The mature follower of Jesus stops asking, "Who's going to meet my needs?" and starts asking, "Whose needs can I meet?" Do you ever ask that question? -- Rick Warren
The GOP's Top 18 Pick-Up Opportunities In The House For 2006
It's not shaping up to be a great year for the GOP, the Democrats definitely have a big edge, and quite frankly, this is a lean field. Still, the GOP does have some opportunities that we may be able to exploit.
At the moment, as of Sept 8, 2006, here are the best pick-up opportunities the GOP has in the House, split up into 3 tiers:
Tier 1
District: (IL-08) Seat Currently Held By: Melissa Bean (D) Candidate + cash on hand: David McSweeney ($473,615) Opponent + cash on hand: Melissa Bean ($2,175,474) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 44% vs. 56% Polling:Constituent Dynamics For Aug 27-29: Bean 48% Vs. McSweeney 45% Webpage:here
District: (GA-12) Seat Currently Held By: John Barrow (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Max Burns ($733,000) Opponent + cash on hand: John Barrow (1.3 million) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 49.6% vs. 50.4% Polling:Internal Poll: Barrow 44% Vs. Burns 43% Webpage:here
District: (SC-5) Seat Currently Held By: John Spratt (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Ralph Norman ($733,600) Opponent + cash on hand: John Spratt ($1.5 million) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 42% vs. 57% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: (VT-at large) Seat Currently Held By: Bernie Sanders (Socialist Democrat / Independent) Candidate + cash on hand: Martha Rainville ($339,221) Opponent + cash on hand: Peter Welch ($815,988) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 59% vs. 39% Polling:American Research Group In Late July: Rainville 42% vs. Welch 41% Webpage:here
District: (TX-17) Seat Currently Held By: Chet Edwards Candidate + cash on hand: Van Taylor ($454,453) Opponent + cash on hand: Chet Edwards ($1,576,787) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 30% Vs. 70% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: (WV-01) Seat Currently Held By: Alan B. Mollohan (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Chris Wakim ($318,306) Opponent + cash on hand: Alan B. Mollohan ($674,593) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 42% vs. 58% Polling:Constituent Dynamics For Aug 27-29: Mollohan 52% Vs. Wakim 42% Webpage:here
Tier 2
District:(Oh-6) Seat Currently Held By:Ted Stickland (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Chuck Blasdel ($290,441) Opponent + cash on hand: Charlie Wilson ($277,1553) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 49% vs. 51% Polling:Constituent Dynamics For Aug 27-29: Wilson 56% Vs. Blasdel 40% Webpage:here
District: (GA-08) Seat Currently Held By: Jim Marshall (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Mac Collins ($794,256) Opponent + cash on hand: Jim Marshall ($1,206,784) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 44% vs.55% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: (IA-03) Seat Currently Held By: Leonard Boswell (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Jeff Lamberti ($775,105) Opponent + cash on hand: Leonard Boswell ($1,093,465) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 50 vs. 50 Polling:Constituent Dynamics For Aug 27-29: Boswell 54% Vs. Lamberti 41% Webpage:here
District: (NC-13) Seat Currently Held By: Brad Miller (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Vernon Robinson ($466,768) Opponent + cash on hand: Brad Miller ($540,736) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 52% vs. 47% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District:(LA-03) Seat Currently Held By: Charles J. Melancon (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Craig Romero ($958,990) Opponent + cash on hand:Charles J. Melancon ($1,651,630) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 42% vs. 58% Polling:Anzalone-Lizst Research In Mid-July: 51% to 27% Webpage:here
District: (CO-3) Seat Currently Held By: John Salazar (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Scott Tipton ($342,905) Opponent + cash on hand: John Salazar ($1,177,634) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 44% vs. 55% Polling:Survey USA In Mid-August: Salazar 53% vs. Tipton 42% Webpage:here
District: (Il-17) Seat Currently Held By: Lane Evans Candidate + cash on hand: Andrea Lane Zinga ($186,783) Opponent + cash on hand: Phil Hare ($225,747) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 51% vs. 48% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
Tier 3
District: (UT-2) Seat Currently Held By: Jim Matheson (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Lavar Christensen ($102,234) Opponent + cash on hand: Jim Matheson ($1,029,402) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 31% to 66% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: OH-13 Seat Currently Held By: Sherrod Brown Candidate + cash on hand: Craig Foltin ($151,454) Opponent + cash on hand: Betty Sutton ($194,037) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 56% vs. Bush 44% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: (LA-02) Seat Currently Held By: William Jefferson (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Joe Lavigne ($198,462) Opponent + cash on hand: William Jefferson ($321,633) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 75% vs. 24% Polling:Mercury Public Affairs:: Jefferson 31.3% vs. Lavigne 29.4% Webpage:here
District: (WA-02) Seat Currently Held By: Rick Larsen (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Doug Roulstone ($383,994) Opponent + cash on hand: Rick Larsen ($886,431) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 51% vs. 47% Polling: None Found Webpage:here
District: (PA-12th) Seat Currently Held By: John Murtha (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Diane Irey ($159,138) Opponent + cash on hand: John Murtha ($1,804,695) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 51 vs. 49 Polling: None Found Webpage:here
* No polling done prior to Mid-July was included since, at this late date, it's virtually meangingless.
PS: You can donate to many of these candidates through Rightroots.
The Most Competitive Senate Races For 2006 (3rd Edition)
There have been a lot of changes over the last two and a half weeks and it's time to reevaluate the Senate races although it's still early and these rankings will change between now and the election. The higher the rating is, the greater the chance is that the seat might change parties.
Dark Horse Races
15) Jon Kyl* (R) vs. Jim Pederson (D)
14) John Ensign* (R) vs. Jack Carter (D)
Competitive
13) Maria Cantwell* (D) vs. Mike McGavick (R)
12) Mark Kennedy (R) vs. Amy Klobuchar (D) (Dem Seat)
11) Debbie Stabenow* (D) vs. Mike Bouchard (R)
10) George Allen* (R) vs. James Webb (D)
9) Michael Steele (R.) vs. The winner Of Ben Cardin (D.) & Kweisi Mfume (D.) (Dem Seat)
Dogfights
8) Bob Corker (R) vs. Harold Ford (D) (Rep Seat)
7) Robert Menendez* (D) vs. Tom Kean (R)
6) Jim Talent* (R) vs. Claire McCaskill (D)
Danger Zone
5) Conrad Burns* (R) vs. John Tester (D)
4) Rick Santorum* (R) vs. Bob Casey (D)
3) Mike DeWine* (R) vs. Sherrod Brown (D)
2) Lincoln Chafee* (R) or Steven Laffey (R) vs. Sheldon Whitehouse (D)
1) Joe Lieberman* (I) vs. Ned Lamont (D) vs. Alan Schlesinger (R)
PS: Lieberman's seat would flip if he won, since he is running as an independent.
How about clicking on just a few these ads? It helps support Right Wing News and it rewards advertisers to spending money on conservative blogs. So, hope you'll help out!
"It ain't easy, picking out evil-doers in the urban canyons of the Middle East; there are so many places to hide. Taking 'em out can be even harder, what with all those noncombatants hanging nearby. But the Air Force thinks it might have an answer to this most vexing problem in counter-insurgency: frisbees.
disc_uav.JPGNot just any frisbees, mind you. Robotic frisbees. Heavily armed robotic frisbees.
The Air Force recently tapped Triton Systems, out of Chelmsford, Mass, to develop such a "Modular Disc-Wing Urban Cruise Munition."
"The 3-D maneuverability of the Frisbee-UAV [unammned aerial vehicle] will provide revolutionary tactical access and lethality against hostiles hiding in upper story locations and/or defiladed behind obstacles," the company promises.
The circular drones will be lanuched "from munitions dispensers or by means of a simple mechanism similar to a shotgun target (skeet) launcher," Triton adds. Once in the air, they'll be tele-operated by soldiers on the ground. Or, if needed, the fightin' frisbees will pilot themselves as they hunt for guerrillas.
Once they catch up to the baddies, the drones will use a series of armor-piercing explosives, shooting jets of molten metal, to eliminate their targets. And these MEFP [Multiple Explosively Formed Penetrator] "warheads will be controllable so as to provide a single large fragment (bunker-buster) or tailorable pattern of smaller fragments (unprotected infantry or light utility vehicles)." The decision of whether to go bunker-buster or infantry-annihilator mode can either be determined by the drones' human operators, "or autonomous target classification routine built into the UAV."
We're preparing molten metal shooting death frisbees to kill cave dwelling tribalists who want to drag the world backwards to the 7th century. What a contrast...
Cindy Sheehan Fantasizes About Murdering Bush When He Was An Infant
According to her new book, Cindy Sheehan is every bit as mentally unbalanced as you'd expect:
"The right-wingers who think nothing but the worst of Cindy Sheehan probably won't change their minds after reading Peace Mom. In the book, which hits bookstores September 19, the antiwar icon admits she has fantasized about going back in time and killing the infant George W. Bush, thereby preventing the Iraq War."
Fantasizing about murdering George Bush when he was an infant? No wonder they call her "Saint Cindy," after she has displayed that kind of moral courage. Given that she's this far off of her rocker, is it really a big surprise that George Bush doesn't want to meet with her again? She's just deranged enough that she might try to blow herself up jihadi style in an effort to take him out.
PS: Isn't it supposed to be like Day 163 of Cindy's fast? Oh wait, she actually pledged to fast for two months and supposedly ate something 37 days in on doctor's orders Shouldn't she be thinner than Nicole Ritchie after heavy liposuction by now? Maybe that's why she wishes she could murder Bush in his crib, because she's so weak from all that fasting and she doesn't think she's physically strong enough to murder anybody bigger than a baby.
We're looking to pull in 100 donations for each of our 21 candidates over at Rightroots. Towards that end, I'm going to be doing profiles of our candidates each day in order to give you a better idea of whom you'd be giving money to. Today, the candidates profiled will be Scott Tipton and Max Burns.
Candidate #1: Scott Tipton
District: (CO-3) Seat Currently Held By: John Salazar (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Scott Tipton ($307,568) Opponent + cash on hand: John Salazar ($1,173,988) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 44%% vs. 55% Latest polling: Survey USA In Mid-August: Salazar 53% vs. Tipton 42% Webpage:here
Other: -- Tipton has been endorsed by Tom Tancredo
Tipton can definitely beat Salazar, but the district is huge and he's going to have to close that fund raising gap with Salazar in order to be competitive.
Candidate #2: Max Burns
District: (GA-12) Seat Currently Held By: John Barrow (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Max Burns ($733,393) Opponent + cash on hand: John Barrow ($1,338,950) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 49.6% vs. 50.4% Latest polling: Public Opinion Strategies in July: Barrow 44% vs. Burns 43% Webpage: here
Barrow beat Burns 52% vs. 48% in 2004, but the district has been redrawn since then in a way that makes it more favorable to Burns.
You can contribute to either of these candidates and help us meet out goal for the 15 day challenge by chipping in a few bucks here, at Rightroots.
These ads are devastatingly effective, will play well in North Carolina, and have helped Robinson raise $804,934 so far which is just phenomenal for a Republican challenger going up against an entrenched incumbent.
Republican candidates all across the country should be studying these ads and trying to see what to learn from them. Granted, these ads are probably a little too bare knuckled for most Republicans, but if they were watered down a notch or two they'd still be potent and better than what most Republicans are putting on the air.
PS: Can Robinson beat Brad Miller, who is extremely liberal? Honestly, yes, he has a real shot. Robinson is keeping up with him on fund raising, the district only went to Kerry 52% to 47% over Bush in 2004, and North Carolina Democrats are not as liberal as a lot of other Dems across the country. Combine that with the fact that this is a year in which there's a lot of anti-incumbent sentiment out there and it means that Robinson is definitely capable of pulling off an upset.
Democratic Senators Hug Their Beloved Pal, Joe Lieberman.
Right now, all across the left side of the blogosphere, there are undoubtedly keyboards being pounded, Indigo Girls CDs being thrown across living rooms, and doves who won't even swat mosquitoes are wishing horrible and foul dooms on half the Senators in their own party.
Why?
Because of the enormous wet, sloppy, kiss the Dems in the Senate figuratively planted on Joe Lieberman.
Just imagine the reaction Jane "Rape Gurney Joe" Hamsher and Kos must have had when they read this:
“I don’t think there’s any of us out there saying ‘Godd*mn, I hope Joe doesn’t win,’” said Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), who has endorsed Lamont in the general election.
Indeed, Democratic senators applauded Lieberman at their weekly policy luncheon, when Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) asked him to brief the caucus on upcoming port-security legislation.
“Welcome back,” said Reid, who was scheduled to meet with Lamont later in the day.
After Reid’s introduction, Lieberman got “a warm ovation,” according to Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.).
As much as liberal scrawlers on the Internet are calling for his scalp, Lieberman’s courtly colleagues seem to be patting him on the shoulder.
“I’d always like to work with Joe Lieberman,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is backing Lamont, said of a possible Lieberman win in the general election.
Others were a little more forward.
“I’m not going to settle for a handshake. I want a big hug,” Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) told Lieberman. Lincoln has not endorsed either candidate.
A smiling Lieberman emerged from the caucus shortly after 2 p.m. to chat with about 40 members of the news media who had gathered in the hallway outside of the meeting room.
“I appreciated it immensely,” he said of the ovation he received, noting that it had been some time since his mere presence at a caucus meeting sparked applause.
For a second there, when I read this line from Blanche Lincoln...
“I’m not going to settle for a handshake. I want a big hug.”
...I wondered if I'd lost track of time and had forgotten that it was April 1st, because if a line in the article had been written expressly to infuriate left-wing bloggers, there's nothing that could have done a better job of it than that -- other than perhaps having George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove all joining the party and getting in on a big group hug!
The Democrats are flipping out over ABC's movie, The Path to 9/11, that's set to debut this week-end:
"A furious Bill Clinton is warning ABC that its mini-series "The Path to 9/11" grossly misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden - and he is demanding the network "pull the drama" if changes aren't made.
Clinton pointedly refuted several fictionalized scenes that he claims insinuate he was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal to care about bin Laden and that a top adviser pulled the plug on CIA operatives who were just moments away from bagging the terror master, according to a letter to ABC boss Bob Iger obtained by The Post.
The former president also disputed the portrayal of then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright as having tipped off Pakistani officials that a strike was coming, giving bin Laden a chance to flee.
"The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has the duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely," the four-page letter said.
The movie is set to air on Sunday and Monday nights. Monday is the fifth anniversary of the attacks.
Based on the 9/11 commission's report, the miniseries is also being provided to high schools as a teaching aid - although ABC admits key scenes are dramatizations.
The letter, written by Bruce Lindsey, head of the Clinton Foundation, and Douglas Bond, a top lawyer in Clinton's office, accuses the ABC drama of "bias" and a "fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans."
Having the Clinton Administration complain that they look bad in this mini-series is like a football team that lost a game 56-0 griping that the highlight reel on the news that night made them look bad. The truth is that the Clinton Administration didn't take terrorism as seriously as they should have and did very little of note to prevent it. Since that's the case, the Clinton Administration can't possibly come off well in any sort of mini-series that accurately discusses what happened.
Does that mean the mini-series is spot-on accurate? Since it hasn't been shown yet, it's hard to say. But let's hope that ABC didn't pull a Michael Moore and just stuck to the facts because given the poor performance of the Clinton Administration on terror related issues, there would be no need for even the most vehement critics of the Clintons to exaggerate their record on terrorism to make them look incompetent.
It has been more than 3 months since the last time I ranked my favorite 40 blogs, so I thought it was about time to do it again, for the third time in 2006.
Do keep in mind that as the quarter has progressed, some blogs have, of course, moved up and others have dropped, based on how often I visit them, how much I like what I see when I get there, how often the blogs are updated, etc., etc. Also, as per usual, do keep in mind that this sort of list changes frequently over time based on a variety of factors. So if a blog didn't get included, it's no big deal -- it could be on the list next time.
Furthermore, if there are any other bloggers out there who rank at least 10 favorite blogs or more in order today and then link back to the post & let me know about it, I'll add a link to your post right here later tonight.
PS: I decided to leave pages that compile "the best of the blogosphere" -- like The Hotline's Blogometer & GOPINION -- out of the mix because I wasn't sure if they'd count as blogs or not. Also, since I now write a column for Human Events, they're not eligible to make the list.
The Democratic Underground Poll Of The Day: The Bush Administration Was Behind The Anthrax Attacks!
Here are the results of a poll question at the Democratic Underground called, "Anthrax Attacks."
In case you're wondering what MIHOP is, it's short for, the Bush Administration "made it happen on purpose."
So, 80% of the liberal Dems who go to the DU believe the Bush Administration was actually sending anthrax to American citizens in order to help get the Patriot Act passed.
This brings to light a question: what must it be like for a Democratic politician to go to an event and know, even before he or she walks in that door, that a significant percentage of the people there will be utterly insane? I mean that these nutty conspiracy theories have become so widely accepted on the left, that you can be almost certain that any large gathering of liberals is going to draw a lot of kooks. Worse yet, there are so many of these nutjobs out there that they actually constitute a voting block on the left.
Think about the consequences of that. There are Democratic politicians, going into primaries, who know that if they can't bring the, "Bush administration used truck bombs on the WTC and then rigged the elections in 2000 and 2004," crowd into their camp, they're not going to win.
If you want to know whom John Kerry is trying to appeal to when he complains about the vote in Ohio or who Howard Dean is trying to reach out to when he says things like...
"There are many theories about (9/11). The most interesting theory that I’ve heard so far—which is nothing more than a theory, it can’t be proved—is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is?"
...it's the significant number of liberals out there who embrace these conspiracy theories. At some point, responsible Democrats need to step up and squash these whacked out theories for the good of their party or their country or, over time, you're going to see more and more Dems that are going to have to cater to these lunatics.
So, a Green Party nutjob advocates capital punishment for George Bush on Chris Matthews' show and Matthews lets it pass unchallenged? That's pathetic...
Chris Matthews: "Look, let me ask you this. Where are you on capital punishment?"
New York Gubernatorial Green Party Candidate Malachy McCourt: "Capital punishment? I think that if, if I've got to find that guy in Spain who indicted Pinochet and get him for war crimes, and I get him to do the same thing for Bush. And in that case, I would be for capital punishment. Otherwise, I am against it. Spitzer, who is the other guy running here, he is for capital punishment for those who kill policemen. Well, my son is a cop in New York, and if somebody killed my son, and it wouldn't do me any good or give me any satisfaction to sit there in some death house in Sing Sing and watch them put some other person to death because they killed my son. That would not cheer me up one bit, Chris."
Chris Matthews, smiling: "You just sound like a liberal Democrat, Malachy."
Matthews is right about one thing, this kook does, "sound like a liberal Democrat." He's just ahead of his time. By 2008, the Democrats will probably insert a plank into their platform that calls for freeing Mumia Abu-Jamal, executing Bush, banishing the death penalty, and then giving everyone on death row the right to vote.
Ok, Ok...that's probably off just a little bit. In all fairness, they're more likely to call for capital punishment to be applied to Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, and -- if Kos has his way -- Lieberman.
PS: I'm just kidding. They probably would not call for the death penalty to be applied to Colin Powell.
We're looking to pull in 100 donations for each of our 21 candidates over at Rightroots. Towards that end, I'm going to be doing profiles of our candidates each day in order to give you a better idea of whom you'd be chipping in money to. Today, the candidates profiled will be Mike Bouchard and David McSweeney.
Candidate #1: Mike Bouchard
State: Michigan Seat Currently Held By: Debbie Stabenow (D) Candidate + cash on hand: Mike Bouchard ($530,115) Opponent + cash on hand: Debbie Stabenow ($4,369,090) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 51% vs. 48% Latest polling: Free Press-Local 4 Poll: Stabenow 50% VS. Bouchard 37% & GOP Internal Poll: Stabenow 49% Vs. Bouchard 42% Webpage:here
Other: -- Bouchard has been endorsed by the Club for Growth.
-- Here's Bouchard's latest commercial.
-- A teleconference with Mike Bouchard.
Mike Bouchard is a Michigan Sheriff who started to become competitive with incumbent Democrat Debbie Stabenow after he completed a long, tough primary race. If Bouchard gets the money he needs to run ads, he can beat Debbie Stabenow and we can replace a liberal Democrat with a conservative Republican who is tough on crime, terrorism, illegal immigration, and pork.
Candidate #2: David McSweeney
District: (IL-08) Seat Currently Held By: Melissa Bean (D) Candidate + cash on hand: David McSweeney ($473,615) Opponent + cash on hand: Melissa Bean ($2,175,474) Kerry vs. Bush in 2004: 44% vs. 56% Latest polling: Constituent Dynamics: Bean 48% vs. McSweeney 45% Webpage: here
Other: -- A mini-interview with David McSweeney is here.
-- A third party candidate named Bill Scheurer may draw off significant support from Bean.
Melissa Bean occupies a seat that probably shouldn't be hers. There's a good chance to reclaim this one for the GOP. Bean took it away from Phil Crane two years ago and the Republicans in Illinois want it back. David McSweeney emerged as the GOP nominee, but spent nearly all of his $2 million to do it. He'll need to mobilize the Republican base to turn Bean out, and needs funds to do it. This is one you can put back in our column.
You can contribute to either of these candidates here, at Rightroots.
Democrats Nominate 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist in Florida By Rusty Shackleford
Democrats in Florida's 15th district have nominated a 9/11 conspiracy theorist to run for Congress.
Dr. Bob Bowman had 55 percent over 45 percent for John M. Kennedy. The winner will face incumbent Republican Rep. Dave Weldon.
But don't worry, it's okay for him to "quesion" 9/11, because Dr. Bob Bowman is a retired Air Force officer. See how that works, if you served in the military, you get the pass from the Democrats.
At least he's no chickenhawk.
Plus he's got a Ph.D. I mean, that would get me to vote for him right there.
And for you Catholics out there, it just gets worse. He's a former "Archbishop" of the "United Catholic Church"....where gays, lesbians, and abortion rights activists who are out of Communion go to congregate.
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
"The exercises that went on that morning simulating the exact kind of thing that was happening so confused the people in the FAA and NORAD....that they didn't they didn't know what was real and what was part of the exercise," said Bowman
"I think the people who planned and carried out those exercises, they're the ones that should be the object of investigation."
Asked if he could name a prime suspect who was the likely architect behind the attacks, Bowman stated, "If I had to narrow it down to one person....I think my prime suspect would be Dick Cheney."
Bowman said that privately his military fighter pilot peers and colleagues did not disagree with his sentiments about the real story behind 9/11.
I've actually talked about this guy being a nutjob before in an unrelated post. I'll try to find it.
And do you want to know how I found out that Bowman had won? I was monitoring a "moderate" Muslim message board in the UK. These "moderates" were ecstatic that Bowman had won. I'm not kidding, you don't get more mainstream than these guys.
This content was used with the permission of The Jawa Report.
Pathetic Individuals Post Homemade Stingray Videos For ‘Laughs’ At YouTube By Sister Toldjah
You’d think people would show a little more sensitivity about this but for the idiotic it’s just another opportunity to score a laugh - at the expense of someone's death.
I was at YouTube tonight looking for a music vid to post here, and a link to one labelled “Steve Irwin’s last video” popped up at the end of the music vid I watched. You know it’s not real, because no video of Steve’s final moments has been released (I hope it’s not, either). The ‘faux video’ has had nearly 44,000 hits but thankfully the viewer rating on it was low. There’s also one called “Steve vs. Stingray” which has had nearly 10,000 hits but the viewer rating on that one is low as well.
Have they no sense of decency?
This content was used with the permission of Sister Toldjah.
Moderate Muslims -- Speak Up or Get Lumped In with The Islamo-Fascists
A recent USA TODAY/Gallup Poll showed that the American people are becoming progressively more hostile towards Muslims. For American Muslims, these are not encouraging numbers:
"Thirty-nine percent of respondents...said they felt at least some prejudice against Muslims. The same percentage favored requiring Muslims, including U.S. citizens, to carry a special ID "as a means of preventing terrorist attacks in the United States." About one-third said U.S. Muslims were sympathetic to al-Qaeda, and 22% said they wouldn't want Muslims as neighbors."
Now, why are we seeing this increasing level of hostility toward Muslims when the overwhelming majority of practitioners of Islam in the United States are peaceful, decent folk?
I'd suggest that it's being caused by two things: Islamo-Fascists making the news for behaving badly and moderate Muslims refusing to speak up about it.
As far as the Islamo-Fascists go, you can hardly turn on the TV or pick up a paper without reading about a suicide bombing, honor killing, beheading, mass murder, or forced conversion committed by Muslims in the name of Allah. Maybe moderate Muslims are hesitant to speak up, but the extremists don’t hesitate to tell the world that Islam is all about murder, death, and savagery. They also seem to have no reservations about acting on their beliefs.
Let me show you what I mean. What you're about to read are 5 headlines per month taken straight from the daily news section of my blog, Right Wing News, over the last year. As you read these Islam related headlines, keep in mind that it would have been easy to post 3 or 4 times as many items for any given month.
September, 2005
Ditch Holocaust Day, Advisers Urge Blair Because It Is Offensive To Muslims
Jews And Freemasons Controlled War On Iraq Says Muslim Adviser To Tony Blair
Suicide Bomber Says He Was Kidnapped, Drugged, And Beaten To Be Forced To Take The Mission
Poll: Muslim Students Protect Terrorists. 10% In UK Wouldn't Expose Co-religionist Plotting Attack
Reports: Plot To Attack Paris Subway, Airport. Police Arrest 9 In Anti-Terror Sweep After Tip Off From Algerian Authorities
October, 2005
The United States And Its Allies Have Thwarted At Least 10 Serious Al Qaeda Terrorist Plots Since Sept. 11, 2001, Including Never-Before-Disclosed Plans To Use Hijacked Commercial Airliners To Attack The East And West Coasts In 2002 And 2003, President Bush And His Aides Said
Police Investigate New York Subway Terror Threat
India's First Female Bomber Strikes
Chechen Terrorists Murder 85 In Russia
Bombs Kill More Than 40 In Indian Capital
November, 2005
Rioting Spreads To 300 Towns In France
Aussie Terrorists Had Stockpiled Enough Chemicals To Make At Least 15 Large Bombs To Be Used Against Selected Targets
Al-Qaeda Calls Queen An ‘Enemy Of Islam’
Anti-Christian Rampage By 2,000 India Muslims. Organized Vandals In Buses Burn Churches, Convent, Schools, Homes Of Pastors, Priests
A Village Council In Pakistan Has Decreed That Five Young Women Should Be Abducted, Raped Or Killed For Refusing To Honour Childhood "Marriages"
December, 2005
Iran President Expresses Doubt Holocaust Happened
U.S. Reporter Denied Entry To Syria Because He's A Jew
Iranian Cleric: Muslims Could Nuke Israel
Pakistan: Nazir Ahmed Appears Calm And Unrepentant As He Recounts How He Slit The Throats Of His Three Young Daughters And Their 25-Year Old Stepsister To Salvage His Family's "Honor"
65% Of Palestinians Applaud Terror Attacks On US And Europe
January, 2006
UK: Muslims Boycott Holocaust Day
Iran To Hold Holocaust Denial Conference
Iranian Pilgrims In Mecca Shout "Death To America"
Iran Leader: Islam To 'Rule The World'
Iran To Hang Teenage Girl Attacked By Rapists
February, 2006
Muslims Attack Danish Embassy Building In Jakarta
Suicide Blast, Clashes in Pakistan Kill 22
Female Reporter Stoned For Not Wearing A Headscarf At Turkish Cartoon Protest
Poll Reveals 40% Of Muslims Want Sharia Law In UK
An Islamic Court In India Has Issued A Fatwa, Or Religious Decree, Condemning To Death The 12 Artists Who Drew The Controversial Images Of The Prophet Mohammed
March, 2006
100,000 "Mostly Muslim" Protestors In India Chant "Death To Bush"
Lawyers For A Cleric Have Urged A Judge In Yemen To Condemn To Death A Local Editor Who Published The Danish Caricatures Of The Prophet Muhammad
Tarheel Terrorist Tried To Kill Americans Out Of "Love For Allah"
Afghan Man Faces Execution After Converting to Christianity
A Spanish Judge Has Charged 32 Suspected Islamic Militants Over An Alleged Plot To Blow Up The National Court In Madrid
April, 2006
Iranians Claim To Have 40,000 Suicide Bombers Ready To Attack America
Iranian Group Seeks British Suicide Bombers
Palestinian: 'Even Though I Am Suffering, My Suicide Bomber Son Was A Hero'
Sienna Miller Gets Death Threats From Muslims. U.S.-Born Actress Warned 'She Will Be Sorry' Unless She Pulls Out Of Film
'Pregnant' Suicide Bomber Takes Sri Lanka To The Brink Of Civil War
May, 2006
Terrorists Massacre 26 In India
Saudi Cleric Sees U.S. Collapsing, Muslim Victory. Al-Jazeera Broadcasts Remarks On Upcoming 'Battle' With 'Enemies Of Allah'
Yay For Wifebeating In Jordan And Egypt?
An Egyptian Blogger Arrested For Promoting Freedom, Blogs From Jail
Saudi School Textbooks Encourage Jihad Against The Infidels
June, 2006
England Afraid To Fly Its Own Flag. Following Threats By Extremist Islamic Group, Several Corporations, Chain Of Pubs Ban England Flag
London: Terror Cell 'Was Planning Nerve Gas Attack On Capital'
No Music, No Dancing, No Football As Muslim Law Takes Over From Reign Of The Warlords
40 Percent Of The Moroccan Youth In The Netherlands Reject Western Values And Democracy. Six To Seven Percent Are Prepared To Use Force To Defend Islam.
Hamas: Islam Will Conquer US And Britain
July, 2006
Poll: 77% Of Palestinians Back The Kidnapping Of Corporal Gilad Shalid And 60 Percent Back Rocket Attacks On Israel
Joking Muslim Cleric Mocks Victims Of London Blasts
Terrorist Bombs Kill 190 In India
67% Of Iranians Say Israel "Is Illegitimate And Should Not Exist." 9% Disagree.
Hezbollah Fires Rocket-A-Minute At Israel
August, 2006
From Iran: "Death To America!"
Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei: 'America Can Expect A Resounding Slap And A Devastating Fist-Blow From The Muslim Nation'
British Police Arrested 24 People In Overnight Raids And Said On Thursday They Had Foiled A Plot To Commit "Mass Murder" By Blowing Up Several Aircraft Flying Over The Atlantic Ocean To The United States
Terrorists Planning To Use Their Babies As Cover Sought In Britain
Fox News Crew Freed After Gaza Ordeal -- Forced To Convert To Islam At Gunpoint
Now, after reading all that and more, what would you expect the average American to think about Islam? Especially when thousands of Muslims will riot over cartoons featuring Muhammad, but few will protest terrorist attacks in the name of Allah? Can you blame Americans for being suspicious of Muslims when groups like CAIR complain about the use of the word "Islamo-Fascism," but don't seem to have much to say about actual Muslims advocating Fascism in the name of Islam? What are Americans supposed to think when they see people getting their heads cut off in the name of Allah while moderate Muslims simply shrug their shoulders and declare that Islam is a religion of peace?
Among Americans, there is a growing and hardening suspicion that moderate Muslims are really nothing but "moderate" Muslims who talk about peace while they tacitly support terrorism. There's a simple way for Muslims to change that perception. All they need to do is regularly condemn terrorism, condemn Sharia, condemn Hamas, condemn Hezbollah, and condemn Al-Qaeda. Maybe it's unfair that Muslims should be asked to do that and unfair that what extremists are doing should reflect badly upon Muslims who don't share their beliefs. However, fair or unfair, more moderate Muslims need to speak out, loudly, about their disagreements with the Islamo-Fascists or regrettably, the number of people in the United States and across the world that are hostile to Islam is only going to continue to increase.
Bush went out and clearly explained how valuable our interrogation of terrorists has been by showing information gotten from terrorist A, helped lead to the capture of terrorist B, who gave us info that led to the capture of terrorist C.
Then, he demanded Congress step up, authorize military tribunals and clearly tell our soldiers what they can and can't do (which is something Congress was too cowardly to do during the "torture" debate). Bush said this is priority one for Congress for the rest of the year and he also said we could expect trials for these big shot terrorists once Congress gets the job done.
All in all, it was a good speech on an important topic and Bush was wise to bring it up, not just because it's good policy, but because it's good politics. If the Democrats want to cry tears for how tough the terrorists will have it when they go on trial, let them, but it'll just emphasize what a bunch of weaklings they are right before the elections.
This is a good move by Bush and every Republican should back him to the hilt on it.
-- As you may have heard, Pakistan is pulling their military out of the tribal areas that are sheltering the remnants of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
What does that mean exactly?
Bill Roggio says it's an, "abject surrender," by Pakistan to the terrorists. On the other hand, the Times Online says that this is part of a strategy to, "close (the) trap on (the) Taleban" and says that,
"Pakistan took a big step towards ending the fighting in the lawless Waziristan region when it signed a peace deal with tribal leaders. The agreement commits local militants to halt attacks on both sides of the border.
In return Pakistan will reduce its military presence and compensate tribesmen whose relatives have been killed or whose properties have been damaged.
A key provision of the deal is that tribesmen will expel foreign fighters from the area."
Who's right? I think the jury's still out at this point because there are too many unanswered questions. If the tribesmen actually expelled the foreign fighters, this would be a good deal. Will they do that? I don't know, but I tend to doubt it. Did Musharraf, who's no dummy, cut this deal because he thought it would help the situation or out of weakness? Can Musharraf afford to put himself in a position that might damage his relationship with the US, especially when he still has to fear the US cozying up to India? Will Bin Laden still be targeted? Pakistan says that earlier comments that were made were taken out of context and no, Bin Laden will not get a pass.
My gut instinct is that this is bad news, but it's still too early to say for sure.
-- Rarely do I ever say this, but kudos to Germany. If Hezbollah is complaining, that must mean they're doing something right:
"The Shiite Hezbollah militia has expressed "reservations" about Germany's involvement in the multinational UN force deploying for Lebanon, owing to German demands that its troops be allowed to stop and search boats bound for the country.
"Our reservations are regarding the German demand to search boats as they enter Lebanon," Hezbollah member of parliament Hussein Haj Hassan told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa on Tuesday. "Such a demand stands against the sovereignty of Lebanon."
Of course, they'll probably wimp out, but it's nice to see that at least one of the nations participating in the "peace keeping" force in Lebanon is halfway serious about what they're doing.
-- Cindy Sheehan has apparently decided to build her own little "Ewok Village 2000," in Crawford Texas. From an interview with her (via Polipundit):
Q: Last question. Do you plan to come back next year? The president is going to be in office till 2009 and our continued presence in Iraq seems fairly assured.
A: I hope he’s not in office till 2009, but this (anti-war presence in Crawford) is permanent. We’re going to start building a permanent structure soon. This may sound weird, but I’m going to live here. My residence is going to be a tree house. We’ve got some plans for amazing tree houses! This is a flood plain, so we have to build it. But the first structure we’re going to build is a camphouse with a great room and an industrial-type kitchen and an office and some bathrooms. So we’re planning on being permanent. It’s not just about George Bush, it’s about ending the occupation of Iraq and making sure it never happens again.
What's next for the "Rosa Parks" of the anti-war movement? Will it be a fort or a clubhouse with a "No Republicans Allowed," sign on it?
"Moreover, three fifths (62 per cent) agree that “in order to reduce the risk of future terrorist attacks on Britain the Government should change its foreign policy, in particular by distancing itself from America, being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq”. Women (66 per cent) and Liberal Democrat voters (74 per cent) agree with this view particularly strongly."
Churchill and Thatcher's country is moving closer by the day to becoming Neville Chamberlain's country. I don't how much time the "special relationship" has left, but it's clear that we're moving towards the end of its shelf life. It'll be sad to see our stalwart allies become just "another European nation," but it seems to be just a matter of time.
-- Rich Lowry on what the Democrats offer economically to the middle-class:
"Programmatically, Democrats essentially offer the middle class a nullity. Kim and Kessler run through the greatest hits of Democratic policy. The average family income for Pell Grant recipients is $19,460. Head Start is for poor children. A married family of four can make a maximum of only $37,263 to still be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (to the tune of $1). Only 2.7 percent of American workers make the minimum wage, and half of them are under age 25. Giving health care to the uninsured affects only 15.7 percent of Americans, and many of them aren’t middle class."
This cute Spanish chick (At least I think the cute Spanish chick runs the website. It's all in foreigner talk, so who can tell?) was directly linking to a picture of Steve Irwin on my server. That's called bandwidth leeching and it's bad manners in the blogging world, even when an attractive woman does it. So, I "improved" her image:
In our first month, Rightroots raised roughly $47,500 and Jack Kingston's PAC chipped in another $14,000 to our candidates. That's not a bad start for a virgin effort. Still, there's a lot more to do on the fund raising front, especially with the GOP still struggling to retain the House.
That's why we've decided it's time to take it up to the next level with Rightroots. First of all, we've added three new candidates, all of whom are trying to knock off Democratic incumbents. Those candidates are:
Ralph Norman (SC-05)
Liberal Democrat, John Spratt, is running in a very Republican district which George Bush won 57% to 42% in 2004. Last time around, Spratt ran against a competitor who only raised $1,215. Yet, that candidate still managed to get 37% of the vote. This time around, Spratt is going to have to face a real challenge from conservative Ralph Norman, who is capable of beating Spratt -- if you help him get the funding he needs to win.
Andrea Lane Zinga (IL-17)
In 2004, former CNN anchor Andrea Zinga went up against incumbent Democrat Lane Evans. He beat her in fund raising nearly 3 to 1 and handily defeated her 61% to 39%. This time around, Evans has retired and Zinga is running against Phil Hare, who trails her in name recognition and in fund raising. If Zinga gets the money she needs, she can definitely carry this district, which only went 51% to 48% for Kerry over Bush in 2004.
Mike Bouchard: Michigan
Mike Bouchard is a Michigan Sheriff who started to become competitive with incumbent Democrat Debbie Stabenow after he completed a long, tough primary race. If Bouchard gets the money he needs to run ads, he can beat Debbie Stabenow and we can replace a liberal Democrat with a conservative Republican who is tough on crime, terrorism, illegal immigration, and pork.
In order to drum up support for these candidates and for the original 18 candidates we selected, we've decided to approach things from a different angle.
Over the next 15 days, our goal is to pull in 100 donations per candidate. That won't be an easy goal to hit, but we can make it with your help. So, if you've been planning to chip in some money to Rightroots, now's the time to do it. Moreover, maybe you've been thinking, "Gee, I only want to give 20 or 30 bucks." Great! Split it into a couple of contributions and send it over. Every little bit you can send over will make a difference.
November isn't far away, folks, and we're going to have to live with the results of that election for two long years. This is your chance to help make a difference in some of the biggest key races, even if you don't live in those districts. Let's get those numbers up, meet that challenge, and help stop Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Howard Dean from running the show in Washington.
Since it's a bit slow news day on the political front and since I'm a fan of lists, here are, in my personal opinion, the 10 hottest Hollywood stars -- based totally on looks (and not in order).
"We Have The Islamic Right To Kill These Journalists And Media" By Robert Spencer
An "Islamic right to kill"? Expect Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR to fire off a stern letter to Mullah Dadullah forthwith. "Top Taliban military commander dismisses NATO casualty reports, warns journalists," from AP, with thanks to Harrie:
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan The top Taliban military commander on Monday said that NATO's claims to have killed more than 200 insurgents over the weekend were propaganda and warned that his men would target journalists who reported "wrong information" given by the U.S.-led coalition or NATO.
"They are saying that they have killed 200 Taliban but they did not kill even 10 Taliban," said Mullah Dadullah, Taliban military commander for south and southeastern Afghanistan. "They are just destroying civilian homes and agricultural land. They are using the media to do propaganda against the Taliban."...
"From today, I want to tell journalists that if in future they use wrong information from coalition forces or NATO we will target those journalists and media," Dadullah said. "We have the Islamic right to kill these journalists and media."
Broadcast Taliban propaganda, or die. Remember that in the coming weeks when you see reports coming out of Afghanistan.
This content was used with the permission of Jihad Watch.
Newt Gingrich's Suggestions For A Republican Agenda
Fresh from my email, here are Newt Gingrich's, 11 Ways to Say: "We're Not Nancy Pelosi," for Republicans running for office. Because it's so good, I'm going to post all 11 planks of Newt's suggested platform. Maybe I shouldn't post that much of it, but politicians seldom mind that sort of thing as long as you get their names right and give them the credit they deserve.
1) Make English the Official Language of Government. The House should pass a bill making English the official language of government, abolishing multilingual ballots and reaffirming that new citizens should be required to pass a test on American history in English. The Rasmussen poll reported that support for English as the official language was 85%. The Zogby poll had it at 84%. Why do Republican leaders find it so hard to side with more than four out of every five Americans? How many liberal Democrats who currently assume they are unbeatable would suddenly have a hard time explaining a series of votes against English to their constituents? Remember, at 85%, there are no anti-English congressional districts no matter what the elite media says.
2) Control the Borders. The House should pass a narrowly focused bill to ensure that the United States can control the border. The current Senate bill is a disaster. It is impossible to pass a "comprehensive" immigration bill in the next two months. The American people overwhelmingly want the borders controlled and every act of terrorism reminds us that having the borders uncontrolled makes us more vulnerable to attack. The House should immediately pass a border-control bill and conservative Republican senators should move every day to bring it up in the Senate. Let Democrats and elitist Republicans block controlling the border and make that a referendum test for Election Day.
3) Keep God in the Pledge. Congress should take two steps to preserve the right to say "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, a right which is supported by 91% of all Americans. The American people feel deeply that our Declaration of Independence is correct in saying that each of us is endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights. Beginning with the Supreme Court's 1963 decision outlawing school prayer, the courts have waged a 43-year assault on the core values of American liberty. It is time to return to a balanced Constitutional system. There is no Constitutional case for five lawyers' on the court being a floating majority for a permanent Constitutional Convention.
4) The American people would rally to the elected branches' taking steps to rebalance the Constitution. First, the House should pass a bill suspending the recent federal district court decision in California outlawing the words "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Second, the House should pass a law blocking the Supreme Court from reviewing the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance (a power of the Congress expressly granted in the Constitution).
5) Require a Voter ID Card. The American people overwhelmingly support (85% in one poll) having a voter id card so we can be sure only legal citizens are voting. Passing a bill to require this in all federal elections would be a big step toward more honest elections.
6) Repeal the Death Tax, for Good. The American people have consistently supported the total repeal of the death tax and the House should simply pass it once a week and attach it to various Senate bills to force the Senate to deal with it again and again. Let liberals explain why they oppose something that more than 70% of the country favors.
7) Restore Property Rights. The American people are deeply opposed to local politicians' being able to seize a citizen's home or business. The Supreme Court's Kelo decision on eminent domain is one of the most unpopular in recent years and is also one of the most dangerous. Anyone who knows the history of local government corruption in America knows it will not be long before some corrupt developers engage some corrupt politicians and this power is exploited at the cost of most Americans. Members of the Black Caucus have been among the most vocal in pointing out that it is poor people who will be the most victimized so rich developers and greedy politicians can make the money off their homes and businesses. The House should pass a powerful bill returning the constitutional law to the pre-Kelo rules and blocking the Supreme Court from reviewing it.
8) Achieve Sustainable Energy Independence. The country is eager for a straightforward new energy strategy for national security, environmental and economic reasons. The combination of $3 gasoline, watching Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Russia get more of our money, and concerns about the environment come together to require real change. The House should meet that need. Starting with Rep. Jim Nussle's (R-Iowa) bill on renewable fuels, adding to it clean nuclear power using new technologies that are safe and produce little waste, developing more clean coal solutions, investing in a conversion to a hydrogen economy, incentivizing conservation, providing tax credits so the auto industry can invest in the new technology and new manufacturing equipment needed to produce revolutionary new vehicles, creating the tax incentives to build the distribution system for biofuels, hybrids, and hydrogen, providing deeper tax incentives for radically better cars (imagine a substantial tax credit for cars exceeding 200 miles to the gallon of petroleum through a combination of E-85 or biodiesel, hybrid use of electricity and hydrogen), and a bill to create state flexibility in exploring off shore with a 50% split in revenue so state legislatures and governors would have an incentive to develop environmentally sound methods of exploration and production.
9) Control Spending and Balance the Budget. The House should pass new budget legislation to control spending, leading to a balanced budget in seven years (the length of time we gave ourselves in the Contract with America and which led to the first four balanced budgets since the 1920s), with special focus on programs liberals will fight to increase spending. Let the country see who is really committed to smaller government with lower taxes and who is committed to bigger government with higher taxes.
10) Tie Education Funding to Teacher Accountability. A major result of the No Child Left Behind legislation has been the clear revelation that a number of schools systems are crippling and destroying children. When the Detroit school system only graduates 21% of entering freshman on time, it is clear the children are being cheated. The American people strongly support reforms designed to save the children. The first step would be to insist that federal funds only go to school systems which require teacher competency and accountability. A clear choice between those who want to save the children and those who want to save the bureaucrats would mobilize the country in favor of dramatic education reform.
11) Defend America From the Irreconcilable Wing of Islam. Terrorism is a real threat. Congress should hold hearings on the recent terrorist activities in Canada, the U.K. and Morocco. The House should move bills that strengthen our security from terrorists with increased powers for surveillance, an overruling of the disastrous Hamdan decision and a series of other steps.
Focus on Iran and North Korea. The American people are very prepared to believe we face extraordinary threats from a nuclear North Korea and an Iranian regime actively seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Any actions in Iraq need to be recast in terms of their impact on Iran. A weak America in Iraq will be unable to stop Iran. Stopping Iran is potentially literally a matter of life and death. Congress should hold hearings on the scale of the Iranian and North Korean threat, the statements of their key leaders and the requirements for action to replace these dictatorships before they succeed in killing millions of Americans. The Santorum Iranian democracy bill should be forced out of the Senate in the context of these threats. Everything about Iraq should be debated within this larger and much more dangerous context.
No wonder Ann Coulter likes Bill Maher: the guy is honest enough to come right out and say the sort of appalling things that most liberals keep to themselves.
“You know, this country is, I've said this before, I'm going to keep saying it, it's a pitiful, helpless giant....
About The American People:
"Again, (America is) a stupid country with stupid people who don't pay attention."
About Religious People:
"Well, first of all I think the bottom line is that religion makes people arrogant. One of the things I don't like about religion is I think it is arrogance...I think religion is usually, especially in this country, it's arrogance masquerading as humility."
About Terrorism:
"Saddam was actually a bulwark against terrorism."
What a typical liberal. He has disdain for his own country. He thinks the American people are stupid. He's hostile to religion and like most liberals, he seems to always find a way to sympathize with anyone who's against the United States, even if it requires putting forth complete nonsense as a reason.
The truth is that there's probably not two dimes' worth of difference between what Maher said and what people like Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Ned Lamont, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi think. The only difference is that Maher was impolitic enough to say it.
Air America's Mike Malloy: "You’ve Got Muslims In New Jersey. Why Not Go Kill Some?"
Here's (now fired) Air America host, Mike Malloy, filling in for Randi Rhodes on August 28, (about 3/4's of the way through the show):
Mike: Ray is calling from New Jersey. Welcome to the program. Thanks for holding on.
Ray: Hi Michael.
Mike: Hey.
Ray: You were asking for a conservative or a bush supporter to call so I just thought I’d call.
Mike: Well, thanks. Have a great day. What are you calling about?
Ray: Well, I support the president and I’m thankful there’s a conservative in the white house during these times when terrorists want to kill us because we’re not Muslim.
Mike: Wow. Is that why they hate us? Because we’re not Muslims?
Ray: Well, those two guys, they had guns held to their, the two reporters, the cameramen? They had guns held to their heads. Were sworn to change their religion to be set free or they would have been killed. Is that what we’re up against here?
Mike: I guess so. It’s a terrible world. Thank god George Bush is in power to stop that sort of thing from happening. Right?
Ray: Don’t you think we should get them before they get us?
Mike: Oh yeah, that makes sense. Let’s go kill…I’ll tell you what. Where do you live? You live in New Jersey, Ray?
Ray: Yeah, I live in..
Mike: Are there any Muslims in New Jersey?
Ray: I’m sure that there are.
Mike:Okay, why don’t you find some and kill them?
Ray: I’m in the northeast area in New Jersey.
Mike: Frankly I don’t care where you live in New Jersey. I’m just saying, next time you see a Muslim why not blow, why not kill him?
Ray: ha. Why is the liberal thing…
Mike: Ray, Ray, Ray, I have a question for you. Answer the question or I’m gonna leap through the phone and rip your ears off. Here’s the question, Ray. Why not go kill a Muslim? Don’t leave it up to the soldiers, don’t leave it up to the middle east. You’ve got Muslims in New Jersey. Why not go kill some?
Ray: Cause some liberal attorney will lock me up.
Mike: No, no no, Ray, answer the question. Are you going to do one of these cowardly republican right-wing things on me. Let me ask you something, since you can’t answer that question…shut up!
(and the conversation goes on for a few more seconds before Mike hangs up on him)
So, here we have a liberal radio host, who apparently can't even figure out the difference between someone like Osama Bin Laden wanting to kill us for not being Muslims and the patriotic Muslim American down the block. Because of that, he's challenging a listener to murder a Muslim in cold blood. Then, when the listener quite naturally balks at Malloy's insane suggestion, Malloy describes it as, "one of these cowardly republican right-wing things." I guess in Malloy's world, you're a chickenhawk if you believe in fighting against terrorism, but don't approve of slaughtering the first person you see walking out of a mosque.
PS: I ran across this story at the Democratic Underground. Newsflash: when people at the Democratic Underground think you're an extremist, you're really out there.
-- As most of you know, Steve Irwin, "the Crocodile Hunter," was killed when a stingray put a barb into his chest. The poor fella was only 44 years old and had a wife along with two young childen, so it seems particularly tragic for him to be killed in such a bizarre way.
But, on the other hand, Irwin lived 3 or 4 lifetimes in those 44 years. Here's a guy who loved animals and he spent his days traveling around the world, getting paid, to get up close and personal with every exotic and dangerous creature on the planet. The guy was on TV, he had plenty of money, and he got to do a job that he loved with his family. All in all, at least superficially, the guy lived a pretty good life and died doing what he loved. There's something to be said for that.
-- The Washington Times reports on the goings on in a Georgia mosque. Not Georgia the country, Georgia down South in the US. I wanted to make that clear just so people would understand that we have pro-terrorist Muslims like this in our country:
"Last year, Miss Mansfield visited a mosque in Georgia that advertised an English and Arabic session on God and family. She attended the Arabic session where a man identified as Khaled recounted a New York flight. He and his friends acted suspicious and made simultaneous restroom runs to frighten passengers.
"He laughed when he described how several women were in tears, and one man sitting near him was praying," Miss Mansfield later wrote in an account of that meeting on her personal Web site.
"As the meeting drew to a close, the imam gave a brief speech calling for the protection of Allah on the mujahedeen fighting for Islam throughout the world, and reminded everyone that it was their duty as Muslims to continue in the path of jihad, whether it was simple efforts like those of Khaled and his friends, or the actual physical fighting," Miss Mansfield wrote."
Let's hope the FBI has got eyes and ears inside of that mosque.
-- This is getting a lot of attention today around the blogosphere:
"As they prepare for a critical pre-election legislative stretch, Congressional Republican leaders have all but abandoned a broad overhaul of immigration laws and instead will concentrate on national security issues they believe play to their political strength."
Unfortunately, you have the President and a significant block of the Republicans in the Senate that are hellbent on committing political suicide via amnesty for illegals and the Republicans in the House want no part of it. That's understandable and the right move -- since going along with George Bush, John McCain, Bill Frist and these other guys with terrible political instincts aren't going to move -- and going along with them would cost the GOP the House.
However, there's a risk associated with waiting, too. If the GOP loses the House, they may not be able to stop a terrible bill from getting through. Moreover, right after the election, anyone in the House doing the right thing on illegal immigration purely for political purposes will be sorely tempted to switch positions.
If the GOP can hold the House, amnesty can probably be stopped. If not, expect the American people to get the shaft in favor of illegals.
-- Anti-Semitic rants against Joe Lieberman at the MoveOn forums? Is this really a big surprise?
"A string of anti-Semitic rants about Sen. Joe Lieberman have popped up on the liberal MoveOn.org's open forum Web site, drawing criticism from the Anti-Defamation League.
It's the latest flap in the contentious race between Lieberman, who is running as an independent to keep his seat in Connecticut, and upstart Ned Lamont, the Democratic nominee.
"We recognize that Action Forum is an open forum intended
