Friday, July 29, 2005

The Ugly Left

FrontPage by Tammy Bruce:
"Consider their political and public leadership those who are supposed to be the cream of the crop, meant to attract others to their camp, the Role Models: Teddy Kennedy, the Clintons, Lynne Stewart, Barbra Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg, Rosie O'Donnell, Michael Moore, Alec Baldwin, and Al Franken. Need I say more?

During my time with the National Organization for Women one of the (many) things that disturbed me during national board meetings was the fact that many of the women seemed to be allergic to bathing, and especially frightened of the concept of grooming."
Tammy makes a valid point. One of the benefits of the Left is that you are not required to do anything, your Nanny State government will do it for you. All you have to do is pay your taxes and be a nice little subject.

Another thought, off the point. If you don't realize how much you need your government, the government will allow sociopaths such as rapists and child molesters back into society. They do on a regular basis. When the obvious brutal and unthinkable crimes occur, you will look towards the nanny state to fix it.

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Clinton to Direct Creation of Democrats' Agenda

LA Times
"The appointment solidified the identification of Clinton, once considered a champion of the party's left, with the centrist movement that helped propel her husband to the White House in 1992. It also continued her effort, which has accelerated in recent months, to present herself as a moderate on issues such as national security, immigration and abortion. "
Yep PRESENT HERSELF. She is a liar. It will "take a village" to destroy her political aspirations. Maybe if Rudy removes her from the Senate in 2006?

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Democrats "Framing" their Message

Good analysis and a great quote from Right Wing News
"What the Democrats who're latching onto 'framing' don't get is that you can take a big old mound of horse crap, put a layer of icing on it and call it a chocolate cake, but you aren't going to fool many people, and those you do trick aren't going to be real happy with you after they take that first bite."

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Hanoi Jane Rides Again

My Way News
Actress and activist Jane Fonda says she intends to take a cross-country bus tour to call for an end to U.S. military operations in Iraq.

"I can't go into any detail except to say that it's going to be pretty exciting," she said.
Is this a great country, or what? This traitor gets to go on a bus tour. No more comment is necessary.

Monday, July 25, 2005

Congressman suggests way to retaliate for nuclear terror - Jul 18, 2005
"DENVER, Colorado (AP) -- A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could 'take out' Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.

Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Florida. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

'Well, what if you said something like -- if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites,' Tancredo answered.

'You're talking about bombing Mecca,' Campbell said.

'Yeah,' Tancredo responded."
Hypothetically? Lemme see, all the Germans weren't NAZI, but they had their country destroyed... HMMM!

Friday, July 22, 2005

Attacks on UK will continue, radical cleric says

Attacks on UK will continue, radical cleric says:
Mongos Emphasis "Attacks on UK will continue, radical cleric says

By Gideon Long
Friday, July 22, 2005; 10:57 AM

LONDON (Reuters) - Militant Islamists will continue to attack Britain until the government pulls its troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the country's most outspoken Islamic clerics said on Friday.

Speaking 15 days after bombers killed over 50 people in London and a day after a series of failed attacks on the city's transport network, Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed said the British capital should expect more violence.

'What happened yesterday confirmed that as long as the cause and the root problem is still there ... we will see the same effect we saw on July 7,' Bakri said.

'If the cause is still there the effect will happen again and again,' he said, adding he had no information about future attacks or contacts with people planning to carry out attacks.

Bakri, a Syrian-born cleric who has been vilified in Britain since 2001 when he praised the September 11 hijackers, said he did not believe the bombings and attempted attacks on London were carried out by British Muslims.

He condemned the killing of all innocent civilians but described attacks on British and U.S. troops in Muslim countries as 'pro-life' and justified.

In an interview with Reuters, Bakri described Osama bin Laden, leader of the radical Islamist network al Qaeda, as 'a sincere man who fights against evil forces.'
Bakri said he would like Britain to become an Islamic state but feared he would be deported before his dream was realized.

'I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world,' he said.


A hate figure for the British tabloid press, the bearded and bespectacled Bakri said Islam contained "a message of peace for those who want to live with the Muslims in peace."

"But Islam is a message of war for those who declare war against Muslims," he said.

"I condemn any killing and any bombing against any innocent people in Britain or abroad, but I expect the British people to condemn the killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan."

However, asked about Islamist attacks on British and U.S. troops and on Israelis, he said: "If violence is pro-life I don't condemn it."

Britain has around 1,100 troops in Afghanistan and 8,500 in Iraq. Prime Minister Tony Blair supported the United States in its respective invasions of both countries in 2001 and 2003.

Bakri, a 46-year-old father of six, was born in Syria and lived in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. When the Saudi government expelled him in 1985 he came to London.

Nicknamed "The Tottenham Ayatollah" after the area of north London in which he lives, he has infuriated many Britons with his firebrand speeches and refusal to condemn suicide bombings.

He founded the British branch of Hizb ut-Tahrir, which describes itself as a non-violent political party dedicated to creating an Islamic caliphate centered on the Middle East.

But he split from the group in 1996 and set up al Muhajiroun, which won notoriety in 2001 for celebrating the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon which killed nearly 3,000 people.

Bakri has Syrian and Lebanese citizenship and says he thinks the British government might deport him to one of those two countries in the wake of this month's bombings.

"But I think that would be political suicide for the British government if they started to deport and imprison all extremists and radicals," he said.

"Because if, God forbid, something happened again, they would have nobody left to blame."

'I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world,'WELL THERE IT IS... ARE WE AWAKE YET... SHOOT THIS ASSHOLE PLEASE ...



Note to Fat Teddy

You know Ted, you, more than anyone else, are responsible for driving me away from the Democratic Party.

The Demogogs trot you out to spew the leftist party line, then put you back in your closet, with your bottle. I haven't seen you interviewed in years. I'm sure you would embarrass yourself, your family, and your state. You have embarrassed your country for over 30 years.

What a dispicable waste of space you truly are.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Calling Londonistan: It's Time To Wake Up

" it would be hard to find a place outside the Middle East more infested with radical Islam than London, or Londonistan, as it is commonly and derisively referred to.

One former counterterrorism official has likened it to 'the Star Wars bar scene' for Islamic radicals. Everyday and twice on Friday, radical imams are preaching jihad to the high heavens in London and throughout Britain.

Considering Britain's hospitality and extraordinary tolerance, it doesn't seem very cricket of them, what? But Britons ought be tolerant of them, oughtn't they?

Well, actually, no, they oughtn't, unless they want the Britain that they know and love to go the way of the dodo bird. Here's the problem in a nutshell. What Britain has created for itself is the ultimate multicultural conundrum: How do you tolerate the intolerant culture that wants to destroy your culture of tolerance without risking the total loss of your enlightened toleration?

Or to put it more simply:

How do you practice enlightened tolerance in a world filled with apocalyptic Islamic terrorists without allowing it to become a societal suicide pact?"

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Dick Durbin against John G. Roberts

Just remember when you hear Durbin, here is his TERRORIST HANDLING KIT. My friends accross the river are saying you are a one termer DICK. Remember Mosley-Braun DICK. Stop being a DICK, DICK.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

So Who is Joseph Wilson? (and who cares?)

From Neal Boortz at
He was the ambassador in Iraq during the first Gulf War. He is a partisan Democrat. His wife sent him to Africa to investigate the claims that Saddam Hussein sought to acquire yellowcake uranium from that country. Joe Wilson came back and concluded that Iraq did not try to buy the yellowcake uranium. Although Saddam Hussein did get it from somewhere, because he had 500 tons of it already (see today's reading assignments.)

At that point, what did Joe Wilson do? As the one supposedly worried about national security, secrecy and the integrity of the CIA? He wrote an op-ed in the New York Times, talking about the whole thing. So much for secrecy. Joe Wilson also lied and said the Vice President sent him to Africa. Dick Cheney doesn't even know Joe Wilson.

So we know that Joe Wilson is a Bush-basher, partisan liberal Democrat and a liar. He's also selling a book that he's written. Those are facts that cannot be disputed. Yet in all of this, the mainstream media and the left is hitching their wagons to Wilson as if he's the victim here and as if his intentions are entirely pure
Mongo emphasizes Neal's comments. Outside of the Beltway this is no news at all (but it made it to the front page of the St. Louis Post Disgrace). This guy Wilson is a hack, and his wife WAS NOT an agent at the time she dispatched him (paid by the taxpayers) on this trip to Niger. In addition, we received reports from BRITISH Intelligence about the uranium.

The SMSM has made this kerfluffle, and I believe (or hope) the American People can look past the media's thinly veiled masks to see their seething hatred of the Bush Administration.

Monday, July 18, 2005

Mission Implausible

Ann Coulter
"... The real story about Joseph C. Wilson IV was not that Bush lied about Saddam seeking uranium in Africa; the story was Clown Wilson and his paper-pusher wife, Valerie Plame. By foisting their fantasies of themselves on the country, these two have instigated a massive criminal investigation, the result of which is: The only person who has demonstrably lied and possibly broken the law is Joseph Wilson."
The SMSM (Socialist Main Stream Media) is in a lather about this guy Wilson. If studied this guy a bit. He is a Walter Mitty type who postures as an "agent". His wife, at the time SHE recommended him for the Niger investigation, was a desk jockey at CIA. Until I hear more red meat on this case (which all should be out by now...) I'm not impressed that Rove messed up too bad.

Sunday, July 17, 2005

Molon Labe! Oleg Volk

Saturday, July 16, 2005

The Left doesn't support the troops and should admit it

Dennis Prager
" One example is the claim made by Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and almost all other Democrats and liberals that the war in Iraq is 'the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time.' How does one support troops that are fighting a wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time? A few leftist writers have been honest enough to say, 'Nothing personal, guys, but I sure don't support you.' But the vast majority of the Left and all Democratic politicians have not been honest on this matter.

A second example is the oft-repeated line, found on liberal bumper stickers, 'War is not the answer.' Aside from the idiocy of this claim -- war has solved slavery, ended the Holocaust, destroyed Japanese Fascism, preserved half the Korean peninsula from near-genocide, and saved Israel from extinction, among other noble achievements -- the claim offers no support to those who do engage in war."
Liberals Lie, Terrorists Die .... Wow, I kind of like the sound of that one...

Friday, July 15, 2005

No More Srebrenicas -

A review of the disasterous policies of the UN in the Wall Street Journals OpinionJournal -- Lessons of Srebrenica
.. the U.N.'s disastrous decision to establish 'safe areas' around several threatened ethnic enclaves, including Sarajevo and Srebrenica. According to a 1993 U.N. Secretariat report, safe areas would have the benefits of limiting 'loss of life and property, deterring aggression, demonstrating international concern and involvement, setting the stage for political negotiations and facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aide.'

From the start, however, it was unclear where the U.N. soldiers to protect the enclaves would come from; then-President Clinton had ruled out the deployment of U.S. ground troops. It was also unclear whether the U.N. soldiers in safe areas were actually authorized to use force to defend the people in their care. Worst of all, the price Muslims paid for U.N. protection was to abandon their weapons, which they did within a week of the safe areas' creation."
Our lovely UN and gun control ... a recipe for genocide.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Neal Boortz on the White House Press Corp Nealz Nuze Today's Nuze:
"Even though they knew the press secretary wasn't going to tell them a thing, TV reporters like to get their question in for their own cameras. So Terry Moran, David Gregory and John Roberts played up their spoiled child in the candy aisle routine for all it was worth."
emphasis Mongos...
I REALLY HOPE a lot of citizens saw this display of egotistical, condescending garbage from these supposedly "independant" reporters. I was going to say "journalists" but I gagged. These slimy bastards are soooo partisan they should be on the DNC payroll.

They think they have Carl Rove. What they do have doesn't amount to shot glass full of warm spit. They will try to spin it, but THEY DON'T CONTROL THE AGENDA ANYMORE.

Sorry Socialist Pigs, you lose, go crying to the UN, if you can bribe your way in.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Suspect in Dutch filmmaker's murder makes dramatic court room confession

If you aren't familiar with the Theo Van Gogh case you can get some information here
"The man accused of killing Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh confessed to a Dutch court that he acted out of his religious beliefs, saying he would do 'exactly the same' if he were ever set free.

'I take complete responsibility for my actions. I acted purely in the name of my religion,' 27-year-old Dutch-Moroccan national Mohammed Bouyeri told the court in Amsterdam on the final day of his trial"
Mongo went on a blogrant after the London bombings, and I put up a post blaming Muslims for the terrorism, and placing the responsibility on all Muslims. After I was called on it by a comment, I pulled the post (the first I have ever pulled). However, if I was a Muslim I would feel partially responsible for the crimes committed on humanity in the name of my religion. If my religion did not try to clean up its radical fringes, I would attempt to. Back to the latest news on the "religion of peace"...

So Bouyeri, after shooting her son 15 times, stabbing him several times, and cutting his throat says to the mother of his victim...

"'I cannot feel for you ... because I believe you are an infidel,' he added."

Lesson Learned

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Property Rights Are Civil Rights

In OpinionJournal - John Fund on the Trail analysis of how the Kelo eminent domain decision has united both the left and right. Emphasis added.
"Many Democrats who used to scoff at conservative fears about activist judges are now joining their barricades when it comes to eminent domain.

In a way this ruling is about civil rights because it interferes with your right to own and keep your property,' says Wilhelmina Leigh, a research analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington. 'It means you have to hope and trust in the goodness of other human beings that if you buy real estate that you will be allowed to keep it.'

Few appear to be willing to trust government on this issue, which is why the Kelo decision has touched off such a populist reaction against it. "
Oh, the Democrats Nanny State can't be trusted with this? Why not, they want the government in all other areas of our lives. Here is why... The Demos know they will lose big time on this issue if they stay with their socialist goals. As long as they control the government handouts, they feel they can control the votes, but when Grandmas house gets bulldozed in the name of tax dollars, they know the pitchforks and torches will not be far behind.

Monday, July 11, 2005

AFI List of Top 100 Quotes From U.S. Films

The American Film Institute's list of top 100 quotes from U.S. movies, with film title and year of release:
1. 'Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn,' 'Gone With the Wind,' 1939.
2. 'I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse,' 'The Godfather,' 1972.
3. 'You don't understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I could've been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am,' 'On the Waterfront,' 1954.
4. 'Toto, I've got a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore,' 'The Wizard of Oz,' 1939.
5. 'Here's looking at you, kid,' 'Casablanca,' 1942.
6. 'Go ahead, make my day,' 'Sudden Impact,' 1983.
7. 'All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up,' 'Sunset Blvd.,' 1950.
8. 'May the Force be with you,' 'Star Wars,' 1977.
9. 'Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night,' 'All About Eve,' 1950.
10. 'You talking to me?' 'Taxi Driver,' 1976.
Great list, I don't agree with the rankings on a lot of them, but you won't either.

Sunday, July 10, 2005

Oh to be a cat....

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Our "International" Supreme Court

In March, when the "under 18" death sentance elimination was decided Neal Boortz hit the nail on the head with this statement. Emphasis added ...
"The Supreme Court, you see, is expected to cite a Constitutional basis for its rulings. Not so in this case.

Instead, Kennedy cites a 'national consensus' and 'international opinion.' Boiled down, 'national consensus' is just another way of saying 'the will of the majority.'

So now it seems official. The Supreme Court will base its rulings on what is and what is not Constitutional based on the mood of the people; based on the whims of the mob. This is nothing less than the legitimization of the lynch mob. If' there's a 'national consensus' that old so-and-so must hang, then hang he does, regardless of whether or not such niceties as the rule of law have been followed or Constitutional rights met.

Perhaps the next step is for the Supremes to hire a polling firm to measure the mood of the people before they issue rulings on Constitutionality."
A very sad observation, but unfortunately true. I voted for W twice PRECISELY BECAUSE I WANTED HIM TO NOMINATE STRICT CONSTRUCTIONISTS TO THE COURT. Why? Because, as Neal notes, if we allow the decisions of the court to be guided by other than our Constitution, we are headed for anarchy. Yep Anarchy. If all rules are negotiable, why have rules? If all rules are situationally adjustable, are they really rules. Rules and laws should be well thought out at first and sloooowwwly adjusted. The framers gave us a wonderful constitution, which we have improved and screwed up over time. They also were smart enough to give the PEOPLE the right to govern, and to give the PEOPLE rights which the government cannot infringe. Our rights belong to us, and are not given to us by government

Tuesday, July 05, 2005


From Neal Boortz, at emphasis added:

Dick Morris is telling us that "personal attacks" on Hillary Clinton will only embolden her. Morris is also a bit upset about Ed Klein's book (The Truth About Hillary) which alludes to homosexuality, a rape at the hands of her husband and other such dark charges.

OK .. a question. Just what constitutes a "personal attack."

Would telling the American people that Hillary holds them in absolute and complete disdain be a personal attack?

How about identifying Hillary as a liar? How about explaining her contempt for the laws of this country; her feeling that those laws apply to others, but not to herself.

What if I detail how Hillary helped with an Arkansas real estate scheme (Casa Grande) that ended up costing the American taxpayers millions?

What if I remind people about her health care plan, a health care plan that could have put you in jail if you dared to try to hire a private doctor. Would that be a personal attack?

What if I remind people that Hillary loves government more than freedom, and believes that America is great because of its government, not because of the dynamic of people working and living together in economic liberty?

Would it be a personal attack if I reminded people that Hillary is a combatant in the war against individualism?

Monday, July 04, 2005

Happy Fourth of July 2005

Wow, we made it though 229 years! Amazing!

When the Hate America First Socialist Libtard moan about Bushitler and the situation, remind them that our government is the oldest standing government in the world today.

Saturday, July 02, 2005

The Kyoto Suicide Pact

Neal Boortz hits a homer again, (emphasis added) :
For what has seemed like an eternity, the enviro-whackos have been jumping up and down screaming about how the Bush Administration is doing nothing about global warming. If only he would sign the much-vaunted Kyoto protocol, that would make everything better, we're told. But to this day, George Bush has refused to go along with it.

Democrats, including The Poodle and Bill Clinton have pushed the Kyoto agreement. Liberals talk about how our standing in the world is suffering because we won't go along with it. After all, most other countries, including England, have signed it.

Just why do you think so much of the world wants the U.S. to sign the Kyoto treaty? Because it would weaken the United States, that's why. Remember, a recent European poll showed that 58% of Europeans wanted to see the United States weakened economically and militarily worldwide. So .. on the one hand the world seems to want a weaker United States .. and that same world wants the U.S. to sign Kyoto.

Duhhhhhh. Connect the dots people!"

Friday, July 01, 2005

Conceit of Government

Peggy Noonan has an excellent analysis of the elitism which apparently drips from Washington, emphasis added by Mongo...
"How exactly does it work? How does legitimate self-confidence become wildly inflated self-regard? How does self respect become unblinking conceit? How exactly does one's character become destabilized in Washington?

The Supreme Court this week and last issued many rulings, and though they were on different issues the decisions themselves had at least one thing in common: They seemed to reflect a lack of basic human modesty on the part of many of the justices.

Many are famously very old, and they have been together as a court for a very long time. One wonders if they have lost all understanding of how privileged they are to have lifetime sinecures of power and authority. Do they have any sense anymore of common human wisdom, of the normal human arrangements by which Americans live?

Maybe a lot of them aren't bothering to think. Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg is no longer in the habit of listening to arguments but only of watching William Rehnquist, and if he nods up and down she knows to vote 'no,' and if he shakes his head she knows to vote 'yes.' That might explain some of the lack of seriousness in the decisions. Local government can bulldoze Grandma's house because it's in the way of a future strip mall that will add more to the tax base? The Ten Commandments can appear on public land but not in a courthouse, but Moses, who received the Ten Commandments can appear in the frieze of the House but he'll be sandblasted off the Supreme Court? Or do I have that the other way around? "
The court bothers me in another way. I'm not naive enough to believe that the Supreme Court will bring down decisions which will please everyone. It is pretty well understood that by the time a case is brought to the court, everyone is displeased and there must be a final arbiter of the matter. The Court is the final arbiter.

But, we should expect a decision based on United States law. Not on some changing social thought in "the World". Review recent decisions and you will see a blatant insertion of "world" thought in the decisions. The Nine don't work for the French, or the UN, or Amnesty International. They work for us. I suggested to my Congressman that funding to the court should be cut as a disciplinary method. Hit em where it hurts.

Oh, if you cut funding tomorrow, it won't hurt the 9 millionaires, but it sure could put a dent in their operations. Just a thought.