior we expect of our troops. They also know that the “embedded” media and our adversaries, the UN, the French, and the Germans, will demand that no matter what dirty tricks they utilize that we “play fair.”
Now a young Marine comes along-- tired and stressed out from being shot at by every shape, form, and manner of “insurgent” that has trickled into Iraq from Iran and Syria over the past year—and decides to not risk his own life and the lives of his platoon. They all cry "FOUL."
Since a member of the Marine’s own unit had been killed the day before by the detonation of a booby-trapped explosive attached to another “insurgent,” he decides it is safest to prevent another incident by using a few more bullets and a little less compassion.
You know what, I DON’T BLAME HIM ONE BIT!
If the world and the media want to prevent events of this kind from happening, a court marshal and months of harping about it in the newspapers isn’t the answer. They are complaining about the actions of the wrong people.
Instead, the TV talking heads and the rest of the world media should be demanding that the so called “insurgents” (I call them terrorists) get themselves some uniforms that will allow us to discern them from the civilians, move their bombs and ammo out of their schools and hospitals, stop putting snipers on the domes of their sacred buildings, and stop strapping explosives to their cars, their children, and their wounded.
If they don’t care enough about their elderly, children, women, and Mosques to not involve them in their Holy War, why should a boy from Alabama give a Rat’s ASS.
Is it just me?
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Saturday, November 13, 2004
They Paved Paradise, And Put In A Parking Lot
Private property rights are a fundamental part of the underlying legal basis of every successful government throughout history. On a very general basis, if you show me a listing of the rights that the citizens of a given country enjoy relating to the ownership of private property, particularly real estate, I can tell you a good deal about the health and output of the resulting economy on a per capita basis.
Historically, in communist, socialist, and fascist countries where the government controlled or limited their residents’ property rights, there has always been a corresponding reduction in the economic output and quantity of individual wealth generated. If you can’t acquire the right to own “stuff”, why work--other than to avoid the threat of a taskmaster’s whip? Further, why expend your best efforts when just showing up will do?
In the United States, our government has recognized the citizens right to very broad based property rights protections under the law, beginning with the Constitution and filtering down through state and local governments. Unfortunately, like every other freedom in this country, there are a number of forms of infringement that continue to creep into our lives on a yearly basis.
Take zoning laws, for instance. Thomas Sowell makes an excellent argument for the reality of zoning laws contributing to the high cost of homes in California. Once you get your own piece of paradise, you don’t want your neighbors being too close by or putting in trailers lest you have to look at their laundry hanging on the line outside.
Zoning laws, or the lack thereof, have been huge issues in the last two places I have owned property and/or resided, Mexico Beach, Florida and St. Simons Island, Georgia. Both locals are adjacent to the beach. One property was about three blocks from the shoreline, while the current one is a mile from the waves and a few hundred yards from a salt marsh. The local officials in both locations are constantly considering zoning requests and the value a given owner can expect to command for a given piece of property rises and falls with the banging of the gavel of local despots on the city council or zoning board. The zoning for both lands changed radically over the years, severely limiting my options for development.
Who are these people to tell me what I can do with my land? Is it my land or isn’t it? How can you change the rules on me after I already own it? The tendency here in the Golden Isles, like most coastal areas, is a constant conflict between occupancy densities versus the rising cost of land. The problem is, the very laws that the government enacts to encourage green space and lower density at the same time serves to increase the price of land and increase the occupancy density in spite of the enforced property line setbacks and building height restrictions they demand. "If I can only build four stories high, I’m going to by God cover as much of the property as I can with as many units as I can" is the developers attitude.
Another, more abusive trend is embodied in the change being made nationally in the interpretation of eminent domain laws. Historically, the concept of eminent domain was used to force the owner of land needed for public use like a roadway or utility line to sell or otherwise grant easement rights to the government or a so called “public” utility in order to meet the needs of the public good. How things have changed.
Take the little central Alabama city of Alabaster, Alabama, for instance. Alabaster sits adjacent to Interstate 65 just south of Birmingham. The city and the county is an exurb that is still mainly a bedroom community for Birmingham. There are several county roads that have interchanges where they cross I-65. A developer has decided that he wants to build a shopping center including a Super Wall Mart at one of the interchanges. The problem is that the owners of some of the land the developer wanted liked their little piece of paradise and didn’t want to sell.
So what did the developer do? Did he find another piece of land at another intersection to buy or make the owners a price offer that they couldn’t refuse? Noooooo. The developer went to the City and told them about all of the property and sales taxes they were missing out on by not having a Wall Mart in town. He then let the city do his dirty work for him. The city followed the national trend and used the idea of increasing the tax digest as “public use,” condemned the land, forced the owners to sell, then turned around and sold the coveted land to the developer for use in the shopping center project. Their attitude was basically, "tough shiskey."
There are a number of initiatives at the state level to change laws making this form of theft easier to achieve. I don’t have the time or the energy to talk about every state’s efforts, but I encourage you to follow your local news and contact your state politicians to express your outrage if you can. Remember, private property rights are fundamental to our freedoms, and this infringement isn’t John Ashcroft’s fault.
Update: November 13, 2004
George will has a nice editorial in the Washington Post that addresses this issue. I hope the Supreme Court will hear the Connecticut case and put an end to this theft.
Historically, in communist, socialist, and fascist countries where the government controlled or limited their residents’ property rights, there has always been a corresponding reduction in the economic output and quantity of individual wealth generated. If you can’t acquire the right to own “stuff”, why work--other than to avoid the threat of a taskmaster’s whip? Further, why expend your best efforts when just showing up will do?
In the United States, our government has recognized the citizens right to very broad based property rights protections under the law, beginning with the Constitution and filtering down through state and local governments. Unfortunately, like every other freedom in this country, there are a number of forms of infringement that continue to creep into our lives on a yearly basis.
Take zoning laws, for instance. Thomas Sowell makes an excellent argument for the reality of zoning laws contributing to the high cost of homes in California. Once you get your own piece of paradise, you don’t want your neighbors being too close by or putting in trailers lest you have to look at their laundry hanging on the line outside.
Zoning laws, or the lack thereof, have been huge issues in the last two places I have owned property and/or resided, Mexico Beach, Florida and St. Simons Island, Georgia. Both locals are adjacent to the beach. One property was about three blocks from the shoreline, while the current one is a mile from the waves and a few hundred yards from a salt marsh. The local officials in both locations are constantly considering zoning requests and the value a given owner can expect to command for a given piece of property rises and falls with the banging of the gavel of local despots on the city council or zoning board. The zoning for both lands changed radically over the years, severely limiting my options for development.
Who are these people to tell me what I can do with my land? Is it my land or isn’t it? How can you change the rules on me after I already own it? The tendency here in the Golden Isles, like most coastal areas, is a constant conflict between occupancy densities versus the rising cost of land. The problem is, the very laws that the government enacts to encourage green space and lower density at the same time serves to increase the price of land and increase the occupancy density in spite of the enforced property line setbacks and building height restrictions they demand. "If I can only build four stories high, I’m going to by God cover as much of the property as I can with as many units as I can" is the developers attitude.
Another, more abusive trend is embodied in the change being made nationally in the interpretation of eminent domain laws. Historically, the concept of eminent domain was used to force the owner of land needed for public use like a roadway or utility line to sell or otherwise grant easement rights to the government or a so called “public” utility in order to meet the needs of the public good. How things have changed.
Take the little central Alabama city of Alabaster, Alabama, for instance. Alabaster sits adjacent to Interstate 65 just south of Birmingham. The city and the county is an exurb that is still mainly a bedroom community for Birmingham. There are several county roads that have interchanges where they cross I-65. A developer has decided that he wants to build a shopping center including a Super Wall Mart at one of the interchanges. The problem is that the owners of some of the land the developer wanted liked their little piece of paradise and didn’t want to sell.
So what did the developer do? Did he find another piece of land at another intersection to buy or make the owners a price offer that they couldn’t refuse? Noooooo. The developer went to the City and told them about all of the property and sales taxes they were missing out on by not having a Wall Mart in town. He then let the city do his dirty work for him. The city followed the national trend and used the idea of increasing the tax digest as “public use,” condemned the land, forced the owners to sell, then turned around and sold the coveted land to the developer for use in the shopping center project. Their attitude was basically, "tough shiskey."
There are a number of initiatives at the state level to change laws making this form of theft easier to achieve. I don’t have the time or the energy to talk about every state’s efforts, but I encourage you to follow your local news and contact your state politicians to express your outrage if you can. Remember, private property rights are fundamental to our freedoms, and this infringement isn’t John Ashcroft’s fault.
Update: November 13, 2004
George will has a nice editorial in the Washington Post that addresses this issue. I hope the Supreme Court will hear the Connecticut case and put an end to this theft.
Announcing The Redneck Gourmet
Well folks, its official--no topic is safe from my ranting and raving. Take cooking, for instance.
Last weekend I started The Redneck Gourmet and I just wrote my third post this morning. Stop on by for some non-political reading.
Last weekend I started The Redneck Gourmet and I just wrote my third post this morning. Stop on by for some non-political reading.
The Fat Lady Has Sung, But It's Not Over--Part II
Hello CBS…we're still waiting.
What’s it been, six, eight, ten weeks, and I can still see Dan Rather’s sullen scowl every evening (IF I change channels from FOX News or Food Network.)
What about the “independent” CBS investigation? You know, the investigation into how obviously forged documents, documents that could be reproduced by a sixth grader with a ink jet printer and a word processor, were allowed to be used as a basis for a nationally broadcast CBS 60 Minutes news story attacking the person of a sitting President of the United States of America in the heat of a re-election campaign.
We've been waiting patiently, and it’s not like your executives there at CBS can’t make a decision if they want to. After all, they only took two days to fire the producer whom committed the heinous crime of daring to interrupt the last five minutes of the prime time show “CSI: NY” to break the news that old Yasser Arafat had finally bought the farm.
Noooo, the public was outraged, and CBS couldn’t allow that. Not only did they do a thorough investigation and fire the producer within 48 hours of the scandalous event, they are also going to make amends to their viewers by re-broadcasting the entire CSI:NY episode so everyone can see the final five minutes.
America is vindicated. I know I’ll sleep better tonight.
Oh, and CBS….we’re STILL waiting….
What’s it been, six, eight, ten weeks, and I can still see Dan Rather’s sullen scowl every evening (IF I change channels from FOX News or Food Network.)
What about the “independent” CBS investigation? You know, the investigation into how obviously forged documents, documents that could be reproduced by a sixth grader with a ink jet printer and a word processor, were allowed to be used as a basis for a nationally broadcast CBS 60 Minutes news story attacking the person of a sitting President of the United States of America in the heat of a re-election campaign.
We've been waiting patiently, and it’s not like your executives there at CBS can’t make a decision if they want to. After all, they only took two days to fire the producer whom committed the heinous crime of daring to interrupt the last five minutes of the prime time show “CSI: NY” to break the news that old Yasser Arafat had finally bought the farm.
Noooo, the public was outraged, and CBS couldn’t allow that. Not only did they do a thorough investigation and fire the producer within 48 hours of the scandalous event, they are also going to make amends to their viewers by re-broadcasting the entire CSI:NY episode so everyone can see the final five minutes.
America is vindicated. I know I’ll sleep better tonight.
Oh, and CBS….we’re STILL waiting….
Friday, November 12, 2004
Giving Him The First Degree
Thank God the Scott Peterson trial is over with in theory--on to the sentencing phase.
And of course there is the appeal phase.
Then there is the other appeal phase.
Then there is the state supreme court phase.
Then there is the Federal Supreme court phase.
Does California freeze, fry, or inject their murderers?
I'm just glad the damn thing is over with. But don't worry, the media already has the next pretty girl murder case set up to wear us out with. You did see the story about the murdered beauty queen in Napa Valley.
Just watch...
And of course there is the appeal phase.
Then there is the other appeal phase.
Then there is the state supreme court phase.
Then there is the Federal Supreme court phase.
Does California freeze, fry, or inject their murderers?
I'm just glad the damn thing is over with. But don't worry, the media already has the next pretty girl murder case set up to wear us out with. You did see the story about the murdered beauty queen in Napa Valley.
Just watch...
It's My Party and I'll (Lie) If I Want To
Ever heard of a the concept of having a paradigm shift? A paradigm shift involves completely changing the way you think, feel and/or view a part of the world around you. Relationships, jobs, religion, politics, you name it--you might feel better as a result of a paradigm shift, or you might just want to blow your brains out or at least get the hell out of Dodge as a result of your newly found revelations.
While the mainstream media (MSM) has been attempting to elect John Kerry and loosing their collective minds over Abu Ghraib prisoners being forced to wear panties on their heads, while they’ve been wondering if Colin Powell or John Ashcroft personally authorized the purported prisoner abuse as a matter of standard operating policy, there is a real international scandal out there involving an organization and their high ranking leaders that really deserves American’s attention, yet you barely hear it whispered about by Dan Rather or written about on the front page of the NY Times.
EVERYONE, QUICK, LISTEN UP, BECAUSE I’M GOING TO SHIFT YOUR PARADIGM WHEN IT COMES TO THE UNITED NATIONS.
The scandal is known as the UN Oil For Food Program (OFF) and the scope of the corruption is growing on a daily basis. You’ve heard about this multi-billion-dollar so-called humanitarian effort, haven’t you? You know the program, the one overseen by the UN that was set up to prevent the people of Iraq from starving to death as a result of international sanctions imposed as a result of the 1992 Gulf War? Oh sure you have. You know, the program that was supposed to let Saddam sell Iraq’s only marketable natural resource, crude oil, in return for dollars used to buy limited non-military products like rice and beans and milk and McDonalds Burgers? Oh come on, you know…the program overseen by Kofi Annan’s son, the program that granted “oil vouchers” to Kofi Jr. and various French and German and Russian leaders and diplomats and businessmen at ridiculously low prices to be sold on the open market for huge profits?
Yeah, you know, THAT program, that’s the one. Nothing illegal or underhanded, just good old-fashioned graft and corruption, USA mafia style you know? The program designed by dictators, for dictators.
Well, it seems that we have a problem, Houston. It seems that the program didn’t quite accomplish it’s goal of punishing Saddam, instead it made him rich(er.) It also didn’t seem to prevent Saddam from buying military materials, according to documents that US forces have captured in Iraq. Now that the cat is out of the proverbial bag, Kofi Jr. and Kofi Sr. seem to have a bad case of amnesia and are making it difficult for us to find out what was really going on with the Oil for Food program.
But never fear, there will be an investigation to get to the bottom of things. The problem is, the UN is investigating itself, with a team lead by Paul Volker, and woe be it to any outside organization (like the US Senate) that wants to speed things along on an independent basis.
Here is a letter to His Excellency, Kofi Annan, from Norm Coleman, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Investigations. It seems that Kofi is so busy that it took him four months to respond with a big old “get lost” to the honorable Senators. He’s too busy stalling Mr. Volker’s investigation to answer ole’ Norm.
I presently can’t add much in the way of discussion to this issue other than to point out that any position that allows you to be referred to as “His Excellency” should also require you to constantly wear those little “Elf” shoes with the curled up tips and have some psycho pervert like Michael Jackson or John Hinkley as your chambermaid.
Does anybody know if Charles Manson has butler skills?
While the mainstream media (MSM) has been attempting to elect John Kerry and loosing their collective minds over Abu Ghraib prisoners being forced to wear panties on their heads, while they’ve been wondering if Colin Powell or John Ashcroft personally authorized the purported prisoner abuse as a matter of standard operating policy, there is a real international scandal out there involving an organization and their high ranking leaders that really deserves American’s attention, yet you barely hear it whispered about by Dan Rather or written about on the front page of the NY Times.
EVERYONE, QUICK, LISTEN UP, BECAUSE I’M GOING TO SHIFT YOUR PARADIGM WHEN IT COMES TO THE UNITED NATIONS.
The scandal is known as the UN Oil For Food Program (OFF) and the scope of the corruption is growing on a daily basis. You’ve heard about this multi-billion-dollar so-called humanitarian effort, haven’t you? You know the program, the one overseen by the UN that was set up to prevent the people of Iraq from starving to death as a result of international sanctions imposed as a result of the 1992 Gulf War? Oh sure you have. You know, the program that was supposed to let Saddam sell Iraq’s only marketable natural resource, crude oil, in return for dollars used to buy limited non-military products like rice and beans and milk and McDonalds Burgers? Oh come on, you know…the program overseen by Kofi Annan’s son, the program that granted “oil vouchers” to Kofi Jr. and various French and German and Russian leaders and diplomats and businessmen at ridiculously low prices to be sold on the open market for huge profits?
Yeah, you know, THAT program, that’s the one. Nothing illegal or underhanded, just good old-fashioned graft and corruption, USA mafia style you know? The program designed by dictators, for dictators.
Well, it seems that we have a problem, Houston. It seems that the program didn’t quite accomplish it’s goal of punishing Saddam, instead it made him rich(er.) It also didn’t seem to prevent Saddam from buying military materials, according to documents that US forces have captured in Iraq. Now that the cat is out of the proverbial bag, Kofi Jr. and Kofi Sr. seem to have a bad case of amnesia and are making it difficult for us to find out what was really going on with the Oil for Food program.
But never fear, there will be an investigation to get to the bottom of things. The problem is, the UN is investigating itself, with a team lead by Paul Volker, and woe be it to any outside organization (like the US Senate) that wants to speed things along on an independent basis.
Here is a letter to His Excellency, Kofi Annan, from Norm Coleman, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Investigations. It seems that Kofi is so busy that it took him four months to respond with a big old “get lost” to the honorable Senators. He’s too busy stalling Mr. Volker’s investigation to answer ole’ Norm.
I presently can’t add much in the way of discussion to this issue other than to point out that any position that allows you to be referred to as “His Excellency” should also require you to constantly wear those little “Elf” shoes with the curled up tips and have some psycho pervert like Michael Jackson or John Hinkley as your chambermaid.
Does anybody know if Charles Manson has butler skills?
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Do Unto Others...
Liberals love to tell you how they are compassionate and “concerned” about taking care of the less fortunate in our society. To this end, the liberal politicians love to help us take care of our stuff, particularly our money. They think that our feeble little minds just can’t possibly take care of the needy in our midst. They believe that they can spend our money better than we can, so they tax our asses off under the guise of helping their causes.
Well, the Catalogue For Philanthropy has just published their “Generosity Index” and it reveals some rather disturbing facts about our liberal friends. The index is published on a state-by-state basis and factors personal income versus charitable giving to produce a state ranking.
Number one on the list—the state of Mississippi. Mississippi is dead last in income, but her residents are number five in charitable giving. The number two on the list, Arkansas, is number forty-seven in income, but number six in giving. You can scroll down the list and find that the top 25 states are all conservative, based on last week’s elections.
Good old liberal New York state is number twenty-six on the list, with a income rank of fifth and a giving rank of ninth. And all of those lovely California ex-hippies-- you know, the ones that don’t understand air pollution and homelessness—they are number twenty-nine. Their income ranking is sixth, but their charitable giving level is a dismal seventeenth.
I say we start a campaign for making these loudmouths put their own money where their bleeding-heart mouths are. Who are they to take everyone else’s hard earned money to spend on their pet causes while they sit home on their own wad of cash?
Is it just me? Just wondering…
Well, the Catalogue For Philanthropy has just published their “Generosity Index” and it reveals some rather disturbing facts about our liberal friends. The index is published on a state-by-state basis and factors personal income versus charitable giving to produce a state ranking.
Number one on the list—the state of Mississippi. Mississippi is dead last in income, but her residents are number five in charitable giving. The number two on the list, Arkansas, is number forty-seven in income, but number six in giving. You can scroll down the list and find that the top 25 states are all conservative, based on last week’s elections.
Good old liberal New York state is number twenty-six on the list, with a income rank of fifth and a giving rank of ninth. And all of those lovely California ex-hippies-- you know, the ones that don’t understand air pollution and homelessness—they are number twenty-nine. Their income ranking is sixth, but their charitable giving level is a dismal seventeenth.
I say we start a campaign for making these loudmouths put their own money where their bleeding-heart mouths are. Who are they to take everyone else’s hard earned money to spend on their pet causes while they sit home on their own wad of cash?
Is it just me? Just wondering…
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Barbara Streisand Joins The Liberal Meltdown
This morning I was doing my normal snooping for news and reading my favorite Blogger sites when Matt Drudge's site alerted me to yet another liberal meltdown on the internet.
Barbara Streisand has a website that she has used in the past to promote her personal agenda, including making a number of "Michael Moore" type rants against the Republican Party and President George Bush. You do remember that it was her and her husband, James Broland, who were major forces behind the Ronald Regan bashing movie that caused all of the stir earlier this year?
My advise to Ms. Barbara is to keep on raking in the millions making the rare acting and/or singing appearance and leave the thinking and voting to the balance of America. I have this theory that every dollar you earn costs you one brain cell, and when you start getting into the hundreds of millions you start becoming long on financial where withall and short on mental capital. I submit most of the Hollywood elite as evidence to support this thesis.
And I rest my case, your honor...
Barbara Streisand has a website that she has used in the past to promote her personal agenda, including making a number of "Michael Moore" type rants against the Republican Party and President George Bush. You do remember that it was her and her husband, James Broland, who were major forces behind the Ronald Regan bashing movie that caused all of the stir earlier this year?
My advise to Ms. Barbara is to keep on raking in the millions making the rare acting and/or singing appearance and leave the thinking and voting to the balance of America. I have this theory that every dollar you earn costs you one brain cell, and when you start getting into the hundreds of millions you start becoming long on financial where withall and short on mental capital. I submit most of the Hollywood elite as evidence to support this thesis.
And I rest my case, your honor...
Monday, November 08, 2004
The Fair Tax Plan Is Really Fair
The only thing certain is death and taxes. People have been complaining for a long time about both. In the Bible (Book of I Kings, Chapter 12) the Israelites petition their new king, Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, to cut their income taxes. In the words of the King James Bible, they say:
“Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore make thou the grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter, and we will serve thee.”
Politicians being as they are, King Rehoboam talks things over with his administration and three days later he gives them his answer:
“And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.”
So there it is Folks, ask for a tax cut and you get a tax increase—and they throw in some whips and scorpions (can you say IRS audit?) for good measure.
So not much has changed in the past 2500 years when it comes to income taxes. Everyone thinks that their taxes are too high and the next guy making more money should have to “pay his fair share.” The idea of fair taxation has often caused conflict. Remember the Boston Tea Party? Fair or not, the income tax has been a reality for us here in the US since the Civil War when President Lincoln imposed a temporary income tax to fund the war effort.
It took an act of congress in the form of the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution in order to allow the federal government to impose a permanent tax on income. The original income tax code required the filing of only a one page form and the entire tax code was only 14 pages. Individuals with incomes of over $4,000 annually were taxed, and most Americans made much less.
Our income tax was supposed to be temporary. It wasn’t. It was supposed to be fair. It isn’t. In its present form it costs this country, in addition to the actual taxes, additional billions in lost productive time and expenses (lawyers/accountants) just to comply with the record keeping and filing of forms. (Almost) everyone hates it, it dominates local and national elections, but no one ever does anything about it other than deflect the cost from themselves’ and their family/peer group.
Forget about taxing only the rich, about deductions and rebates, earned income credits, and all of that other politically expedient crapolla the dominates the evening news and every political campaign—there is an alternative out there that is actually getting some serious consideration in Congress.
The Fair Tax Plan, also called the National Retail Sales Tax, could be the answer. That is, if the politicians are willing to give up the substantial amount of political influence they currently wield as a result of being able to spend our hard earned money on their political constituents.
Here is how the Fair Tax Plan would work. The federal payroll and income taxes on all personal and corporate income would be eliminated, to be replaced with a 21% to 23% sales tax on all goods and services at a retail level. You would still pay state and local income taxes if you pay them now. Georgia would still demand 6% and Florida would get nothing out of your check.
At first you want to jump out of your seat and yell “A 23% FEDERAL SALES TAX, I CAN’T AFFORD TO EAT!” But wait a minute while I explain the benefits.
The Fair Tax would mean that companies and individuals would pay no income tax on their incoming money. Your paycheck would increase dramatically because you are only having state and local income taxes and things like insurance deducted. Meanwhile, the before-sales-tax cost of goods and services would go down substantially. This is because products produced for sale at a retail level would have no imbedded taxes included in their cost. Things like taxes on the raw materials and the employers so called “contribution” to the FICA/FUTA payroll taxes. Manufacturers are also removed from the task of collecting taxes on their employees’ wages so their administrative overhead cost goes down. Estimates indicate that the cost of a domestically produced consumer item already includes at least 23 cents on every dollar of “imbedded taxes” and tax admin costs.
“So I just break even in the process” I might ask? No, you government schooled bonehead. If I make $75,000 this year, I only pay taxes on what I spend. If I save $10,000, I pay no taxes on that amount. Get it? Also, the government would give everyone a monthly rebate check equal to the sales tax paid on the basic cost of living (food, clothing, and shelter) based on the poverty level rate for each size family. This means that the poor people will not only not pay income tax, they won’t pay anything but state sales tax on their bread, milk, Reeboks, and spinner rims for the Escalade.
The revised tax law would encourage earning, saving, and investing. Of course, if you are a drug dealer or a house painter running a cash-only business and you’ve made all of your money “under the table” for the past 20 years, you will suddenly start having to pay your fair share. The entire underground economy in this country would suddenly be forced to start paying taxes. Experts actually project that the federal revenue stream will go up, allowing services to be maintained while the deficit spending is eliminated. Note that I would still like to see a review of existing services and the reduction or possible removal of the Federal government’s involvement in things like education and the retirement business.
The only losers in the process would be tax lawyers, accountants, and the Internal Revenue Service. They would just have to find something else to do rather than have us support their government mandated non-essential existence. Every one else would be winners.
Imagine if you could wake up on New Year’s Day and know that every day for the next three hundred sixty five days you would not owe the Federal Government one thin dime—unless you bought something new at the retail level.
Who do I call and where do I go to sign up?
“Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore make thou the grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter, and we will serve thee.”
Politicians being as they are, King Rehoboam talks things over with his administration and three days later he gives them his answer:
“And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.”
So there it is Folks, ask for a tax cut and you get a tax increase—and they throw in some whips and scorpions (can you say IRS audit?) for good measure.
So not much has changed in the past 2500 years when it comes to income taxes. Everyone thinks that their taxes are too high and the next guy making more money should have to “pay his fair share.” The idea of fair taxation has often caused conflict. Remember the Boston Tea Party? Fair or not, the income tax has been a reality for us here in the US since the Civil War when President Lincoln imposed a temporary income tax to fund the war effort.
It took an act of congress in the form of the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution in order to allow the federal government to impose a permanent tax on income. The original income tax code required the filing of only a one page form and the entire tax code was only 14 pages. Individuals with incomes of over $4,000 annually were taxed, and most Americans made much less.
Our income tax was supposed to be temporary. It wasn’t. It was supposed to be fair. It isn’t. In its present form it costs this country, in addition to the actual taxes, additional billions in lost productive time and expenses (lawyers/accountants) just to comply with the record keeping and filing of forms. (Almost) everyone hates it, it dominates local and national elections, but no one ever does anything about it other than deflect the cost from themselves’ and their family/peer group.
Forget about taxing only the rich, about deductions and rebates, earned income credits, and all of that other politically expedient crapolla the dominates the evening news and every political campaign—there is an alternative out there that is actually getting some serious consideration in Congress.
The Fair Tax Plan, also called the National Retail Sales Tax, could be the answer. That is, if the politicians are willing to give up the substantial amount of political influence they currently wield as a result of being able to spend our hard earned money on their political constituents.
Here is how the Fair Tax Plan would work. The federal payroll and income taxes on all personal and corporate income would be eliminated, to be replaced with a 21% to 23% sales tax on all goods and services at a retail level. You would still pay state and local income taxes if you pay them now. Georgia would still demand 6% and Florida would get nothing out of your check.
At first you want to jump out of your seat and yell “A 23% FEDERAL SALES TAX, I CAN’T AFFORD TO EAT!” But wait a minute while I explain the benefits.
The Fair Tax would mean that companies and individuals would pay no income tax on their incoming money. Your paycheck would increase dramatically because you are only having state and local income taxes and things like insurance deducted. Meanwhile, the before-sales-tax cost of goods and services would go down substantially. This is because products produced for sale at a retail level would have no imbedded taxes included in their cost. Things like taxes on the raw materials and the employers so called “contribution” to the FICA/FUTA payroll taxes. Manufacturers are also removed from the task of collecting taxes on their employees’ wages so their administrative overhead cost goes down. Estimates indicate that the cost of a domestically produced consumer item already includes at least 23 cents on every dollar of “imbedded taxes” and tax admin costs.
“So I just break even in the process” I might ask? No, you government schooled bonehead. If I make $75,000 this year, I only pay taxes on what I spend. If I save $10,000, I pay no taxes on that amount. Get it? Also, the government would give everyone a monthly rebate check equal to the sales tax paid on the basic cost of living (food, clothing, and shelter) based on the poverty level rate for each size family. This means that the poor people will not only not pay income tax, they won’t pay anything but state sales tax on their bread, milk, Reeboks, and spinner rims for the Escalade.
The revised tax law would encourage earning, saving, and investing. Of course, if you are a drug dealer or a house painter running a cash-only business and you’ve made all of your money “under the table” for the past 20 years, you will suddenly start having to pay your fair share. The entire underground economy in this country would suddenly be forced to start paying taxes. Experts actually project that the federal revenue stream will go up, allowing services to be maintained while the deficit spending is eliminated. Note that I would still like to see a review of existing services and the reduction or possible removal of the Federal government’s involvement in things like education and the retirement business.
The only losers in the process would be tax lawyers, accountants, and the Internal Revenue Service. They would just have to find something else to do rather than have us support their government mandated non-essential existence. Every one else would be winners.
Imagine if you could wake up on New Year’s Day and know that every day for the next three hundred sixty five days you would not owe the Federal Government one thin dime—unless you bought something new at the retail level.
Who do I call and where do I go to sign up?
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Michael Tells Us Mo(o)re Than We Need To Know
I try to limit my personal attacks on individuals, public or otherwise, to those whom I have a good deal of high quality, well documented information about. Other than the occasional emotional outburst, given time to compose myself, I have adhered to this policy in my writing. I don’t care “what I’ve heard” or “what other’s say” about you, I generally wait until I have some direct contact or experience before I form my final opinion.
Public officials and celebrities, both real and self-proclaimed, are an exception, since I don’t spend much time in Hollywood or roaming the storied halls of the government buildings in Washington DC.
The best form of information available on a person is usually obtained by either hearing them speak in person or by reading something written by them. The old axiom, “do as I say, not as I do” is exceeded by “read what I write and forget what I say. Until the last 100 years or so, the spoken word tended to evaporate into the infinite ether of the universe while the written word has been destined to survive through the ages.
Having said all of that, I come to the subject of Michael Moore. I haven’t seen any of Mr. Moore’s films. I have seen a little too much of Mike’s unshaven, slovenly looking, fairly rotund persona as he has sauntered around the Democratic campaign for the office of President of the United States of America.
Other than a few appearances in a rented tuxedo, the guys’ closet must contain a wardrobe consisting of 500 pairs of sneakers, dozens of brown leather and denim jackets, mountains of baggy, faded blue jeans, complemented by an assortment of baseball caps adorned with the sports team “logo de jour.”
I congratulate Mr. Moore in his success in parlaying his image and position into a fairly nice living, but I have wondered about his motives and intellectual ability on a core basis. Beyond riding the wave of liberal outrage, what does he know, what does he think, and what can he really do in life besides stir up controversy?
Well, we can all stop wondering. After three days of silence, Senior Moore, the rocket scientist, has come out of hiding to post his latest thesis about the results of the election, 17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists.
I usually do a bunch of background research in order to support my posts, but I refuse to waste my time reading any more about this obvious genius. I am fairly certain that he is in his mid- thirties, but his writing must be aimed at teens and early twenty-somethings and it reads like it was written by a high school sophomore.
I have a suggestion for Mr. Moore…Grow up and get a life!!
(God knows you have the cash to pay for it…)
Public officials and celebrities, both real and self-proclaimed, are an exception, since I don’t spend much time in Hollywood or roaming the storied halls of the government buildings in Washington DC.
The best form of information available on a person is usually obtained by either hearing them speak in person or by reading something written by them. The old axiom, “do as I say, not as I do” is exceeded by “read what I write and forget what I say. Until the last 100 years or so, the spoken word tended to evaporate into the infinite ether of the universe while the written word has been destined to survive through the ages.
Having said all of that, I come to the subject of Michael Moore. I haven’t seen any of Mr. Moore’s films. I have seen a little too much of Mike’s unshaven, slovenly looking, fairly rotund persona as he has sauntered around the Democratic campaign for the office of President of the United States of America.
Other than a few appearances in a rented tuxedo, the guys’ closet must contain a wardrobe consisting of 500 pairs of sneakers, dozens of brown leather and denim jackets, mountains of baggy, faded blue jeans, complemented by an assortment of baseball caps adorned with the sports team “logo de jour.”
I congratulate Mr. Moore in his success in parlaying his image and position into a fairly nice living, but I have wondered about his motives and intellectual ability on a core basis. Beyond riding the wave of liberal outrage, what does he know, what does he think, and what can he really do in life besides stir up controversy?
Well, we can all stop wondering. After three days of silence, Senior Moore, the rocket scientist, has come out of hiding to post his latest thesis about the results of the election, 17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists.
I usually do a bunch of background research in order to support my posts, but I refuse to waste my time reading any more about this obvious genius. I am fairly certain that he is in his mid- thirties, but his writing must be aimed at teens and early twenty-somethings and it reads like it was written by a high school sophomore.
I have a suggestion for Mr. Moore…Grow up and get a life!!
(God knows you have the cash to pay for it…)
Here's Hannibal...
Testing adding photo's to the Blog, here's me playing my other alter-ego...Hannibal in the play "The Curious Savage"
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Yasser Arafat Is Dead (And I don't Feel So Good Myself)
I was taking a few minutes off from writing “The Fair Tax Plan is Really Fair” in order to watch President Bush’s first press conference since the election. In the middle of the press conference, one of the reporters prefaced his question with an announcement that Yasser Arafat had died this morning.
I would normally react with muted applause while being deferential to the grief of the Arafat family, but somehow I’m not exactly sure if I can celebrate the passing of this proven, documented terrorist.
Like the fall of the Soviet Union, what fractionalization are we now facing in the leadership effort to establish a Palestinian state? What new towel head radical will take the reigns of the PLO?
Perhaps this is a good omen for the new Bush administration. Perhaps the new PLO leadership will be rational and reasonable and we can truly forge a framework for Middle Eastern peace.
We can only hope for the best.
UPDATE: November 8, 2004
Ok, ok, ok...I was wrong, technically. They are still pounding on poor old Yasser's chest and have tubing stuck in every bodily orifice (and several extra tubes pushed into new, manmade holes) and they claim that he is still alive. For all intents and purposes, he's "bought the farm," or at least his own personal piece of arid, rocky, middle eastern desert.
So the title to my Post should have read "Yasser Arafat Is A Gonner..." His old lady and his lieutennants are predictably fighting over his money and his position as the leader of the PLO and the poor bastard isn't even cold and burried in his own little section of the Gaza Strip. Israel is refusing to inter him in Jereusalem and based on his history, I believe they have that right.
I'm working on a new series of posts on Yasser and the PLO that will cover some issues you need to hear in detail.
For now, RIP Mr. Arafat.
UPDATE: November 11, 2004
Well, like I said last Thursday, Yasser was a gonner, and he is now finally. Thanks to our useless French friends for leading the charge to elevate this petty criminal/terrorist to the rank of statesman. Let's all step out of the way to let the news anchors from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN all come by to kiss his ring finger.
And of course Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, and each and every other member of the United Nations "Love Your Local Dictator and Socalist Club" will come out to mourn the loss of his miserable carcass. At the risk of sounding crass, crude, and socially unacceptable....
Good riddence...
I would normally react with muted applause while being deferential to the grief of the Arafat family, but somehow I’m not exactly sure if I can celebrate the passing of this proven, documented terrorist.
Like the fall of the Soviet Union, what fractionalization are we now facing in the leadership effort to establish a Palestinian state? What new towel head radical will take the reigns of the PLO?
Perhaps this is a good omen for the new Bush administration. Perhaps the new PLO leadership will be rational and reasonable and we can truly forge a framework for Middle Eastern peace.
We can only hope for the best.
UPDATE: November 8, 2004
Ok, ok, ok...I was wrong, technically. They are still pounding on poor old Yasser's chest and have tubing stuck in every bodily orifice (and several extra tubes pushed into new, manmade holes) and they claim that he is still alive. For all intents and purposes, he's "bought the farm," or at least his own personal piece of arid, rocky, middle eastern desert.
So the title to my Post should have read "Yasser Arafat Is A Gonner..." His old lady and his lieutennants are predictably fighting over his money and his position as the leader of the PLO and the poor bastard isn't even cold and burried in his own little section of the Gaza Strip. Israel is refusing to inter him in Jereusalem and based on his history, I believe they have that right.
I'm working on a new series of posts on Yasser and the PLO that will cover some issues you need to hear in detail.
For now, RIP Mr. Arafat.
UPDATE: November 11, 2004
Well, like I said last Thursday, Yasser was a gonner, and he is now finally. Thanks to our useless French friends for leading the charge to elevate this petty criminal/terrorist to the rank of statesman. Let's all step out of the way to let the news anchors from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN all come by to kiss his ring finger.
And of course Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, and each and every other member of the United Nations "Love Your Local Dictator and Socalist Club" will come out to mourn the loss of his miserable carcass. At the risk of sounding crass, crude, and socially unacceptable....
Good riddence...
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
You Reap What You Sew
I have an acquaintance, Charles, who used to be a next-door neighbor at my first house I purchased back in the mid 1980’s. Charles was attending law school at night at the time and was working all day to support his wife and young son. He looked like a nice fellow on paper, based on the information he presented to us about his self.
Charles and I lost contact with each other after a few years when his family moved to a new home a few miles away. The distance between us wasn’t the reason for the alienation, however. It was, rather (but not Dan Rather,) his treatment of my ex-wife and I after his departure. You see, he stiffed us of the $1000 finders fee he promised to pay anyone that could bring him a buyer for the house he owned next door. We did find him a buyer the very next day, one of my ex’s co-workers, and he didn’t pay us the finder’s fee. Not a word, not an apology, not even drinks or a dinner out. We let him get away with it gracefully
Fast forward to 2003-2004 and I learn that my old friend Charles has not only graduated from law school and been admitted to the State Bar of Georgia, but Charles has been elected to be Chief Magistrate Judge of Cherokee County, Georgia. Hurray for Charles!
As the title to this post says, there is a certain truth to the Biblical saying “you reap what you sew.” You see, Charles had had a few problems in his past that recently came to the surface. Some really bad problems in his past. I think they refer to his problems as issues dealing with "moral turpitude."
It seems that Charles name wasn’t originally Charles—he changed it—and his past convictions for theft of government property, possession of methamphetamine, and his resulting dishonorable discharge from the US Army in the late 1970’s was a problem as to his suitability to be an elected judge. He failed to reveal these little "hicups" when he made application for election to the judiciary.
The revelations of these indiscressions by a political foe recently caused the Georgia Supreme Court to recall him from the Magistrate’s bench. Adding to his humiliation, the local press was all over the events, in real time, as they occurred, which is how I found out about his troubles long distance, through the Internet. I think they are after his law license now. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy…
Which brings me to my current concern—Senator John F. Kerry’s war record. He beat us to death with self aggrandizing war stories for six months of the campaign while the press was breaking their collective necks looking the other way (for 30 years, for that matter.) The Swift Vets were partisan liars, Kerry was a War Hero.
I suggest that if Kerry wants to continue to represent Massachusetts as a US Senator, it is time for him to sign form 180 and let the nation see his true war records, not just “all of the records that the Navy has sent to me” as he has said in his web site.
I’m not going to dignify the rumors that I have heard with validity by repeating them here. They are still simply rumors, but I will point out that they are spreading on the internet if you wish to see them. IF they are true, Masseur Kerry needs to not only not be president, he needs to resign his position as Senator and "move-on.org" back to France.
Can you say recall vote???
Charles and I lost contact with each other after a few years when his family moved to a new home a few miles away. The distance between us wasn’t the reason for the alienation, however. It was, rather (but not Dan Rather,) his treatment of my ex-wife and I after his departure. You see, he stiffed us of the $1000 finders fee he promised to pay anyone that could bring him a buyer for the house he owned next door. We did find him a buyer the very next day, one of my ex’s co-workers, and he didn’t pay us the finder’s fee. Not a word, not an apology, not even drinks or a dinner out. We let him get away with it gracefully
Fast forward to 2003-2004 and I learn that my old friend Charles has not only graduated from law school and been admitted to the State Bar of Georgia, but Charles has been elected to be Chief Magistrate Judge of Cherokee County, Georgia. Hurray for Charles!
As the title to this post says, there is a certain truth to the Biblical saying “you reap what you sew.” You see, Charles had had a few problems in his past that recently came to the surface. Some really bad problems in his past. I think they refer to his problems as issues dealing with "moral turpitude."
It seems that Charles name wasn’t originally Charles—he changed it—and his past convictions for theft of government property, possession of methamphetamine, and his resulting dishonorable discharge from the US Army in the late 1970’s was a problem as to his suitability to be an elected judge. He failed to reveal these little "hicups" when he made application for election to the judiciary.
The revelations of these indiscressions by a political foe recently caused the Georgia Supreme Court to recall him from the Magistrate’s bench. Adding to his humiliation, the local press was all over the events, in real time, as they occurred, which is how I found out about his troubles long distance, through the Internet. I think they are after his law license now. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy…
Which brings me to my current concern—Senator John F. Kerry’s war record. He beat us to death with self aggrandizing war stories for six months of the campaign while the press was breaking their collective necks looking the other way (for 30 years, for that matter.) The Swift Vets were partisan liars, Kerry was a War Hero.
I suggest that if Kerry wants to continue to represent Massachusetts as a US Senator, it is time for him to sign form 180 and let the nation see his true war records, not just “all of the records that the Navy has sent to me” as he has said in his web site.
I’m not going to dignify the rumors that I have heard with validity by repeating them here. They are still simply rumors, but I will point out that they are spreading on the internet if you wish to see them. IF they are true, Masseur Kerry needs to not only not be president, he needs to resign his position as Senator and "move-on.org" back to France.
Can you say recall vote???
Unite on 'Common Ground'
USA Today’s online editorial this morning is titled “Unite on ‘Common Ground.’ It is written by, of all people, California ultra-liberal Nancy Pelosi. Well isn’t that special, coming from someone who could be defined by Webster’s as “an expert in partisan divisiveness.” I’m sure she can teach us a great deal—NOT!
After Republicans and conservatives have had a chance to politely celebrate our recent victories in the election for the office of the President, the House, the Senate, and various local and regional races, we will innately turn to the task of healing wounds and attempting to bring a coalition of Americans from both sides together to go about the business of running our country. And we will do this as a matter of instinct and human nature, not at the request of the venomous Ms. Pelosi and newspapers like USA Today that have covered the election in a shamefully partisan manner.
I find it curious that Nancy and the USA Today editors waste no time offering an olive branch of peace to the 2004 Republican politicians and their supporters when they in reality should be waving a white flag of surrender. They want to shake hands, get a big ‘ole hug, maybe a sloppy kiss on the mouth, and let bygones be bygones. I have a little problem being so friendly so soon after declaring the “end of major military operations.”
In a country other the USA, like Iran or Korea, the whole liberal crowd and their media co-conspirators could be facing a firing squad as a result of their actions. And the sad thing is that I am afraid, while the liberals seem to be calling for a good working relationship—“a climate of give and take”—that in reality it will be business as usual with conservatives doing all of the giving and the liberals doing all of the taking. “We gotta do this” and “we gotta do that.” That’s liberal speak for “you have to give me this concession” and “you must give me that concession,” lest I hold my breath or lie down in the floor and have a screaming kicking fit.
To quote Ms. Pelosi:
“The new administration should also address, at once, our domestic priorities: creating good jobs, better access to health care and the best possible education for our children. Even on these complicated issues, there is broad bipartisan consensus on certain concrete steps we could take immediately.
To create jobs, we can begin by passing a robust transportation bill that will create 1.7 million new jobs nationwide, while modernizing our infrastructure.”
OK Nancy, show me in the Constitution where it says that it is the government’s responsibility to create jobs? Show me where the Federal Government should be involved in Education (you can thank Jimmy Carter for the Department of Education and the current debacle.)
“We must also reform the tax code to end incentives for outsourcing. As a matter of basic fairness, no taxpayer should have to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.”
Outsourcing of jobs? Where I come from its is called subcontracting, and it is very effective. If it is my company, they are MY jobs, not the employees’ jobs, and I’ll by God hire whoever I want to, where ever I want to--male, female, purple skin, or green.
It’s my company and the bottom line costs are my responsibility. I am a business working to make me and the other owners of the company a profit. We are not a job creating charity, and further, if the government isn't in the business of creating jobs or subsidizing jobs, the taxpayer won't have "to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.
“To expand access to quality, affordable health care, Congress should take up legislation on the first day of the new session to provide health insurance to every child. We must also revisit the widely unpopular prescription drug bill to lower the cost of prescription drugs by allowing the safe reimportation of drugs from Canada and elsewhere. And we must unlock the miraculous promise of stem cell research.”
Health insurance for every child? Health care for children is already available virtually across the board. The crack head parents just need to take the child to the free clinic.
And another thing. The Prescription Drug Bill was a perfect example of the Republicans trying to work with the Democrats in a bi-partisan effort. You are right that in it’s current form it is bad, but it’s the concept in general, not the implementation that is the problem. More government involvement in our national healthcare system will only serve to cause more waste and further increase costs. The FDA regulation of the hated “big pharmaceutical companies” is the cause of high drug costs, not the solution. Canada’s drugs cost less because their bureaucrats have less hurdles for the drug makers to jump through to get medicine on the shelves for consumers. And we don’t have enough flue shots this year as a direct result of lawyers like John Edwards and government's vaccine purchasing programs.
Get this through your expensively coiffed head: there is no government ban on stem cell research. There is a ban on funding new lines of embryonic stems cells, but all the existing lines are not being used currently. There is increased government funding on adult stem cell work. The only existing therapies using stem cells involve the use of adult stem cells. There are no existing treatment’s that have developed using embryonic stem cells. Further, private businesses are free to spend their entire piggy bank on existing embryonic stem cell lines and all the adult stem cell lines they can finance. The election is over, stop lying about “bans on stem cell research.”
“To improve education, we must keep the promise of No Child Left Behind, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. And we must make college education more affordable, so that every student who has the motivation will also have the means.”
No Child Left Behind is an under funded Federal government mandate on the states that is doomed to failure as long as students and parents don’t make an equal commitment to academic success. College education is a function of supply and demand, not government regulation. Student motivation will produce the means, massive government funding of unqualified students will simply lower educational quality. Look at Georgia’s Hope Scholarship Program if you want a perfect example of the outcome
Finally, Ms Pelosi ends her piece with this gem:
“As the rhetoric of the campaign recedes, the business of governing—and leading—begins anew. As elected officials, our commitment must be to build a future worthy of the vision of our Founding Fathers, worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and worthy of the aspirations of our children.”
I trust that Nancy Pelosi will take a large, double dose of her own advice. And in the words of Forrest Gump…”and that’s all I have to say about that…”
UPDATE: November 4, 2004
I just knew that Nancy didn't sound in the USA Today OpEd piece like the old Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader that we love to hate. On the same day her flowery text was published, her mouth was busy telling us what she really thought and felt in response to House Speaker Dennis Hastert's offer "to work with those Democrats who want to work with me to get good things done for the American people..."
Miss Pelosi says "(t)he Republicans did not have an election about jobs, health care, education, environment, national security. They had an election about wedge issues in our country, and you know what they are," she said.
"They exploited the loveliness of the American people, the devoutness of people of faith for a political end."
So which is it Nancy?
Are you, or aren't you going to listen to your own words and 'unite on common ground'?
After Republicans and conservatives have had a chance to politely celebrate our recent victories in the election for the office of the President, the House, the Senate, and various local and regional races, we will innately turn to the task of healing wounds and attempting to bring a coalition of Americans from both sides together to go about the business of running our country. And we will do this as a matter of instinct and human nature, not at the request of the venomous Ms. Pelosi and newspapers like USA Today that have covered the election in a shamefully partisan manner.
I find it curious that Nancy and the USA Today editors waste no time offering an olive branch of peace to the 2004 Republican politicians and their supporters when they in reality should be waving a white flag of surrender. They want to shake hands, get a big ‘ole hug, maybe a sloppy kiss on the mouth, and let bygones be bygones. I have a little problem being so friendly so soon after declaring the “end of major military operations.”
In a country other the USA, like Iran or Korea, the whole liberal crowd and their media co-conspirators could be facing a firing squad as a result of their actions. And the sad thing is that I am afraid, while the liberals seem to be calling for a good working relationship—“a climate of give and take”—that in reality it will be business as usual with conservatives doing all of the giving and the liberals doing all of the taking. “We gotta do this” and “we gotta do that.” That’s liberal speak for “you have to give me this concession” and “you must give me that concession,” lest I hold my breath or lie down in the floor and have a screaming kicking fit.
To quote Ms. Pelosi:
“The new administration should also address, at once, our domestic priorities: creating good jobs, better access to health care and the best possible education for our children. Even on these complicated issues, there is broad bipartisan consensus on certain concrete steps we could take immediately.
To create jobs, we can begin by passing a robust transportation bill that will create 1.7 million new jobs nationwide, while modernizing our infrastructure.”
OK Nancy, show me in the Constitution where it says that it is the government’s responsibility to create jobs? Show me where the Federal Government should be involved in Education (you can thank Jimmy Carter for the Department of Education and the current debacle.)
“We must also reform the tax code to end incentives for outsourcing. As a matter of basic fairness, no taxpayer should have to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.”
Outsourcing of jobs? Where I come from its is called subcontracting, and it is very effective. If it is my company, they are MY jobs, not the employees’ jobs, and I’ll by God hire whoever I want to, where ever I want to--male, female, purple skin, or green.
It’s my company and the bottom line costs are my responsibility. I am a business working to make me and the other owners of the company a profit. We are not a job creating charity, and further, if the government isn't in the business of creating jobs or subsidizing jobs, the taxpayer won't have "to subsidize the outsourcing of his or her own job.
“To expand access to quality, affordable health care, Congress should take up legislation on the first day of the new session to provide health insurance to every child. We must also revisit the widely unpopular prescription drug bill to lower the cost of prescription drugs by allowing the safe reimportation of drugs from Canada and elsewhere. And we must unlock the miraculous promise of stem cell research.”
Health insurance for every child? Health care for children is already available virtually across the board. The crack head parents just need to take the child to the free clinic.
And another thing. The Prescription Drug Bill was a perfect example of the Republicans trying to work with the Democrats in a bi-partisan effort. You are right that in it’s current form it is bad, but it’s the concept in general, not the implementation that is the problem. More government involvement in our national healthcare system will only serve to cause more waste and further increase costs. The FDA regulation of the hated “big pharmaceutical companies” is the cause of high drug costs, not the solution. Canada’s drugs cost less because their bureaucrats have less hurdles for the drug makers to jump through to get medicine on the shelves for consumers. And we don’t have enough flue shots this year as a direct result of lawyers like John Edwards and government's vaccine purchasing programs.
Get this through your expensively coiffed head: there is no government ban on stem cell research. There is a ban on funding new lines of embryonic stems cells, but all the existing lines are not being used currently. There is increased government funding on adult stem cell work. The only existing therapies using stem cells involve the use of adult stem cells. There are no existing treatment’s that have developed using embryonic stem cells. Further, private businesses are free to spend their entire piggy bank on existing embryonic stem cell lines and all the adult stem cell lines they can finance. The election is over, stop lying about “bans on stem cell research.”
“To improve education, we must keep the promise of No Child Left Behind, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. And we must make college education more affordable, so that every student who has the motivation will also have the means.”
No Child Left Behind is an under funded Federal government mandate on the states that is doomed to failure as long as students and parents don’t make an equal commitment to academic success. College education is a function of supply and demand, not government regulation. Student motivation will produce the means, massive government funding of unqualified students will simply lower educational quality. Look at Georgia’s Hope Scholarship Program if you want a perfect example of the outcome
Finally, Ms Pelosi ends her piece with this gem:
“As the rhetoric of the campaign recedes, the business of governing—and leading—begins anew. As elected officials, our commitment must be to build a future worthy of the vision of our Founding Fathers, worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and worthy of the aspirations of our children.”
I trust that Nancy Pelosi will take a large, double dose of her own advice. And in the words of Forrest Gump…”and that’s all I have to say about that…”
UPDATE: November 4, 2004
I just knew that Nancy didn't sound in the USA Today OpEd piece like the old Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader that we love to hate. On the same day her flowery text was published, her mouth was busy telling us what she really thought and felt in response to House Speaker Dennis Hastert's offer "to work with those Democrats who want to work with me to get good things done for the American people..."
Miss Pelosi says "(t)he Republicans did not have an election about jobs, health care, education, environment, national security. They had an election about wedge issues in our country, and you know what they are," she said.
"They exploited the loveliness of the American people, the devoutness of people of faith for a political end."
So which is it Nancy?
Are you, or aren't you going to listen to your own words and 'unite on common ground'?
The Fat lady Has Sung, But it's not over
With the dust settling around the free-for-all that we called the 2004 presidential election, Kerry conceded by telephone at 11:05 AM this morning and Bush is expected to talk to us in a little while.
Kerry has been hiding all morning in his palatial townhome in Boston’s Beacon Hill district and appears to be as arrogant in addressing his resounding loss as he has been over the past six months of the campaign. President Bush has waited patently for Kerry to go first. Many people see the only remaining tasks to be a little “housekeeping” regarding the provisional ballots in Ohio and swatting a few lawyers on the nose that are sniffing around other states looking for signs of “disenfranchisement” and “intimidation.”
Not me.
With the conclusion of the election follies, I am ready to demand some answers from the mainstream media regarding what, if anything, they intend to do about policing their ungodly, unmitigated, unrestrained, brazen liberal bias that was exposed during this election cycle. Specifically, where are the results of the “independent” investigation regarding Dan Rather’s forged documents? What is CBS going to do to prevent such obvious, calculated, malicious behavior from occurring in the future? Can you say N-O-T-H-I-N-G?
Then there is this matter of election day coverage and the newly revised, so called independent, “exit polls.” Polls that were used as the exclusive basis of the early proclamations of a large Kerry lead. Just like the early calling of a Florida victory for Al Gore in 2000, the large leads shown by all TV broadcast and cable outlets, supported by the exit polls, were bound to have adversely affected voter attitudes and could have caused mid-American and west coast voters to not vote at all because of the huge Kerry lead. (It might have actually helped Bush) Further, if you stopped watching and went to bed at 10:00 PM, you awoke this morning to the surprise news that it was in fact Bush, not Kerry that was going to lead our country for the next four years.
At the core of the new and improved exit poll consortium is one of “the usual suspects”--the Associated Press. In my opinion the whole thing was designed and implemented as a last minute media assault on the election outcome. If that was in fact not the pure intent, in light of the other indiscressions committed through the campaign, it was certainly the result and it needs adressing.
Need I say more? Beam me up, Scotty…
Update: November 12, 2004
If I'm not accurate, I hope to be the first to admit it--and I was wrong.
I was premature with my declaration of Kerry being arrogant in making us wait for his concession speach. I don't blame him for waiting for the facts, and he was in fact quite humble in conceeding the election to President Bush and not filing an endless chain of lawsuits.
Damn good try Mr. Kerry, you almost won the most powerful position in the world, something I will certainally never have the opportunity to aspire to. For that, you deserve a salute. Here it is ....S-A-L-U-T-E!
Kerry has been hiding all morning in his palatial townhome in Boston’s Beacon Hill district and appears to be as arrogant in addressing his resounding loss as he has been over the past six months of the campaign. President Bush has waited patently for Kerry to go first. Many people see the only remaining tasks to be a little “housekeeping” regarding the provisional ballots in Ohio and swatting a few lawyers on the nose that are sniffing around other states looking for signs of “disenfranchisement” and “intimidation.”
Not me.
With the conclusion of the election follies, I am ready to demand some answers from the mainstream media regarding what, if anything, they intend to do about policing their ungodly, unmitigated, unrestrained, brazen liberal bias that was exposed during this election cycle. Specifically, where are the results of the “independent” investigation regarding Dan Rather’s forged documents? What is CBS going to do to prevent such obvious, calculated, malicious behavior from occurring in the future? Can you say N-O-T-H-I-N-G?
Then there is this matter of election day coverage and the newly revised, so called independent, “exit polls.” Polls that were used as the exclusive basis of the early proclamations of a large Kerry lead. Just like the early calling of a Florida victory for Al Gore in 2000, the large leads shown by all TV broadcast and cable outlets, supported by the exit polls, were bound to have adversely affected voter attitudes and could have caused mid-American and west coast voters to not vote at all because of the huge Kerry lead. (It might have actually helped Bush) Further, if you stopped watching and went to bed at 10:00 PM, you awoke this morning to the surprise news that it was in fact Bush, not Kerry that was going to lead our country for the next four years.
At the core of the new and improved exit poll consortium is one of “the usual suspects”--the Associated Press. In my opinion the whole thing was designed and implemented as a last minute media assault on the election outcome. If that was in fact not the pure intent, in light of the other indiscressions committed through the campaign, it was certainly the result and it needs adressing.
Need I say more? Beam me up, Scotty…
Update: November 12, 2004
If I'm not accurate, I hope to be the first to admit it--and I was wrong.
I was premature with my declaration of Kerry being arrogant in making us wait for his concession speach. I don't blame him for waiting for the facts, and he was in fact quite humble in conceeding the election to President Bush and not filing an endless chain of lawsuits.
Damn good try Mr. Kerry, you almost won the most powerful position in the world, something I will certainally never have the opportunity to aspire to. For that, you deserve a salute. Here it is ....S-A-L-U-T-E!
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Partisan Predictions
I promise that I am going to shift gears in the next few weeks, if not days, and go back to less overtly political commentary, but I feel compelled to come out now and divulge a prediction that I have been making privately to my family and close friends for several months.
It is based on gut instict and a wishfulness not just for my political "team" to win, but rather (but not Dan Rather) my sincere desire to get President Bush another term in office so he can continue to prosecute the war on terrorism.
I don't want poor people to starve, I don't want middle class families to pay excessive taxes or not have medical care, I am not going to shove abortion rights or gay marrage issues down anyone's throats...I just want the Islamo-Muslim-towel-head-weird-beards and the little Korean troll dictator to get their come-uppance and I believe that George W. Bush is the man to do it.
I predict Bush by 300+ electorial votes, and a 53% chunk of the popular vote.
Lets wait and see what happens.
It is based on gut instict and a wishfulness not just for my political "team" to win, but rather (but not Dan Rather) my sincere desire to get President Bush another term in office so he can continue to prosecute the war on terrorism.
I don't want poor people to starve, I don't want middle class families to pay excessive taxes or not have medical care, I am not going to shove abortion rights or gay marrage issues down anyone's throats...I just want the Islamo-Muslim-towel-head-weird-beards and the little Korean troll dictator to get their come-uppance and I believe that George W. Bush is the man to do it.
I predict Bush by 300+ electorial votes, and a 53% chunk of the popular vote.
Lets wait and see what happens.
Monday, November 01, 2004
We're Not in Kansas Anymore, Toto
Since the collapse of the twin towers in 2001, I have often speculated as to the form and the location of the next terrorist attack. This debate also has usually included a discussion of the potential effectiveness (or lack thereof) of our Homeland Security measures.
My point has been that while the attack on the World Trade Center brought a startling reality to the entire spectrum of American society, in practice, for most Americans, it still happened “up there” in New York City, not “out here” in Topeka, Kansas or even on St. Simons Island, Georgia.
We have implemented many well conceived, effective measures to combat potential terrorism and the citizens of the US have done a good job of adapting to the post 9/11 security realities. We have also conceived of some strangely convoluted security measures like screening the walkers and orthopedic shoes of 90 year old Kansas City grandmothers in airports while at the same time allowing young, turban clad men of obvious middle-eastern descent to stroll unfettered through the screening area—fearful of being guilty of politically incorrect “profiling.”
My contention has been that the next terrorist attack does not in fact have to occur on a high profile target in a major city like New York, Washington DC, or Chicago. It could happen anywhere and it wouldn’t have to kill thousands to be effective. Imagine the psychological impact of the detonation of a series of five 2000 pound car bombs, each placed in a different US city adjacent to a movie theater or suburban football stadium packed with people on a Friday night.
Maybe only a few hundred people would be killed in each incident, but an attack like this would shut this country down. Everyone would run to the bank and the grocery store and go home to batten down the hatches for weeks if not months. The aftermath would include no parking zones, reminiscent of the setbacks at airports, for tens of dozens of yards adjacent to all public places of assembly like theaters, malls, stadiums, etc. Forget parking the old Suburban on the curb to wait while the old lady runs into the local “Stash & Cash” to pick up a gallon of milk--unless you want to risk being ripped from your vehicle and strip searched as a result.
Having said this, I wish to point out a major error in the transcript of last Friday’s Osama bin Laden video message to the American people. The Middle East Media Research Institute points out an error in the translation of what Osama “Weird Beard” bin Laden had to say, and it is substantial:
The tape of Osama bin Laden that was aired on Al-Jazeera(1) on Friday, October 29th included a specific threat to "each U.S. state," designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming election against George W. Bush. The U.S. media in general mistranslated the words "ay wilaya" (which means "each U.S. state")(2) to mean a "country" or "nation" other than the U.S., while in fact the threat was directed specifically at each individual U.S. state. This suggests some knowledge by bin Laden of the U.S. electoral college system. In a section of his speech in which he harshly criticized George W. Bush, bin Laden stated: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."
The Islamist website Al-Qal'a explained what this sentence meant: "This message was a warning to every U.S. state separately. When he [Osama Bin Laden] said, 'Every state will be determining its own security, and will be responsible for its choice,' it means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president has chosen to fight us, and we will consider it our enemy, and any state that will vote against Bush has chosen to make peace with us, and we will not characterize it as an enemy. By this characterization, Sheikh Osama wants to drive a wedge in the American body, to weaken it, and he wants to divide the American people itself between enemies of Islam and the Muslims, and those who fight for us, so that he doesn't treat all American people as if they're the same. This letter will have great implications inside the American society, part of which are connected to the American elections, and part of which are connected to what will come after the elections."(3)
So there it is folks, a direct threat to the security of each and every state--INDIVIDUALLY-- based on the outcome of the Electoral College vote. The inference is that if we re-elect “the white thug Bush,” then the states that didn’t vote Bush are safe and those that did vote Bush are at risk of further attacks. So we are really supposed to believe this crappolla?
As I stated in my previous post, Weird Beard Calls Time Out, what ever happened to Osama’s call for the restoration of Islam to the historical Eastern regions and converting the infidel countries of the West? What happened to world-wide Jihad? Did he change his mind after nearly having his ass shot off in Tora Bora?
What bin Laden apparently doesn’t understand is that we are the United States of America, not simply 50 independent states, one district, and some international possessions operating under a fancy flag/corporate logo in order to get retirement benefits and cheep group insurance rates. If you attack one state, you attack all Americans, and because we are a mobile society--even if I don’t live in a given city, chances are that I have a friend, relative, or business associate that does. You hit Kansas, you piss Alabama and Georgia off—real bad (and we have more guns per capita than practically any other part of the country.)
The new video tape can be translated, diallated, mastigated, and debated until we are all blue in the face, but it should be allowed to serve only two distinct purposes.
The first is to prove that Osama bin laden is still out there leading the Islamic war against
the free world.
The second, and most important, is to affirm the need to reelect president George Bush so
that he can finish his competent prosecution of the war on terror.
We, as a nation, cannot, like the Spanish, allow ourselves to cave in to overt threats from outside movements designed to influence OUR national elections.
As my title says, “We’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto.”
GET OUT AND VOTE FOR GEORGE W BUSH.
My point has been that while the attack on the World Trade Center brought a startling reality to the entire spectrum of American society, in practice, for most Americans, it still happened “up there” in New York City, not “out here” in Topeka, Kansas or even on St. Simons Island, Georgia.
We have implemented many well conceived, effective measures to combat potential terrorism and the citizens of the US have done a good job of adapting to the post 9/11 security realities. We have also conceived of some strangely convoluted security measures like screening the walkers and orthopedic shoes of 90 year old Kansas City grandmothers in airports while at the same time allowing young, turban clad men of obvious middle-eastern descent to stroll unfettered through the screening area—fearful of being guilty of politically incorrect “profiling.”
My contention has been that the next terrorist attack does not in fact have to occur on a high profile target in a major city like New York, Washington DC, or Chicago. It could happen anywhere and it wouldn’t have to kill thousands to be effective. Imagine the psychological impact of the detonation of a series of five 2000 pound car bombs, each placed in a different US city adjacent to a movie theater or suburban football stadium packed with people on a Friday night.
Maybe only a few hundred people would be killed in each incident, but an attack like this would shut this country down. Everyone would run to the bank and the grocery store and go home to batten down the hatches for weeks if not months. The aftermath would include no parking zones, reminiscent of the setbacks at airports, for tens of dozens of yards adjacent to all public places of assembly like theaters, malls, stadiums, etc. Forget parking the old Suburban on the curb to wait while the old lady runs into the local “Stash & Cash” to pick up a gallon of milk--unless you want to risk being ripped from your vehicle and strip searched as a result.
Having said this, I wish to point out a major error in the transcript of last Friday’s Osama bin Laden video message to the American people. The Middle East Media Research Institute points out an error in the translation of what Osama “Weird Beard” bin Laden had to say, and it is substantial:
The tape of Osama bin Laden that was aired on Al-Jazeera(1) on Friday, October 29th included a specific threat to "each U.S. state," designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming election against George W. Bush. The U.S. media in general mistranslated the words "ay wilaya" (which means "each U.S. state")(2) to mean a "country" or "nation" other than the U.S., while in fact the threat was directed specifically at each individual U.S. state. This suggests some knowledge by bin Laden of the U.S. electoral college system. In a section of his speech in which he harshly criticized George W. Bush, bin Laden stated: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."
The Islamist website Al-Qal'a explained what this sentence meant: "This message was a warning to every U.S. state separately. When he [Osama Bin Laden] said, 'Every state will be determining its own security, and will be responsible for its choice,' it means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president has chosen to fight us, and we will consider it our enemy, and any state that will vote against Bush has chosen to make peace with us, and we will not characterize it as an enemy. By this characterization, Sheikh Osama wants to drive a wedge in the American body, to weaken it, and he wants to divide the American people itself between enemies of Islam and the Muslims, and those who fight for us, so that he doesn't treat all American people as if they're the same. This letter will have great implications inside the American society, part of which are connected to the American elections, and part of which are connected to what will come after the elections."(3)
So there it is folks, a direct threat to the security of each and every state--INDIVIDUALLY-- based on the outcome of the Electoral College vote. The inference is that if we re-elect “the white thug Bush,” then the states that didn’t vote Bush are safe and those that did vote Bush are at risk of further attacks. So we are really supposed to believe this crappolla?
As I stated in my previous post, Weird Beard Calls Time Out, what ever happened to Osama’s call for the restoration of Islam to the historical Eastern regions and converting the infidel countries of the West? What happened to world-wide Jihad? Did he change his mind after nearly having his ass shot off in Tora Bora?
What bin Laden apparently doesn’t understand is that we are the United States of America, not simply 50 independent states, one district, and some international possessions operating under a fancy flag/corporate logo in order to get retirement benefits and cheep group insurance rates. If you attack one state, you attack all Americans, and because we are a mobile society--even if I don’t live in a given city, chances are that I have a friend, relative, or business associate that does. You hit Kansas, you piss Alabama and Georgia off—real bad (and we have more guns per capita than practically any other part of the country.)
The new video tape can be translated, diallated, mastigated, and debated until we are all blue in the face, but it should be allowed to serve only two distinct purposes.
The first is to prove that Osama bin laden is still out there leading the Islamic war against
the free world.
The second, and most important, is to affirm the need to reelect president George Bush so
that he can finish his competent prosecution of the war on terror.
We, as a nation, cannot, like the Spanish, allow ourselves to cave in to overt threats from outside movements designed to influence OUR national elections.
As my title says, “We’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto.”
GET OUT AND VOTE FOR GEORGE W BUSH.
Sunday, October 31, 2004
"Weird Beard" Calls Time Out?
Much has been made over the new videotape released Friday on Al Jarezaa by our least favorite Islamic Jihadist, Osama bin Laden. Only part of the video has been translated and broadcast on the American TV networks, but the media outlets have worked themselves into a lather asking “What does it mean?” or endlessly pontificating on “How will it affect the outcome of the Presidential election?” The answers to these two questions obviously are as varied as the political spectrum in which we live.
The liberal leaning New York Times had this to say:
"This is going to be the last nail in George Bush's campaign,'' said Jim Jordan, a Democratic strategist working for America Coming Together, a group working to unseat Mr. Bush. "Bin Laden on the loose is arguably Bush's greatest failure as commander in chief."
Richard N. Bond, a former Republican national chairman, said the tape was a "reminder for all Americans that America is under attack - and who can be the best commander in chief in the war on terror is the central issue of this campaign."
So the tape hurts Bush, or it helps Bush, depending on if you are a liberal or a conservative.
I still ask, beyond the possibility of actually influencing the election, beyond proving that Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 911 has been translated into Arabic, what does the tape mean? What was Osama “weird beard” bin Laden actually saying?
My mentors over at Powerline make some interesting points that I totally agree with. Based on a transcript of the video, I too can’t help but wonder: Is Generalissimo Osama trying to call “time out?” Osama is quoted as saying:
"Your security is not in the hands of [Senator John] Kerry, Bush or al-Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Any [presidential] mandate which does not play havoc with our security would automatically ensure its own security."
What was most interesting about the tape was not what bin Laden said, but rather (but not Dan Rather) what he did not say. He did not specifically warn of additional attacks. Not that I believe that more attacks are not coming our way, but the omission is glaring.
I can’t help but wonder about the apparent less than defiant tone of the parts of the video that have been broadcast and translated/transcribed. For one thing, any sign of weakness or compromise is seen an invitation for attack and/or overthrow in the Arab world. This latest message seems to extend an offer of a truce to America that was offered to the nations of Europe earlier this year. Fox News reported that the “last audiotape purportedly from bin Laden came in April. The speaker on the tape, which CIA analysts said likely was the Al Qaeda leader, offered a truce to European nations if they pull troops out of Muslim countries. The tape referred to the March 22 assassination by Israel of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin."
So the total demise of the infidels and the spread of Islam over all of the past historical Muslim regions of the East, as well as the takeover of the West by Islam is no longer the goal here?
I’m more than just a bit leery of this sudden change of rhetoric. Knowing the value of the word of a terrorist is exactly less than zero, I predict another major world shaking terror event, not necessarily on our turf, before the end of 2004. My patriotic side makes me want to believe that we have been effective enough to date in eliminating terrorism at its source (manpower & money) to prevent it from occurring on our soil—but I could be wrong.
If Bush wins, whatever happens will be blamed by the terrorists on his re-election. If Bush looses, any terrorist attack will still be blamed by the liberals and the main stream media on Bush’s prior actions (failures.)
The liberal leaning New York Times had this to say:
"This is going to be the last nail in George Bush's campaign,'' said Jim Jordan, a Democratic strategist working for America Coming Together, a group working to unseat Mr. Bush. "Bin Laden on the loose is arguably Bush's greatest failure as commander in chief."
Richard N. Bond, a former Republican national chairman, said the tape was a "reminder for all Americans that America is under attack - and who can be the best commander in chief in the war on terror is the central issue of this campaign."
So the tape hurts Bush, or it helps Bush, depending on if you are a liberal or a conservative.
I still ask, beyond the possibility of actually influencing the election, beyond proving that Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 911 has been translated into Arabic, what does the tape mean? What was Osama “weird beard” bin Laden actually saying?
My mentors over at Powerline make some interesting points that I totally agree with. Based on a transcript of the video, I too can’t help but wonder: Is Generalissimo Osama trying to call “time out?” Osama is quoted as saying:
"Your security is not in the hands of [Senator John] Kerry, Bush or al-Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Any [presidential] mandate which does not play havoc with our security would automatically ensure its own security."
What was most interesting about the tape was not what bin Laden said, but rather (but not Dan Rather) what he did not say. He did not specifically warn of additional attacks. Not that I believe that more attacks are not coming our way, but the omission is glaring.
I can’t help but wonder about the apparent less than defiant tone of the parts of the video that have been broadcast and translated/transcribed. For one thing, any sign of weakness or compromise is seen an invitation for attack and/or overthrow in the Arab world. This latest message seems to extend an offer of a truce to America that was offered to the nations of Europe earlier this year. Fox News reported that the “last audiotape purportedly from bin Laden came in April. The speaker on the tape, which CIA analysts said likely was the Al Qaeda leader, offered a truce to European nations if they pull troops out of Muslim countries. The tape referred to the March 22 assassination by Israel of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin."
So the total demise of the infidels and the spread of Islam over all of the past historical Muslim regions of the East, as well as the takeover of the West by Islam is no longer the goal here?
I’m more than just a bit leery of this sudden change of rhetoric. Knowing the value of the word of a terrorist is exactly less than zero, I predict another major world shaking terror event, not necessarily on our turf, before the end of 2004. My patriotic side makes me want to believe that we have been effective enough to date in eliminating terrorism at its source (manpower & money) to prevent it from occurring on our soil—but I could be wrong.
If Bush wins, whatever happens will be blamed by the terrorists on his re-election. If Bush looses, any terrorist attack will still be blamed by the liberals and the main stream media on Bush’s prior actions (failures.)
