Yes, this country has absorbed huge migrations of illiterate peasants in the past -- notably Italian immigrants at the turn of the last century. But also notably, half of them went back. We got the good ones. America was not yet a welfare state guaranteeing room and board to the luckless, the lazy and the incompetent from cradle to grave. -- Ann Coulter
Gene Simmons -- A Celebrity Who Gets It?:Gene Simmons of Kiss, a man who freely admits he's to left of center politically, wrote a surprisingly powerful editorial on his homepage defending the invasion of Iraq and America itself. It was so good that I thought I should I quote a big chunk of it here on RWN...
"...I have said in this political climate, that I am ashamed of the behavior of people who call themselves either members of the Democratic Party (whose politics I usually support, incidentally) or as Liberals (funny, I always thought I was one). But, I will not hesitate to tell someone off. I believe in a form of politics that supercedes philosophical discussions. I believe in Pragmatism.
Pacifism is a beautiful word. No one wants war. Not you. Not I. But, the most passionate Pacifist is only relatively so. What I mean is, it's easy to be a Pacifist here in America. That's because Hussein and other menaces are far away. The closer a gun is pointed to your head, the less of a Pacifist you are...the more you're interested in stopping the guy pointing the gun to your head.
Granted. Saddam Hussein never pointed a gun to my head. I also never want to wait long enough for him to do so. PRE-EMPTIVE WAR is one of the realities we all have to face. There will never be another 9/11...and I could give a sh*t if there is or isn't a direct line to Hussein. He had to go. Period. That regime wouldn't think twice about giving an extremist a suitcase filled with a dirty bomb.
I am passionate about America. It has given me (and in my estimation, the world) everything I ever wanted... including the right to disagree, without winding up in a can of dog food. And, because of my passionate love of America, warts and all, I will stand up and defend her at the drop of a hat.
Is America always right? No. But for 100 years, it seems to me, it has gotten most of it right. The most powerful force the world has ever known is not conquering other countries. Previous world powers, had a colonial agenda. This included at various times in history: Rome, Greece, Nazi Germany, France, England, Communist Russia and Persia. There are more.
But, aside from the French complaining (don't they always?) about the influx of the AMERICAN CULTURE, I don't see America expanding its borders...All the countries in the world are free to rule themselves as they see fit...as long as they don't threaten anyone else.
..."America, love it or leave it?" I never subscribed to that ideal. It's actually UnAmerican. I DO believe in different opinions. But, I am also ashamed of any American especially, who gets up on stage in a different country to badmouth America, while American troops are dying in a desert country they would never want to live in.
...The war, for the most part is over. The British and the Aussies, (God bless em both,) amid a murky political situation, stood alongside Americans and did what had to be done.
The Iraqi's are free.
I suggest anyone having a problem with this war go talk to the Iraqi's. Ask them if they prefer freedom (even at the price of, initially having what seems to be chaos), or if they prefer Saddam Hussein come back and reinstates the old ways.
I DARE anyone to say the Iraqi's were better off before, under Hussein.
And, after the war dies down, and people here in America go back to normalcy, there will be people who say that they are "non-violent." You don't want to get into fights. But, what that really means is, you don't want to pick on anybody.
Problem is, the bad guys don't always agree with you. You see, if you're against violence and some guy holds a gun to your head and asks you for your money, you better re-think your position. You better become VERY VIOLENT at that moment. Or, you're dead.
Being a Pacifist, is an ideal. I subscribe to it. I'm against violence. But, only CONCEPTUALLY, if you threaten my children, I wouldn't think twice about snapping your neck on the spot. I suspect most people would take my view.
You can tell by the length of this missive, that this issue has gotten under my skin. So, I'll try to recap my feelings, in brief. Get ready, 'cause here comes the truth:
America is the world's only hope for a bright future.
Yes. I mean that. Yes, I know you live in another country and your country is cool, too. But, America is the only Superpower. There are no others. And that means, the world is a better place. Because if Nazi Germany or Communist Russia were the only superpowers, we would all be either dead or forced to live under their regimes.
America is not interested in ruling your country. If you think it does, smoking crack may be your answer.
I wasn't born here. But, I have a love for this country and its people that knows no bounds. I will forever be grateful to America for going into World War II, when it had nothing to gain, in a country that was far away...and rescued my Mother from the Nazi German Concentration Camps.
She is alive and I am alive because of America.
And, if you have a problem with America, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ME."
Wow, what I can say other than Gene Simmons, RWN salutes you!
That's Not Patriotism, It's Crossing The Line: Knuckleheads like this guy shouldn't be defended by Conservatives...
"A Soldotna man who dumped buckets of cold water on war protesters and produced a video of it set to patriotic music pleaded not guilty to criminal harassment Thursday in Kenai.
...Webster, who has a son serving in the Marines in Iraq, admitted he poured buckets of water from the back of a passing pickup on women holding peace signs at Soldotna's busiest intersection. He received a warning from Soldotna police the first time, then returned a week later with two buckets, video cameras rolling.
Ross (his lawyer) said Thursday that Webster was harmlessly expressing his free speech out of concern for a son in the war zone.
"The more people who protest the war like that, the more dangerous it is for the kids," said Ross, who also has a son in the Marines in Iraq. "What does the state see in prosecuting someone whose son is fighting for the country?"
...His video, widely distributed via e-mail, shows several people holding signs on a curbside getting doused from a passing white pickup to the tune of Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA." As the water showers them, Greenwood sings, "I'm proud to be an American."
I have been hammering the anti-war movement relentlessly for months so without question, I am no friend to anti-war protestors. That being said, reading about this guy trying to avoid taking responsibility for his actions by wrapping himself up in the flag makes me want to retch. Furthermore, claiming that throwing water on anti-war protestors is "free speech" is an asinine statement even for a lawyer. Trying to pass this sort of juvenile bullying off as "patriotism" and "free speech" is nothing less than disgraceful.
PETA Protests Animals Being Killed by Other Animals
PETA Protests Animals Being Killed by Other Animals By Shamus Young: PETA has championed the cause of animals for years, fighting for their right to live without fear of being killed and eaten. While some success has been made in persuading people to stop the barbaric practice of eating other creatures, a new study released by PETA shows that the real danger to animals is far worse than anyone could have expected. The data collected by PETA suggests that the leading cause of death and suffering among animals is not people but other animals.
According to the report, America's woodlands are more violent and deadly than the most dangerous inner-city ghetto. Every day thousands of small, innocent creatures are murdered and eaten by uncaring predators. PETA calls these attacks "nothing short of attempted genocide", on the part of cats, owls, and other aggressors of the wild. Small animals aren't safe leaving their holes, even if only for a few minutes to look for food.
Said Peta activist Alec Baldwin, "Humans need to step in and end the cycle of death and violence. Most of these aggressive animals were taught this behavior, and they never learned any other way to get food. We need to come to them and let them know there is a better answer."
Vegan nutritionists have pointed out that stopping the bloodshed would benefit both sides. The all-raw-meat diet of hunter-type animals is very unhealthy. Bears, wolves, and eagles alike would enjoy the improved quality of life that comes from a vegan diet.
While debate on what should be done to stop the attacks rages on, it is clear that the government can no longer look away as innocent animals are slaughtered, leaving broken families and orphans to fend for themselves in the wild.
Mr. Baldwin summed up the study by saying, "Animals are people too."
If you liked this satire by Shamus Young, you can read more of his work at The Lemon.
The Democrats Learned The Wrong Lesson In 2002: Something Nancy Pelosi said caught my eye and I thought it was worth commenting on...
"What is important, she (Pelosi) said, is that "never again will Democrats go into a campaign where it's not clear about who we are, what we stand for, how different we are from the Republicans, and what we are going to fight for. The public will know the difference between the two parties."
Really? What does the Democratic Party stand for these days other than getting elected and not being Republicans? I'm struggling to think of any ideas the Democrats have really pushed since the 2002 elections other than that cockamamie draft idea. Everything else is just a reaction to what Bush is doing. Most Democrats in the House voted against "Bush's war", don't like Bush's tax cuts, his judges, drilling ANWR, etc, etc, etc. The Democrats are behaving that way because of a huge problem they have and the way they interpreted the results of the 2002 elections.
The problem the Dems have is that their left-wing base is so far outside of the mainstream, that it's very difficult to please them and the swing vote they need to win elections at the same time. So if the Dems do things that hype up their base (the people who contribute money, work on campaigns, tend to vote even it rains on election day, etc), they often turn-off the moderates who might actually go either way on election day.
Of course, there is a way around that problem -- triangulation. You do just enough to keep your base happy, while also denying them a number of things they want to keep the swing voters happy and appear more moderate. This is how Bill Clinton got elected twice and Bush also uses this strategy domestically as well (which quite frankly annoys me although it's hard to argue with success).
But, Democrats have abandoned the triangulation strategy because they mistakenly concluded that their losses in the 2002 elections were a result of not highlighting their differences with George Bush. They believe that if they really go after Bush hard on everything until 2004, their core constituency will all head to the polls and they'll win big.
However, does anyone think it's a winning strategy to relentlessly attack a VERY popular President and the policies that made him popular? Putting it another way, are the Democrats going to get back into power by relentlessly attacking things like Bush's successful prosecution of the war on terrorism and tax cuts? We're going to find out in 2004, but so far, so good as far as I'm concerned...
Gruesome Humor Or A Great Idea?: At first, I thought this was just an evil, yet funny piece humor from, "The Best Page In The Universe"...
"(R)ather than using $100,000 worth of ammo, why don't we take $100,000, convert it to pennies, then drop the pennies on people instead? You could get 10 million pennies for $100,000, which should be able to fill at least 40 bags full of pennies. Thus we could drop bags of pennies more frequently than bombs, which could mean big savings for our military. Hell, you don't even have to drop them in bags to kill people. You could tape the pennies together 10 at a time and drop them from a height of 5,000 feet and kill d*mn near everything on the ground (and in a war on terrorism(tm), this is exactly what you'd want to do).
I call it: operation penny-drop. It's the perfect way to win a war. Even the hippies won't be b*tching because after the war is over and we've killed all the terrorists, the people who are still alive can rebuild their country by picking the pennies from the skulls of the dead people. Not only will we have won the war, but we don't even have to worry about paying war reparations. It's the perfect plan because everybody wins. We kill all the evil terrorists, and give them some of our own currency to rebuild their country with. Eventually when we open the first Starbucks in their country, we won't even have to worry about currency exchange because they can use the left-over money to buy beverages, and let's face it, who could resist an ice cold frappuccino after a long war?"
However, after looking at this, a little light bulb went on in my head. We used GPS guided pieces of concrete to smash tanks in Iraq, so why couldn't pennies be used as a weapon? So I started thinking about the possibilities. Let's say you dropped a few thousand pennies on a city from 15,000 feet up. That would have to do some serious damage right? I mean would a penny not smash a man's head like an eggshell if it was dropped from that height?
But, then I thought that pennies aren't all that aerodynamic. What if instead of pennies, we dropped 1 pound ball bearings? Those would be more accurate and would produce less wind resistance, Hell, they'd probably leave a new hole from the top of your head to the bottom of your feet. However, would they be enough to seriously damage a tank? I wasn't sure, but I didn't think so. So then I wondered what would happen if we took the ball bearings and mixed them with the equivalent of 20 pound steel lawn darts and dropped them. The ball bearings would wipe out the troops and hopefully the steel darts would cripple the tanks. In short, these would be the low tech versions of cluster bombs.
Now, I'll be the first to tell you that I know very little about munitions, bombing, military equipment, etc. So, it would be interesting to find out the answers to some of these questions. I mean, what would it take to slice through a tank? How much damage would a penny do from that high up? Has this sort of thing ever actually been tried aside from the already mentioned GPS guided concrete slabs? I know we have some people reading RWN who are probably knowledgeable enough about this sort of stuff to speculate and I'd like to hear from them in the comments section just to slake my curiosity.
***Update***:Steven Den Beste weighs in on this post with lots of good info.
Eddie, Go Home By Dave Francis: I hear a lot of people complaining about the way the Bush administration has treated our allies. "We have lost our allies," they wail, citing that as one more reason we shouldn't have gone to Iraq and shut down the torture chambers, (One of which specialized in pediatric torture.) weapons labs, and terrorist training camps.
Let's examine the gains and losses.
France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Belgium lead the opposition to the US freeing Iraq. These are the 'allies' that we are supposed to be losing (Cont).
The David Horowitz Interview: Last night, I did an interview by phone with none other than David Horowitz. If you haven't seen him on Fox News, C-SPAN, or Nightline, then you've probably read his editorials on Frontpage Magazine. Read and enjoy! (Cont)
So When Does The EU Go Fascist?: Here is a quote from Margaret Thatcher about the EU that I wholeheartedly agree with...
(On The European Union) "What we should grasp, however, from the lessons of European history is that, first, there is nothing necessarily benevolent about programmes of European integration; second, the desire to achieve grand utopian plans often poses a grave threat to freedom; and third, European unity has been tried before, and the outcome was far from happy."
There are many people across the ocean who want to unite Europe under an EU flag so they can challenge the US for global supremacy. They've been working on that piece by inefficient piece for decades. But slowly and surely, it's coming together. Much of Europe now has a common currency, they're putting together a united army and now they're looking to elect a President.
Their choice is an obvious one. Tony Blair is the man who can bring the reluctant Brits into the EU's clutches and Tony seems to be eyeing that potential EU presidency awfully hard...
"TONY Blair yesterday increased speculation that he wants to become the president of Europe when he claimed that the European Union must speak with a single voice on foreign policy.
...In the wake of the splits over the war in Iraq, Mr Blair told an EU summit in Athens that an enlarged union of 25-member states needed a more powerful voice on the world stage.
He said that voice should be provided by a full-time EU president, responsible to the member governments, giving "strategic direction".
Mr Blair attempted to use the informal summit in the Greek capital to put the damaging political disputes over Iraq to one side. He insisted that the EU now needed a figurehead, or, as a Whitehall official put it, "someone the White House can call".
The Conservatives claimed Mr Blair's suggestion amounted to a "sell-out" of Britain's interests. Michael Ancram, the shadow foreign secretary, said that the divisions over Iraq had exposed the idea of a single foreign policy as a fantasy.
"It is a sad reflection on the Prime Minister that after the courage he has shown on Iraq, he is prepared to sell out fundamental British interests in order to rebuild relations with Europe," he said. "To cap it all, the betrayal is compounded by his ambition to create a job for himself as president of Europe."
Mr Blair's idea received a mixed reaction at the summit - with Romano Prodi, the commission's president, clearly fearing the move could undermine his own role.
...But there were still difficulties over the idea of a "president of Europe".
However, there was almost unanimous agreement that the EU should have what amounts to a "foreign minister" - a single foreign policy supremo, combining the jobs held by Chris Patten, the external relations commissioner, and by Javier Solana, the EU's high representative for foreign and security policy, effectively working under the control of EU governments.
The Athens summit did not resolve whether the new foreign minister would report to the commission or the member states - another example of the battle still ahead over who has real political control in the EU.
..."We need a figurehead to provide strategic direction to the EU," he said. "The current system was fine when there were just six member states, and even works currently with 15. But it will not work when we are 25."
Were I European, the phrase, "someone the White House can call" would scare the Hell out of me. That's because the White House already has people it can call, the leaders of individual nations. If the idea is that we're going to call up the EU President and for the most part, he's going to decide what all of Europe does as our President does, that should frighten Europeans to death.
Now I know the response to this, "But Hawkins, there will be checks built in to make sure that doesn't happen. The EU President won't be THAT powerful." Of course the President won't be strong...at first. But what good is a President with 25 people he has to answer too? Eventually, when that is found to be horribly inefficient (and it will be), they President will be given more power. That's how you do it...one step at a time, all in the name of a "United Europe".
I know many Europeans believe that they can create a "United States of Europe" and compete with the US, but they should remember that means entire nations will play the role of states in America. For example, my state has no say about things like Federal taxes, Federal regulations, & whether we go to war or not. If you're let's say a Pole, how are you going to feel about having a French President sending your men off to fight and die somewhere? If your Irish, how comfortable are you going to feel with a German making a change to tax rates that may benefit his country while hurting yours? Furthermore, what happens when some states decide to pull out? In America, we settled that issue with the Civil War. You might think that couldn't happen in Europe...again...but if things get far enough along, I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen a decade or two from now. Europe is too diverse to live under a single banner and I fear how all this may one day end for the Europeans...
Freedom Of Speech Means You Can't Criticize Tim Robbins
Freedom Of Speech Means You Can't Criticize Tim Robbins: I love how these anti-war celebrities want to have it both ways on Freedom of Speech. As an example, just look at the latest comments from Tim Robbins...
"In the 19 months since 9/11, we have seen our democracy compromised by fear and hatred," he claimed. "Basic inalienable rights, due process, the sanctity of the home have been quickly compromised in a climate of fear.
"A unified American public has grown bitterly divided," Robbins continued, "and a world population that had profound sympathy and support for us has grown contemptuous and distrustful, viewing us as we once viewed the Soviet Union, as a rogue state."
..."A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio...[that] if you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications," Robbins claimed. "Every day, the airwaves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent."
..."Our ability to disagree and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are," Robbins argued. "To allow those rights to be taken away out of fear, to punish people for their beliefs, to limit access in the news media to differing opinions is to acknowledge our democracy's defeat.
..."In this time when a citizenry applauds the liberation of a country as it lives in fear of its own freedom...when people all over the country fear reprisal if they use their right to free speech, it is time to get angry. It is time to get fierce," he continued. "Any instance of intimidation to free speech should be battled against. Any acquiescence to intimidation at this point will only lead to more intimidation."
Oh poor Tim Robbins, his inherent right to criticize George Bush has been taken away...but wait, how can that be? Here he is giving a speech at the National Press Club and the speech is being published by the media. It's even on the Drudge Report right now.
Then if you take a look at Google News, you see 62 articles about the Baseball HOF canceling an appearance by Robbins & Susan Sarandon. Yet despite all of that coverage, it's, "Poor, poor, pitiful me, the news media doesn't cover my point of view, I'm in fear of my freedom, oh the humanity!"
Robbins and his fellow anti-war activists who complain about this same sort of thing have a very peculiar view of freedom -- in short -- it's all one way. Freedom to them is their right to say whatever they want with no criticism or consequences. If you publicly criticize their position, that's not freedom to these people. Worse yet, if you actually decide to boycott products associated with them, stand back or your eardrums might burst from all the shrieks of, "MCARTHYISM!"
Well as far as I'm concerned, if "Tim Robbins, the actor" wants to become "Tim Robbins, the anti-war celebrity", and reel off asinine lines like,"In this time when a citizenry applauds the liberation of a country as it lives in fear of its own freedom," then he should EXPECT fall-out. That's not censorship or intimidation, it is just other people taking advantage of THEIR freedom and that's a good thing.
Mainstream Media Mention: I was the token Conservative quoted in a Dallas Morning News story by Hector Cantu along with Ted Rall, Colin Quinn, Aaron McGruder, & others yesterday about wartime humor. I'd suggest checking it out, but be forewarned, their registration process is a bear. Here's the money quote from the article...
"John Hawkins, who runs RightWingNews.com, says humor - whether from cartoonists or radio talk show hosts - can be a powerful political tool.
"The power comes from the fact that it entertains people who otherwise would tune out," says Mr. Hawkins, who includes conservative viewpoint humor on his site. "Politics is boring and tedious, but with humor it can be funny and entertaining."
I think I actually said, "politics CAN BE boring and tedious," but that's not really worth quibbling over. Ironically, I also trashed Ted Rall while I was talking to the reporter which could have been amusing if the reporter had used that material in the article. I mean just look at this quote from Rall in the article...
"It should be OK to make fun of the Holocaust," he says. "I personally don't know how to do it, but nothing should be off limits."
How cool would it have been for Hector Cantu to have followed that up with something like,
"However, that's not how Conservative author John Hawkins views it, "Rall made fun of the 9/11 widows and he called our soldiers "contract killers". I find him to be a despicable human being."
Now that would have made for a better article, but better yet, it would have been true since Ted Rall is despicable human being. Anyway, thanks to Hector Cantu and the Dallas Morning News. RWN appreciates the mention.
It's Probably Not As Bad As It Sounds: This doesn't sound like the most pleasant way to check out, even for a chicken...
"Two California poultry farmers who fed some 30,000 live chickens into wood chippers will not face criminal charges because they had permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, prosecutors said on Friday.
...The farmers needed to destroy the chickens because they were "spent" -- or no longer able to produce eggs -- and could not make chicken soup out of them because the farms were under quarantine for the poultry virus Exotic Newcastle Disease, District Attorney's spokeswoman Gayle Stewart said.
Stewart said the men, who run a poultry farm near San Diego, asked a senior veterinarian with the Agriculture Department if they could employ the wood chippers and were given permission."
But on the other hand, let's face it, chickens aren't the smartest animals in the world. I can just imagine the thoughts going through their heads right before they bought it...
Chicken 1: "Gee, what's that? Wow, it's moving so fast. Maybe it's some new sort of food or... BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...
Chicken 2: "Hey, what happened to Chicken 1? First he's there, then he's not. There, then he's not. There, then he's not. There.... BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....
Chicken 3: "Round, round, round, round, I get around! Get around, round, round, round, I get around! I get around.... BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
No, no, just kidding. Make sure NOT to put your chickens in a wood chipper, unless, and this is very important, you can make sure the Humane Society never hears about it.
That's very important! No really, I'm serious now -- don't put your chickens in a wood chipper. I can just see some psycho who thinks I'm a member of the Illuminati dropping his puppy in a wood chipper and then telling CNN that he did it because RWN said it was cool. Don't do it. Animals and wood chippers don't mix!
Frank J's Fun Facts About Syria: We've been hearing a lot in the news about Syria lately, so I got my crack research staff to find all the relevant information about them that you need to know.
FUN FACTS ABOUT SYRIA
* Syria is not in South America.
* Syria just barely avoided being put on the Axis of Evil by sending President Bush a fruit basket.
* Their current tourism campaign in Iraq of proclaiming "Syria is a safe harbor for you, your family, and your chemical weapons" has drawn some suspicion.
* Syria was first added to the U.S. list of terrorist nations when it was discovered that the country was in the Middle East.
* Syria is so evil that France just can't wait to appease them.
* Syria's main exports are electronics, computer software, automobiles, telecommunications equipment, and consumer goods.... whoops, I mean their exports are oil followed far behind by clay pots.
* The Syrians, unlike the Romulans, cannot turn invisible.
* If you are ever chased by a Syrian, drop to the ground, curl up in a ball, and play dead; Syrians only like to murder alive people.
* The country of Syria is completely landlocked, unable to fly for even the shortest distances.
* Syria raised a lot of suspicion when they purchased equipment for making Twinkies since such equipment could easily be converted for making chemical weapons.
* Syria used to follow the Islamic practice of collapsing walls on homosexuals. When their towns became devastated from lack of walls, they instituted a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
* Syria is currently as poor as dirt. Without oil, dirt would actually be giving Syria foreign aid.
* Reuters would like to remind you that while some may consider Syria a "terrorist nation", other might consider it a "freedom fighter nation". Reuters would also like to remind you to stop slapping them.
* Once, while everyone was distracted with an anti-Israel rally, a bunch of monkeys staged a bloodless coup. At first, people found it funny seeing the monkeys playing around in the government's capital - that was until the monkeys started ordering mass executions of dissidents.
* In a fight between Syria and Aquaman, Aquaman would win since Superman couldn't just sit there and watch Aquaman get his *ss kicked.
* Military estimates say that the conquering of Syria would take months... unless, of course, you don't care about all that collateral damage crap. Then it would only take a couple hours and a few beers.
If you liked this satire by Frank J, you can read more of his work at IMAO.
How About Taking Some Personal Responsibility Instead Getting A Lawyer?
How About Taking Some Personal Responsibility Instead Getting A Lawyer?: Sometimes you just have to live with the consequences of your mistakes. One of those mistakes is letting your three-year-old run around while you're mowing the lawn...
"A Springfield family is suing Sears and the makers of Craftsman lawnmowers for millions of dollars. Dale Ortman accidentally backed over his 5-year-old son, Rhett, two years ago.
The boy's right leg and ankle were mangled, and he is permanently disabled.
Ortman blames the riding lawnmower. He says the blades on most stop when the mower is in reverse."
Come on, he's blaming Craftsman because he backed over his kid with a riding lawnmower? Why was a three-year-old kid running around in the yard without adequate supervision to begin with and why wasn't his father looking where he was going?
Now I know what some of you are thinking, "Come on Hawkins, this kid is going to have a rough life and if this guy sticks it to Craftsman -- well -- no big deal. They're a huge company, what's a few million dollars to them?"
See, that's the problem. In the end, Craftsman isn't going to pay for it, the people who buy Craftsman lawnmowers are. Because if Craftsman loses that suit, all they're going to do is take all the money they lose and tack it on to the cost of their mowers. Then either the consumers pay more or if costs get too high, the mowers go unsold and some of the people who work for Craftsman lose their jobs.
Again, I can anticipate what some of you are thinking, "Hawkins, you've got to let people sue or these companies will try to get away with making dangerous products. Besides, we're just talking about one guy here."
First off, the problem wasn't that the product was defective. If let's say a blade from the mower flew out and hit the kid in the leg, then sure, it would be appropriate for the family to sue. But, the product worked exactly as it should have. To complain after the fact about an extra-safety feature that MIGHT have prevented some of the child's injuries is asinine. I mean who DOESN'T EXPECT a small child to be injured if a riding lawnmower backs over him?
Furthermore, it isn't just one guy. There are a legion of Dale Ortmans out there and everyone else is paying the price so they can play "lawsuit lottery". According to Walter Olson, we are the most litigious nation in the world by far. Moreover, if the average person knew how big of a "lawyer tax" they paid on products and services they use on a daily basis, the support for Tort Reform would shoot through the roof.
-- Speaking of advertising, you too can advertise with RWN in May. $15 gets you an 88x31 button in the support section for an entire month. That's not a bad deal. If you're interested just put $15 in my Paypal account (that's also in the support section) and send me an email with your button attached. Make sure to hurry if you want an ad, three advertising slots are already filled.
-- If you know of any links to charities that are helping Iraqis, Afghans, or wounded or KIA Coalition forces or their families, please post them in the comments section. I want to try to get a little cash flowing in their direction later this week.
Kook Or Faker -- You Decide!: RWN draws more than its share of weirdos because of the ACPOTI section and one of them is a reader called "Patriot". Here's a response from him in the, "Sick -- No New Posts Until Tomorrow" thread...
"Excellent! No Nazi propaganda today.
Let me tell you what you don't know about WWII.
Hitler was brought to power by the U.S. seeking to use him to overthrow the Soviet Union. Look what happenned in December 1941:
Dec. 5: The USSR begins a counteroffensive near Moscow, and it becomes clear that Hitler lost there.
December 6: Hitler orders no retreats, sealing the fate of his armies so that they not only have no chance of winning the war against the USSR, they also have no chance of stopping the Russians on the German borders.
December 7: Japan bombs Pearl Harbor. At the September meeting with Churchill, Roosevelt made it clear that he will pursue the goal of defeating Germany first. The Japanese decided to attack, and hoped to consolidate gains while America is busy with Germany.
December 8: The U.S. declares war on Japan and Germany.
However, the U.S. does nothing against Germany until the Red Army already destroyed 90% of the Wehrmacht, and is on the borders of Poland. The U.S. had no problem with Hitler and his concentration camps, or anything else. They did have a problem with communists threatening the rest of Europe. The only reason D-Day happenned is to preserve capitalism in Western Europe. If Hitler won against Russia, the U.S. wouldn't have lifted a finger.
Also, I don't think any of you brainwashed ignoramuses know what the Apollo program was about. Its true purpose was accomplished. The purpose was to scout the moon, and set up a nuclear weapons base there. At a convenient opportunity, strange ships looking like aliens would come out and attack the Soviet Union. The Nazis in the American government planned to kill hundreds of millions of people rather than share a planet with an alternative economic system.
The Nazi-controlled hollywood, up to this day, makes propaganda-laden movies about WWII, in which America is portrayed as heroic. It makes me want to puke. Not one movie has been made about the Soviet Union in that war. It might as well not have existed, according to the fascists in Hollywood.
A day without propaganda is a happy day for me.
DEATH TO FASCISTS!"
So what do you think -- is he nuts or just pretending to be?
What Are We Doing In Syria?: So why is the Bush administration shaking the Syrian's cage? Are we getting ready to invade? No, rattling Syria's cage like this is all part of the plan. Way back in August of 2002, I predicted in large part what's happening now....
"In 1998, Hafez al-Assad of Syria was intimidated by Turkish troops massed on his border into cutting off support for the terrorists in the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK). If we control Iraq, we are capable of putting troops on the Syrian border and intimidating his son in exactly the same way. Lebanon is a pathetically weak puppet state of Syria and if Syria decides the terrorists in Lebanon are going out of business, their days are numbered."
There are no divisions lining up on Assad's border -- yet, but the principle is the same. We want to make the Syrians get rid of their WMD, stop supporting terrorism, and we also don't want them playing the same little games with us that they do with Israel. Furthermore, since Syria allowed Iraqis to cross over their border and allowed terrorists to enter Iraq, we have a great excuse to ramp up the pressure. We may indeed have to invade Syria in the future, but let's hope they wise up and that won't be necessary. Remember, it isn't just about Al-Qaeda or Iraq. It's about the whole global terrorist network...
War Leads To Dangerous Destabilization In Iran By Rip Rowan By Rip Rowan: Even before the war in Iraq has been officially ended, dangerous signs of destabilization are already showing in neighboring Iran.
Iran's influential former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has suggested a referendum could be held on resuming ties with the United States, Iran's arch-foe, the official IRNA news agency said on Saturday.
The move reflects a remarkable shift in tone from Iran and could suggest destabilization in the anti-western theocracy in Iran.
"Iranian officials have adopted a softer approach after the fall of Saddam because they are concerned about U.S. intentions," political analyst Saeed Leylaz told Reuters.
This softer approach could result in any number of consequences, including Iran's reconsidering their sponsorship of terrorism, allowing greater freedoms and civil rights, or reinstating talks with Washington that could normalize relations."
"This news is alaming," said anti-war activist Noah Cloo. "If this occurs, it could undermine our leading argument that war in the Middle East could increase terrorism. And if there's one thing worse than a catastrophic attack on the United States, it would be for the anti-war movement to be proven wrong."
If you liked this satire by Rip Rowan, you can read more of his work at The Skeptician.
Sick -- No New Posts Until Tomorrow: I feel totally snarky and under the weather and I even had to skip work. So no new posts until tomorrow -- unless this is SARS, in which case I'll have to wait for my powerful Conservative immune system to fight it off. Until tomorrow, John Hawkins signing out...
Well, some people at the DU got wind of it and here are some of the comments from the now deleted thread. At first, there was some people who thought that a bunch of "Freepers" were responsible....
unblock:anybody know how many posts the quoted duers have? it's entirely possible for a freeper to come over and spout nonsense, then have some paper pin his posts on all of us....
AntiFascist:I wouldn't doubt if its a bunch of closet freepers.
Yes, it all must be a "Freeper plot" because people on the Democratic Underground wouldn't do such a thing. Then the long knives came out...
NewYorkerfromMass (4413 posts):I stand by my comments even the deleted ones. And I stand by a number of the others, including, most notably: jack swift's. How can any logical person not see the appropriateness of someone meeting their own death due to an action they personally lobbied for, despite the fact that that very action meant death for others?
norml (987 posts):Now if only Jack Hawkins would go to Iraq,Syria,Iran,ect. Though the right wing would hardly miss his grade B,wanna be web site.
Patriot_Spear (1058 posts):...Wait until the death of some Neocon bigwig or mouthpiece; I'll be throwing a party.
What is so wrong with celebrating the passing of these un-American, fascist conservatives? They are BAD people! Did we cry when Stalin died? Did we cry when they took Norieaga away? Did we cry when they forced Nixon from office? NO!
Think of it this way; There will be some Iraqi's who will be relieved at the destruction of the Bath' party. I see no reason to hold back when the tools of oppression meet their own mortality.
I do NOT wish injury on anyone. That being said I do have a short list of Neocon's whom I think the world would be a better place without.
KoKo01:So, a couple of "blurbs" from far RW Webpage Sites! Not going to get knickers in knot over this.........BUT! This is how the RW Ann Coulter's started......so GOOD FOR US!!! I wish I had really SLAMMED that F***'n Piece of NO GOOD, Kelly for the RW BLATHER he produced for the WP!!!!
He wasn't a "journalist." He was an "Operative."'
To be fair, not all of them felt the same way. There seemed to be a couple of people who didn't agree and some others who were concerned about the bad publicity -- which is an improvement over the usual for the DU...
I call it: operation penny-drop. It's the perfect way to win a war. Even the hippies won't be b*tching because after the war is over and we've killed all the terrorists, the people who are still alive can rebuild their country by picking the pennies from the skulls of the dead people. Not only will we have won the war, but we don't even have to worry about paying war reparations. It's the perfect plan because everybody wins. We kill all the evil terrorists, and give them some of our own currency to rebuild their country with. Eventually when we open the first Starbucks in their country, we won't even have to worry about currency exchange because they can use the left-over money to buy beverages, and let's face it, who could resist an ice cold frappuccino after a long war?"
