RWN's Favorite Quotes And Excerpts From A Year Of Interviews
Here are some of my favorite quotes and excerpts from the interviews that were done at RWN in 2006.
"The phenomena to be explained are the irrationality and the ardor of European anti-Americanism. Irrational, because entirely disproportionate to any real faults in American society. Of course America has flaws, and no, it is not lunacy to point them out. But in poll after poll, you see substantial numbers of Europeans, non-trivial numbers, who believe the September 11 attacks were staged, yes, staged, by an oil-hungry American military-industrial complex to justify its imperialist adventures in Iraq. In Germany, 20 percent of the population believes this. In France, a book arguing this case was a galloping bestseller. Now that is bughouse nuts. Totally bats in the belfry. Then the ardor: "My anti-Americanism," wrote one columnist in the British Telegraph, "has become almost uncontrollable. It has possessed me, like a disease. It rises up in my throat like acid reflux, that fashionable American sickness." If only we could harness all that outrage and transform it into a non-polluting energy source! You see this kind of thing all the time in the European press. (Meanwhile, if the French, say, wipe out the entire Ivorian air force, do you see protestors on the streets chanting "No blood for cocoa?" What a question.) When you have these two phenomena together-irrationality and this curious passion, this fervor-it seems reasonable to conclude that you are in the presence of something like a cult. So you consider it, sociologically. What role does this ideology serve in the European psyche? One answer: It fulfills many of the roles once played by the Church. It offers a comprehensive-if lunatic-answer to the question, "Why is the world the way it is, and why is there evil in that world?" It provides a devil to excoriate and then to exorcise. There is community and belonging in anti-American activism, ecstasy in protest. Again, a form of Christian heresy, and no more lunatic, surely, than anything the Cathars believed, if also no less." -- Claire Berlinski
"On deficit spending, I think that one of the reasons, today, that Republicans have so much wind in their face at the national level...people talk about the war in Iraq, people talk about a lot of things, but I think it has been the spending. Spending has caused people across this country to look at Republicans in a different way. It's like we've lost our brand at the national level of being the Party of limited government." -- Bob Corker
"John Hawkins: Earlier this year, Sean Penn admitted that he keeps an Ann Coulter doll around that he tortures for fun. Any comment on that beyond the fact that Penn is obviously mentally disturbed?
Ann Coulter: I'd always suspected that Sean Penn was the type of "man" who plays with dolls, but I assumed that he liked the life-sized ones you have to inflate first." -- here
"Thank you, John McCain and Chris Shays -- I give them more credit for the minority than anybody else because...McCain-Feingold destroyed the party's ability to play on a level playing field in these elections." -- Tom DeLay
"I wanted to go after entitlements. That's where the real spending is and the first year of the last Congress, when I got to write an agenda, we had reconciliation as a process in there and we looked at every entitlement program, reformed every one of them, and saved 40 billion dollars. I wanted to do that every year and treat entitlements like you would appropriations and over time, get rid of entitlements as process. Entitlements should be outlawed in America. Every government program shouldn't be on automatic pilot. It should be looked at and appropriated for every year." -- Tom DeLay
"What Republicans always do when they call me -- and I get phone calls from Republicans a lot, John, -- they say what can they do to increase the percentage of blacks (voting for me)? Honestly? Stop kissing *ss, stop talking to them like they're children. Talk to them like they're adults. Give the same speech to black people that you would give in a suburb. Don't change it, don't alter, don't try and soft pedal it because it's insulting, it's condescending." -- Larry Elder
"Then you get this line of, "What I'm in favor of is free trade as long as it's fair trade," and what that means is when a Japanese company gets government subsidies or a Korean company gets government subsidies, then it's "unfair" and, therefore, we should punish them by foreclosing their markets. My response to that is if Japan wants to screw its own citizens and coin money into businesses that otherwise can't compete, that's their problem. We (shouldn't complain) because steel is cheaper and, therefore, cars are cheaper, our appliances are cheaper, and if other countries want to engage in this kind of subsidizing of goods so that customers overseas benefit, let 'em do it." -- Larry Elder
"I have never heard an enlisted man say anything nice about the media, (but) I have heard them say, out of nowhere, "I hate the bleeping media,"..." -- Michael Fumento
"Well, the US is following in the same basic pattern (in Iraq) that we've followed for 60 years in expanding freedom around the world. (The first step is) that we stand up a free government and we've done that in Iraq.
The second step is we stand up a military capable of protecting that government and the third step is the US leaves. We followed that pattern in Japan and the Philippines and Salvadore and our own hemisphere and it's been the traditional and the effective method of this country spreading freedom around the world." -- Duncan Hunter
"(The New York Times is) often wrong, never unsure." -- Duncan Hunter
"The notion that American women face a discriminatory wage gap, which is vigorously promoted by the kind of woman I talk about in this book, is absolutely untrue. Yet, how often have we heard that a woman with similar education levels, skills, and experience gets paid only 76 cents to a man’s dollar? The so-called wage gap is the gift that keeps on giving to the modern woman’s movement.
The basic economic point should first be appreciated. If it’s true that a woman with the exact same qualifications and experience would be willing to work for 76 cents to a man’s dollar, who would ever hire a man? You could hire an all female work force and bury the competition. There is no discriminatory wage gap." -- Kate O'Beirne
"I do not believe the defense of America should rest on the shoulders of single mothers and teenage girls. Then, of course, we see the unique physical demands of combat. The plain fact is that the average woman is simply not as fast or as strong as the average man. The advocates for integrating combat argue that women should serve in any position the military has to offer, “as long as they meet the physical standards.” But in fact, women in uniform do not meet the same physical standards as men.
In the interest of integrating the services, every service has had to adopt gender norm scores for its physical tests to account for the fact that women simply aren’t as physically strong or fast as men. So those physical tests have been gender normed and physical standards have been lowered in order to accommodate large numbers of women." -- Kate O'Beirne
"Women’s studies departments prepare their graduates for one job, it seems to me, and that’s to be a professional aggrieved feminist. Not that that’s not a promising occupation, because there’s a lot of money in being an aggrieved professional feminist." -- Kate O'Beirne
"Well, I think it is because of this: in our Constitution that was adopted and the people ratified it, that became a contract between the people and their government and we lived under that until 1971 which is almost 200 years. It was amended some 16 times, an average of once every 10 to 11 years. From 1933 to 1971 it was amended 7 times for an average of once every 5 to 6 years. Now, since 1971 far left groups, radical groups, learned it was easier to convince 5 members of the Supreme Court to change the Constitution than to convince the voters and their elected representatives to change it.
We have not had a constitutional amendment that has been initiated and adopted since 1971. That’s totally contrary to our past history and these were substantive amendments. They had to do with abolishing slavery, providing what states could not deprive its citizens of due process, it gave the right to vote to women, it gave the right to vote to 18 years olds. These were hot-button issues that we dealt with according to the amendment process.
It’s only been in the last 30 years that those who have a liberal philosophy say that the Constitution is too sacred to be amended and it is too difficult and too cumbersome to do so when it wasn’t too cumbersome for 170 years. They still don’t think it’s too sacred for judges to amend it or change it. But to me it’s the height of arrogance to say that we’ve got to have 5 super legislators sitting on the bench changing the Constitution. That’s not democratic. It turns the principle of, “We the people,” upside down. It turns it on its head." -- Charles Pickering
"Rome didn’t have a written constitution but the American people said we want to know what our Constitution means. We don’t want to have to depend on the whims of some judge as to what the law is or is not. So the Constitution – the concept of a living Constitution in Supreme Chaos -- I describe it as a Mystery Constitution because you don’t know what it means until five judges meet in secret and debate and argue what it means and then announce to you and tell you what it means. So that really does away with the concept or the purpose of a written Constitution. A written Constitution is so that you know what your Constitution means. You don’t have to depend on judges telling you what it mean." -- Charles Pickering
"The same Constitution that gives ACLU the right to freedom of speech gives Christians the same right to freedom of speech, gives them the right to petition their government, the right to assemble." -- Charles Pickering
"Politics increasingly isn't command and control anymore, but it is network warfare. So, it's not hurtful to us if you're focusing on topics that aren't necessarily at the top of the mind in the Beltway, because I think if it's important, it will rise to the top of the mind in the Beltway. ...The ability of bloggers to impact the mainstream media stories is increasing, by the day almost." -- Patrick Ruffini
"Well, my view of Europe in 20 years' time is that you'll be switching on the TV, you'll be looking at scenes of burning and conflagration and riots in the street. You will have a couple of countries that are maybe in civil war, at least on the brink of it.
You will have neofascists' resurgence in some countries and you'll have other countries that have just been painlessly euthanized in which a Muslim political class has effectively got its way without a shot being fired -- and large numbers of people, particularly young people, have left those countries and have moved on to whoever will take them." -- Mark Steyn
"If Islam is incompatible with democracy, that's not a problem for Iraq, it's a problem for Belgium, you know, because Iraq until, you know, a few months back had no democracy to lose. They can easily adjust to the way it's always been. For Belgium or for Denmark or for the Netherlands, they've got real democracies and they are likely to lose and as you see, I think that is really the issue here, that when these contradictions are pointed out, Europeans essentially refuse to acknowledge them. Yet at the same time they're making capitulations to the most naked form of political bullying --and that's when Islam is officially a minority of, you know, 10% or so. In those cities it's a lot higher already. What happens when it's 30%?" -- Mark Steyn
"When people say, "How come you Canadian and Australian and British people are writing in America," and I say, "Well, that's because too many of you guys have paid a fortune to go to journalism school and lost the ability to write." (laughs) We foreigners didn't suffer that crippling disadvantage." -- Mark Steyn
"...(Under Communism) Everything is owned by the government and then if you work or don't work, you get paid the same. On paper it's looks beautiful, but in reality, it just can't happen. That's why they fell apart. The country was going broke. They tried to compete with the United States, in arms, in the Cold War and they couldn't do it, because Russian workers didn't make very much money and just couldn't compete with a capitalistic country where one person could feed a family....while in Russia, you had a hard time trying to feed yourself.
...Americans really don't know how good they have it here. In Russia, you used to go to a store to buy a car? You'd have to stay on a list there for a couple of months, if you were lucky, and then only something like 10% of the people had a car. Then, if you were looking to rent an apartment, if you were lucky, it would take you 10-15 years. See, the American people couldn't understand that because it's one thing to hear something or read something, but it's another thing to see it and experience something. If you read something, you think it might be one way, it might be another way, but if you experience it, you know." -- Nikolai Volkoff
"Republicans need to understand that people are tired of (candidates) talking like Republicans, but acting like Democrats.
They're tired of this administration, not because of George Bush's policies, but because he has been unwilling to stand up and veto excessive spending that Reagan would have choked on. Reagan vetoed a highway funding bill because it had a 121 pork barrel items. He called that unconscionable. This (highway bill) has 6,000 pork barrel earmark items in it. Reagan would have had no trouble vetoing that.
When they look at a Congress that stands up for all the liberal causes and votes for minimum wage increases, led by Republicans -- the people back in the conservative districts...are saying, "Enough is enough. You're using us conservatives. You expect us to carry you through and get you into office, but then you walk away from us. We're going to...take an incumbent, that was put into office as a Republican, but voted liberal, and we're going to throw him out." -- Tim Walberg
Maybe it's because of the season, but I thought it was a good time to write something about "hate." Conservatives are often accused of being "haters." We're accused of hating this group, hating that group. As a conservative, let me clarify the record about a few groups conservatives supposedly "hate:"
Conservatives are often accused of hating black people. Not true. The GOP is the Party of Lincoln, the party that ended slavery, and the party that voted for the Civil Rights Act, percentage wise, in greater numbers than Democrats. That's why we believe in a colorblind society -- because we don't think race should matter -- because we don't think minorities, by virtue of being minorities, need more help than white people to make it. That's why we'd prefer that there were no "hyphenated Americans," because there are only Americans, and what subgroup you belong to, African American, Jewish American, Italian American, etc. is irrelevant.
Conservatives are often accused of hating immigrants. Not true. Conservatives believe immigration is good for America and whether you're talking about someone who's white, black, Hispanic, Asian, you name it, it makes no difference. What conservatives do get concerned about is people coming to this country illegally. Even though conservatives may have a soft spot for the work ethic that many illegal immigrants have, we're concerned that they don't respect our laws, don't want to learn our language, and don't want to assimilate into this great country. As long as the people coming here love this country, follow the rules, love this country, and want to assimilate, conservatives will welcome them.
Conservatives are often accused of hating Muslims. Not true. Although you may find a few people at the fringes who can't tell the difference between moderates and terrorists, that's not true of most conservatives. Our Founding Fathers viewed this country as a religious refuge, and while, of course, religious extremists who support terrorism, anti-semitism, or backwards customs like Sharia aren't wanted, the moderate Muslims who are fellow Americans, emigrating here, or visiting are, of course, welcome in this country.
Conservatives are often accused of hating Jews. Not true. As a general rule, conservatives are much more supportive of Israel than liberals and some of the most prominent conservatives are Jewish. Moreover, if anything, conservative Christians are particularly well disposed towards Jews because they're God's chosen people.
Conservatives are often accused of hating poor people. Not true. In fact, many conservatives, myself included, are poor people or have been poor. What conservatives believe is that except in a few limited cases, it's not the job of the government to do things for people, it's the job of the government to make it easier for people to do things for themselves. This is the land of opportunity and if the government gets out of people's way, people are capable of lifting themselves out of poverty by making good decisions and working hard.
Conservatives are often accused of hating liberals. Not true. As a general rule, the "solutions" that liberals come up with to America's problems make this country weaker and worse off. But, despite their flaws, liberals are just misguided, not bad people. So, we'd like to see liberals change their minds about the policies they support. And, if we can't do that, we'd like to see liberals defeated politically. But, we don't hate liberals and wish them ill personally.
Conservatives are often accused of hating terrorists and foreign powers that want to harm Americans. That's true. If you want to kill Americans, want to harm this country, or support those who do, we wish death, destruction, and misery upon you. So, go ahead and hate us, because we hate you right back.
"Liberals are like people with stale breath talking into your face at a party. You try backing away from them or offering them gum, but then they just start whimpering. They've been using the exact same talking points about how we're losing in Iraq since before we invaded.
It seems they've finally succeeded in exhausting Americans and, thereby, handing a victory to al Qaeda.
The weakest members of the herd are rapidly capitulating, trying to preserve a modicum of honor by prattling about how if their plans had been implemented, Iraq would be in tip-top shape and our troops would be home for Christmas.
Well, if my plans had been implemented, the anti-war crowd would be weeping about Iraqi civilian deaths so much they wouldn't have time to pretend they gave a damn about the loss of American lives.
But the plans that were implemented have deposed a monster, put him on trial -- which resulted in his conviction and death sentence -- killed rape hobbyists Uday and Qusay, presided over three democratic elections, killed al-Zarqawi and scores of other al Qaeda leaders fighting Americans in Iraq, and kept the U.S. safe from Islamic terrorist attacks for five years now. The least I can do is not capitulate to the left's endless nagging." -- Ann Coulter
Are We Doing Enough to Earn Iran's Love? -- Satire By Liberal Larry
As Bush has so aptly demonstrated, any idiot can make enemies. But it takes a man of courage, compassion, and a robustly French approach to diplomacy to turn enemies into friends. Senator John Kerry is such a man. On a fact-finding mission to Syria - a mystical land where facts magically leap into the laps of U.S. senators like horny Bichons Frisés - Kerry urged Bush to open a dialogue with both Syria and Iran in the hopes of winning their much needed assistance in Iraq.
Crawling to the enemy is a brilliant strategy, one that the Shrub would certainly never approve of. That’s because he doesn’t posess an inkling of the diplomacy skills that seemingly ooze out of John Kerry’s stately pores like the stench of cat p*ss from a Chinese opium addict. Iran and Syria are by no means perfect. Indeed, they're actively supplying the Iraqi Freedom Fighters with the weapons they’ve been using to kill and maim our troops as well as scores of innocent civilians - but that doesn’t mean we can’t be friends. For the sake of peace and goodwill, we must have the courage to put aside our petty differences and find common ground with those who openly plot our destruction.
Befriending our enemies is John Kerry’s raison d’être. In fact, some may say it's his whole reason for existence. But it's a task that he cannot shoulder alone. Each of us must look into our hearts and ask ourselves what we are doing in our homes and our workplaces to show Iran and Syria that we are deserving of their love.
Have you called for the downfall of Western Civilization and the destruction of the illegitimate Zionist regime today? Have you denied the Holocaust or blamed your problems on those rascally Jews? Have you burned a U.S. flag in protest of the Great Satan's imperialist occupation of the Muslim holy land? If you answered “Yes” to any of these questions, then you and your fellow Berkeley Professors have done much to lay the Foundation of Friendship upon which John Kerry will build his Luxury Penthouse of Appeasement.
Unfortunately, there those who would rather make enemies than friends. They would talk to Iran and Syria not with finely nuanced words of respect and understanding, but with bullets and bombs. Their primitive neocon ideals make them incapable of compromise, even as Iraq finally becomes the quagmire John Kerry had always hoped it would be. So until John Kerry is restored to the White House in 2008, we can only hope that our own personal gestures of goodwill will be enough to earn the love of those who dwell snugly in the armpit of the International Community.
This satire was used with permission of BlameBush!.
It goes without saying that the last couple of years have been tough for you and the Republican Party. The GOP lost 6 Senate seats and 30 House seats; you're currently sitting on an average approval rating of 36.3% and you haven't cracked 50% all year. Moreover, 63% of the country thinks we're going in the wrong direction while only 29% thinks the reverse is true.
Now, many people might say that there's not a lot that you can do about that. They're writing you off as a lame duck, as a spent force, as a man who's going to be spending the next couple of years twiddling his thumbs and waiting for his replacement to appear. Maybe those people are right -- but, they don't have to be. The reality is that the American people WANT to like and respect the man leading them. Moreover, Republicans REALLY WANT to like and respect you, because you're our guy. We want an excuse to point at you and say, "That's my President and thank God he's in the White House right now."
Moreover, Mr. President, you need to get the Republican people and the American people back on your side, if not for the sake of your agenda, for the sake of the troops fighting overseas who will be better off if they know that the American people support the mission they've been given by their Commander-In-Chief.
So, here are a few pieces of advice. Take them or leave them at your discretion.
#1) The first rule of politics is to take care of your base first and then reach out to the middle. Unfortunately, Mr. President, you've egregiously broken that rule and allowed an antagonistic relationship to develop between your administration and a significant part of your base. Simply by repairing that rift, you can get your approval rating back up into the mid-forties and perhaps just as importantly, you can staunch the biting criticism from the right that has done so much damage to your presidency. There are a number of ways you can shore up your right flank.
A) Announce that you support splitting the security measures and amnesty parts of the senate bill into two parts. Then say you want to support security, the wall, and tough enforcement measures now and that you want to deal with the guest worker program and other "comprehensive" features that many members of your base find so odious later. By doing this, you can take the venom out of the illegal immigration argument by not holding secure borders hostage to an amnesty program, and yet you can still say that you support the other features that some Hispanic activists, liberals, and big business want.
B) Let it be known that you think that one of the messages that the American public was sending in 2006 was that they were tired of runaway spending and as a consequence, make a point of vetoing every bill the Democrats send your way that's full of earmarks or new big government programs. Sure, this has never been one of your strong points, but the Democrats are bigger spenders than you've ever been and by keeping them in check, you can earn credit with the base and the American people.
C) The new media can help you reconnect with your base. Sit down with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Fox News for interviews. They'll be flattered that you got together with them and are likely to be particularly friendly. Moreover, you'll be telling conservatives that, "Yes, I am still one of you and want to reach out to you," just by showing up and making the effort.
#2) Many of the American people feel like we're treading water in Iraq. So, they're lukewarm on continuing to risk the lives of our soldiers in an effort that they believe is just delaying the inevitable. In particular, there's a distinct sense among conservatives that we're fighting with one hand tied behind our back, that our soldiers are being strait-jacketed by ridiculous rules of engagement, and that we're allowing Islamo-fascist thugs in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia along with Sadr's militia to take potshots at our troops with impunity. Moreover, Americans are looking at North Korea's nuclear weapons, Iran building nuclear weapons, Hezbollah engineering a takeover of Lebanon, and the response of the United States has been....what exactly?
In 2004, Americans thought they were voting for the guy who stood on top of a pile of rubble at the World Trade Center with a bullhorn and said, "I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!" What happened to that guy? What happened to the guy who said, "Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists." What happened to the guy whom the Europeans kept calling a "cowboy?" Where has that guy been since the election in 2004? The American people need to be shown that you're still engaged, that you're still determined to "bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies," and that you're still hellbent on doing whatever it takes to win the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism.
#3) The GOP has gotten in trouble on the domestic front for being "democrat light" on issues like spending, illegal immigration, and big government programs. So, when the Democrats take over, don't hesitate to use your veto power and the soapbox that the presidency gives you when they veer off to the left. Draw some real distinctions between what we Republicans believe and what the Democrats believe.
Also, please, please, Mr. President, start defending yourself. When prominent Democrats accuse you of lying to America, torturing prisoners, or screwing the middle-class, tear a chunk out of them every once in a while instead of letting them get away with slapping you around. Americans tend not to like extreme attacks on their President, but if they hear them day in and day out and you never respond, they start to get the idea that maybe you're staying quiet because what they're saying is true. Don't let that continue to happen, Mr. President.
Last but not least, Mr. President, you've got two more years in office. Please don't let them go to waste the way the last two years have. Heal your rift with the base, get aggressive in the war on terror again, and use your veto power along with the bully pulpit at every opportunity. If you do those things, then you can still make a bigger impact than most people think before you head back to Crawford for retirement.
Extreme Mortman: Top 10 funniest things celebrities said about politics in 2006.
The Fourth Rail: The shortcomings and successes of the Iraqi military's training (from Iraq)
The Superficial: "The real moral of the story? You can do anything when you're pretty. Want to punch a fireman in the face? Go for it. Eat a bald eagle? Sure, why not. You've earned it."
You can check out all those links and more by clicking here. Don't forget to bookmark CG!
PS: If you'd like to submit articles to be linked to Conservative Grapevine, register at CG, and then shoot me an email.
14) "Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered special services to "find and destroy" the killers of four Russian diplomats taken hostage in Iraq." -- BBC News
13) "(Keith) Olbermann has a Teflon ego. No matter how stupid he looks or how obviously wrong he is or how completely devoid of wit his copy is, he is perpetually pleased as punch with himself and convinced that the rest of the world is as moist over his brilliance as he is. It's almost like schizophrenia.
Olbermann: I'm the wittiest, cleverest pundit in all the galaxy! All sentient beings worship me and wish to carry my magical seed!
Orderly: You're in an observation cell clutching a beanie baby and standing in your own poo.
Olbermann: What? An autograph? Why of COURSE!" -- Steve H.
12) "I think An Inconvenient Truth is a convenient starting point for changing hearts and minds on the global warming issue. But in order to truly make a difference, I believe it needs some sort of marketing tie-in. People need to know this problem hits close to home. And they need to know it transcends mere politics. They need a reason to cross partisan boundaries—a reason to unite on the steps of Capitol Hill and hold hands and sing the Pledge of Allegiance and/or We Shall Overcome.
Only one thing can compel people to act this way. And that one thing is Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s baby, Shiloh.
"Many people in Washington have long known a dirty little secret about tax-cut measures: When done right, they actually result in more money for the government.
Ever since the Senate approved the last major tax relief bill, in 2003, revenues have increased every year. In 2004, they went up 5.5%. Last year, they rose 14.5%, the largest increase in nearly 25 years.
Total government collections, in fact, increased more after President Bush's 2003 tax cuts than they did after President Clinton's 1994 tax hikes." -- Bill Frist
10) "A couple of years back, I began some generalization or other by saying, "The difference between America and Canada is . . ." And the American I was imparting this insight to interrupted me with: "The difference between America and Canada is that Americans don't care what the difference between America and Canada is." -- Mark Steyn
8) "If a drunken Mel Gibson did indeed call out, "Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," then there can be only one possible place for a man who believes such things: as the next Secretary General of the United Nations." -- David Frum
7) "The New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public's right to know in some cases might override somebody's right to live." -- Tony Snow
6) "Is it wrong for me to ask questions
Is it wrong to seek the truth
I can't just blindly accept their version
I can't base my logic on proof
Almost all the evidence points one way
but I'm like Charlie Sheen and Gloria Estefan
I need to know what really happened on 9/11
9/11, 9/11, what really happened on 9/11." -- Cartman, South Park"
5) "There are no bad guys on the left. There are only people who’ve been driven to desperation by conservative evil." -- Allahpundit
4) "The Democratic Party can never be an adult party; they buy votes to get elected and it's the only way they get elected. If Republicans won't be an adult party, America won't have one." -- Republican Congressman Tom Feeney
3) "Karl, yesterday Ted Kennedy gave a passionate speech on the Senate floor supporting President Bush’s proposal. If you get in bed with Ted Kennedy, you’re going to get more than sleep." -- Congressman Rick Keller's remark to Karl Rove
1) "You may find people who will contend that patriotism is something to be a little bit embarrassed about or that honor is somewhat outdated as a notion and that concentrating on America's imperfection makes you a realist. Not so. That's the sign of a cynic. Being a cynic is easy. You can just sit back, heckle from the cheap seats, while others serve, storm beaches, build nations, meet their destinies. Idealists write history's stirring chapters; cynics read those chapters and seem not to understand. Choose to be an idealist. There have always been those who contend that what's wrong with the world is America. Don't believe it." -- Donald Rumsfeld
The Daily Kos Diary Of The Day: We're Too White And In Need Of Affirmative Action!
Now this is funny stuff: a Daily Kos diary called, "Is DKos 'too white', and in need of 'Affirmative Action'?"
From the diary (the bolding is from the original post):
"If, out of 3,807 Kossacks surveyed, 82% of 'us' self-reported as white, 4.2% as black, 4.5% hispanic, 4% asian, 1.1% native american, and 0.08% were hawaiian/pacific islander - well, my question is: why is the DKos community, at least statiscally, so 'white'? What are we doing wrong, and what can we do about it?
If this is supposed to be the most influential (whatever that means) progressive blog on the web, why is our site 82% white, compared to 69% of the US population? Do we need our own sort of 'affirmative action'?
...My question: Does this mean that the 'average' Kossack is most likely a white, 40-ish, middle-class, hetero male (with a few more gay friends than you might expect)? Gee, that doesn't SOUND like the image we like to have of our demographic? Surely we're more diverse than that! Does this sync with what psychologists call our 'self-concept', or is something off?
...But, as DrSteveB asked in his diary, "Do white Kossacks 'get' race?" Well, that's the question I want to pose. WHY is DKos so white? What can we do about that?
...I WANT TO SUGGEST THAT WE DEVELOP A COMMITTEE/FORUM TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF RACE/ETHNICITY AND HOW IT IMPACTS THIS SITE. Without addressing the 'whiteness' of this site, as well as the structural reasons this might be, we cannot devise ways to deal with this.
...But like colleges and universities, we may want to think up ways to begin to work on the ways structural racism that affects DKos, one of the most powerful sites of progressive activism in the blogosphere today. And I think this effort should foreground the voices of people of color, not the dominant white Kossacks. While I might have ideas on how to address issues of structural racism's effect on DKos (perhaps having our committee cross-post diaries from more diverse blogs, or track down guest columnists from more diverse blogs?), I think these are the sorts of ideas that should be debated in an open forum."
Now, these are interesting questions. What is the Daily Kos "doing wrong" to draw in so many white readers? Don't they need Affirmative Action? Shouldn't they form a committee to address the subject, one that isn't run by the "dominant white Kossacks?"
Of course, getting worried about the racial make-up of a blog that anyone can freely visit is perfectly ridiculous, but boy, is it ever fun to watch the left get a taste of their own medicine!
"The Bush Administration has been quietly nurturing individuals and parties opposed to the Syrian government in an effort to undermine the regime of President Bashar Assad. Parts of the scheme are outlined in a classified, two-page document which says that the U.S. already is "supporting regular meetings of internal and diaspora Syrian activists" in Europe. The document bluntly expresses the hope that "these meetings will facilitate a more coherent strategy and plan of actions for all anti-Assad activists."
...American officials say the U.S. government has had extensive contacts with a range of anti-Assad groups in Washington, Europe and inside Syria. To give momemtum to that opposition, the U.S. is giving serious consideration to the election- monitoring scheme proposed in the document, according to several officials. The proposal has not yet been approved, in part because of questions over whether the Syrian elections will be delayed or even cancelled. But one U.S. official familiar with the proposal said: "You are forced to wonder whether we are now trying to destabilize the Syrian government."
...However, in order to make the "election monitoring" plan for Syria effective, the proposal makes clear that the U.S. effort will have to be concealed: "Any information regarding funding for domestic [Syrian] politicians for elections monitoring would have to be protected from public dissemination," the document says. But American experts on "democracy promotion" consulted by TIME say it would be unwise to give financial support to a specific candidate in the election, because of the perceived conflict of interest. More ominously, an official familiar with the document explained that secrecy is necessary in part because Syria's government might retaliate against anyone inside the country who was seen as supporting the U.S.-backed election effort. The official added that because the Syrian government fields a broad network of internal spies, it would almost certainly find out about the U.S. effort, if it hasn't already. That could lead to the imprisonment of still more opposition figures."
This is nothing less than a leaker and Time Magazine corraborating to break the law in an effort to undermine US foreign policy. It was incredibly irresponsible for the contents of those classified documents to be leaked and for Time to publish them. And quite frankly, somebody should spend the rest of his life in prison over it. Adam Zagorin, the person who reported on this story, should be asked to give up his source. If he doesn't comply, he should be thrown in jail until he complies or dies of old age. If and when he does comply, then the leaker should receive a life sentence just to set an example.
"Far from being extracts from the extreme end of science fiction, the idea that we may one day give sentient machines the kind of rights traditionally reserved for humans is raised in a British government-commissioned report which claims to be an extensive look into the future.
Visions of the status of robots around 2056 have emerged from one of 270 forward-looking papers sponsored by Sir David King, the UK government’s chief scientist. The paper covering robots’ rights was written by a UK partnership of Outsights, the management consultancy, and Ipsos Mori, the opinion research organisation.
“If we make conscious robots they would want to have rights and they probably should,” said Henrik Christensen, director of the Centre of Robotics and Intelligent Machines at the Georgia Institute of Technology."
...“If granted full rights, states will be obligated to provide full social benefits to them including income support, housing and possibly robo-healthcare to fix the machines over time,” it says.
Let me be the first to say that I don't care what kind of ideas they came up with in Sci-Fi novels, machines should never have "rights." Now, I know what some of you Star Trek geeks are thinking, "But, John, what if they're intelligent, have emotions, and a personalty like Data from Star Trek or the machines from AI?" Machines can't really have any of those things because they're nothing but machines. They're not born, they have no souls, and if they seem to possess human traits, it's only because that's how they've been programmed. "Sentient machines?" "Conscious robots?" There is no such thing. There's only programming that allows machines to mimic sentience and consciousness. Nothing more, nothing less.
I never took the time to go back and really take a hard look at the final predictions that were made right before the elections because until very recently, the final numbers weren't in for the House. However, they're in now and when all was said and done, the GOP lost 6 seats in the Senate and 30 seats in the House.
So, who was right on target and who missed it by a mile? Well, here are the final pre-election predictions from around the net:
Actually, my predictions were close to being on target, but the best of the bunch was probably Larry Sabato who was perfect in the Senate and off by only 1 in the House.
"American Capitalism is a malignancy that permeates our economic, social, and political systems and institutions. This untreated cancer ravaging the body of civilization is spreading like an unchecked conflagration in a munitions factory. Feudalism didn’t die; it simply evolved. Corporatism, Consumerism, wage slavery, debt slavery, free trade agreements, deregulation, and privatization condemn most of the global population to varying degrees of slavery, serfdom or indentured servitude." -- Jason Miller at the popular liberal blog, The Smirking Chimp
Because Mr. Miller and his many comrades in the Democratic Party don't understand human nature, they don't understand capitalism. Capitalism is designed to take advantage of one of the most basic truths about human beings: people are selfish.
People will work very hard for themselves and their families, but, they are not automations and very few of them are going to work hard to line someone else's pocket or for "society," if they don't think their efforts are being properly rewarded.
With capitalism, that selfishness leads businessmen to hire more workers to increase their profits, to earn more money which they pay taxes on, and to create products and services that the rest of society can use -- not out of the goodness of their heart, but because they benefit from it. Take away the benefits that people can earn for themselves, then they won't go the extra mile and society won't be able to profit from their efforts.
Moreover, you want to talk about, "slavery, serfdom or indentured servitude?" Well, what do you call a person who has to do menial labor because the government makes it impossible for him to use his God given ability to its fullest running his own business? What do you call a European business owner who busts his butt for 90 hours a week and then pays most of his profits to the government in taxes? What do you call a welfare recipient who survives on the meager, sustenance level checks sent to him by the government?
Last but not least, it's not governments that create wealth. To the contrary, people who have the freedom to use their talent as they see fit, for their own benefit, are the ones who do the most to make a society prosperous. Take away their motivation with communism or its first cousin socialism/liberalism, and society as a whole suffers as a result.
-- A 10 year aggravated child molestation charge for a 17-year old who had consensual oral sex from a 15 year old? I'm from the "lock them up and throw away the key" school when it comes to lawbreakers and even I think that's an insanely harsh sentence. In fact, that 10 year term is such an egregious miscarriage of justice that I don't think a pardon from the governor of Georgia would be out of line.
-- I just finished a book by Dick Wirthlin called, "The Greatest Communicator: What Ronald Reagan Taught Me About Politics, Leadership, and Life." Wirthlin was a strategist and pollster for Reagan and he spent much of his time doing polling and explaining to Reagan what he could do to sell his ideas, pointing out potential sore spots with the American people, and noting things that the Gipper could do to improve his standing with the American people.
As I read the book (which was absolutely superb by the way), I began to wonder if anyone actually fills the same role in the Bush White House as Wirthlin did with Reagan. That's because over the last two years, the Bush administration has seemed to be completely and utterly indifferent to the polls, what the base wants, and what the public thinks of Bush's policies. In other words, when Clinton was in office, you often got the impression that he made most of his decisions based on polling data, but during Bush's second term, he has often acted as if the political ramifications of his actions no longer concern him. There's got to be a happy medium between those two positions and it would be great if Bush would try to reach it.
"My conclusion is that for libertarian ideas to advance, the Libertarian Party must go completely out of business. It must cease to exist, period. No more candidates, no more wasted votes and no more disillusioned libertarian activists.
In place of the party, there should arise a new libertarian interest group organized like the National Rifle Association or the various pro- and anti-abortion groups. This new group, whatever it is called, would hire lobbyists, run advertisements and make political contributions to candidates supporting libertarian ideas. It will work with both major parties. It can magnify its influence by creating temporary coalitions on particular issues and being willing to work with elected officials who may hold libertarian positions on only one or a handful of issues. They need not hold libertarian views on every single issue, as the Libertarian Party now demands of those it supports."
-- Over at the The Huffington Post, Greg Gutfeld comes up with the best idea ever!
IN THE NAME OF FREEDOM AND TOLERANCE, AND IN HARMONY WITH OUR GAY MUSLIM BROTHERS AND SISTERS, WE PROUDLY ANNOUNCE THE FIRST MARCH TO MECCA, FEBRUARY 14, 2007
Human Rights Watch, Moveon.org, ACT-UP, the Huffington Post and David Geffen are proud to present the March to Mecca, a celebration of peace that calls all gay brothers, sisters and people undergoing sex-reassignment to march to the holiest of holy cities, Mecca, the capital city of Saudi Arabia's Makkah province on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2007.
Now that would be really "speaking the truth to power!" If only this weren't just satire...
"John F. Kennedy did not declare his candidacy until January 1960 and that Ronald Reagan entered the 1980 race in November 1979."
But, things move a lot faster now than they did back then. There are bloggers, mags, and radio hosts who are starting to pick candidates now. There will have been multiple debates by September. There are people out there campaigning, building staffs, and getting money from donors today! Furthermore, it's also worth noting that Kennedy and Reagan were a lot stronger candidates than Newt. If Newt were actually in the race today, he'd probably be in the four slot behind McCain, Rudy, and Mitt. Moreover, by September, if Newt were to get in, he'd be in a situation where the other contenders would probably have a 30-40 million dollar advantage over him, most of the top staffers locked up, and the endorsements of a lot of big name conservatives in the bag. So, if anything, he'd fall further behind if he waits.
This leads me to believe that Newt is really trying to increase his stature and build up his PAC, "American Solutions for Winning the Future," rather than really thinking about campaigning for the presidency. Of course, if it looks wide open late next year, who knows what could happen, but for the moment, it isn't looking like Newt is seriously contemplating a run.
-- Oh boy, look at this garbage from U.S.News & World Report, which comes under the header of "Truth or Fiction? It's Hard to Tell:"
"Here's the scene: A conservative president, say President Bush, is getting ready to be replaced by a liberal, say Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, after a crisis like something worse than 9/11. The nation's national security team is worried that the nation is going to pot. So much so that the heads of a 400-person "supermilitia" created to overthrow governments on behalf of Washington move in to dump Bush, stop Clinton's ascension, and rebuild the nation. Crazy? No, it's just the premise of America's Last Days, a new political thriller out next month and already being looked at by Hollywood. Author Douglas MacKinnon, a former Pentagon, Reagan, and Bush aide, says it rings true."
So, "Truth or Fiction? It's Hard to Tell?" Really? The idea that some sort of super militia backed by the Pentagon could take over the United States? You remember that old Jeff Foxworthy routine, "You might be a redneck if...." Well, you might be a conspiracy kook if you think it's plausible that the United States could be taken over in a coup. This isn't some Third World craphole, it's the United States, the world's oldest surviving democracy. We don't do coups in this country.
Tomorrow, I'm planning to put together a post called, "RWN's favorite quotes of 2006." How about suggesting some of your favorite quotes of 2006 to make sure I don't forget any of the really good ones.
"Clinton has often been asked if she regrets her vote authorizing military action and she usually answers that question with an artful dodge, saying that she accepts responsibility for the vote and suggesting that if the Senate had all the information it has today (no WMD, troubled post-war military planning, etc. . .), there would never have been a vote on the Senate floor.
However, she has never gone as far as some of her potential rivals for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination -- who also voted for the war -- and called her vote a mistake or declared that she would have cast her vote differently with all the facts presently available to her -- until now.
This morning on NBC's "Today" show, Sen. Clinton was asked about her 2002 vote and offered a slightly evolved answer. "Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote," she said in her usual refrain before adding, "and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."
In other words, "Sorry all you guys fighting in Iraq, but I had to change my position on the war because Barack Obama is threatening me politically on my left flank. But, it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind, tee-hee!"
Over at YouTube, an anti-jihad music video by a group called Stuck Mojo is causing controversy. According to the band:
Something very strange happened today with the "Open Season" video on YouTube. As previously announced, the video rocketed to a highspot of number 11 on the "Most Viewed" list of music videos for December 11th. Despite the fact that the views held strong at the same pace today, the video mysteriously disappeared off of ALL lists around mid-day. All honors had been revoked instantly. This is strange because the last video on the "Most Viewed" list has around 900 views today. As you'll see, "Open Season" has had over 2,500 views today and is nowhere to be seen.
....We've also received several reports that comments in support of the video have been flat out rejected by YouTube and have subsequently not appeared on the video's page. Again, we can only speculate on the reasons for this, but the evidence is clear and undeniable.
The song is sort of a rap/heavy metal hybrid and it's pretty good (if you like that sort of thing).
"I speak peace when peace is spoken, But I speak war when your hate is provoking, The season is open 24-7-365, Man up yo time to ride, No need to hide behind slogans of deceit, Claiming that you're a religion of peace, We just don't believe you, We can clearly see through, The madness that you're feeding your people, Jihad the cry of your unholy war, Using the willing, the weak and poor, From birth drowning in propaganda, rhetoric and slander, All we can say is d*mn ya
My forefathers fought and died for this here
I'm stronger than your war of fear
Are we clear?
If you step in my hood
It's understood
It's open season
I don't need a faith that's blind, Where death and hate bring me peace of mind, With views that are stuck deep in the seventh century, So much sand in your eyes to blind to see, The venom that you leaders preach, Is the path to your own destruction, Your own demise, You might say that I don't understand but your disgust for me is what I realize, Surprise! Your homicidal ways has got the whole world watching, Whole world scoping, So if you bring it to my home base, Best believe it, The season's open
I see you, Hell yeah I see you, Motherf*cker naw, I don't wanna be you, If you come to my place, I'll drop more than just some bass, Yo you'll get a taste of a, Sick motherf*cker from the Dirty, I ain't worrying not a f*cking bit, I'm telescoping like Hubble, Yo you in trouble, Yo on the double, I'm wild with mine, Bring that style with mine, F*ck with my family I'll end your line, Just the way it is, Just the way it be, Do you understand? No matter if you're woman or man, or child, My profile is crazy, That sh*t you do doesn't amaze me, I'm ready to blaze thee
I don't give a d*mn what god you claim, I've seen the innocent that you've slain, On my streets you're just fair game, Like a pig walk to your slaughter, The heat here is so much hotter, And my views won't teeter totter or fluctuate, Step to me you just met your fate, And I'll annihilate, With the skill of a Shogun assassin, Slicing and dicing precise with a passion, In any shape form or fashion, Bring it to my home, Welcome to the danger zone, Cause your attitude's the reason, The triggers keep squeezing, The hunt is on and it's open season
It's Open Season"
PS: Here's more from the band about why they wrote the song:
"Call me me an alarmist, but this is not about Iraq or the so called "War On Terrorism", this is about a worldwide movement that is compelled by spiritual teachings to convert us or kill us. It's not about Israel or America, if it was then why is this virus present in Algeria, Sudan, Somalia, Indonesia, the former Soviet Union, the Philippines, India, France, Spain and 1.5 million dead in Darfur. But I thought this whole thing was about Israel and America. Then why are Buddhist and Hindu temples set on fire and the followers of these peaceful religions attacked?
Right now, a civil war being waged within Islam. Take a look at what is taking place in Lebanon and in Iraq. You investigate it, it's all there for those who don't live with their heads in the sand to see.
We can argue about percentages of peaceful Muslims vs. non-peaceful Muslims, but that will get us no further than trying to determine how many Germans actually supported Hitler during the late 1930's. The threat is growing and understanding why Hitler wanted to destroy the Jewish people, did not stop it from happening. So how will understanding the leaders of Iran, who have publically called for the destruction of Isreal and the Jewish people, keep them from following through with what they believe they are compelled to do by God.
Why is it a news story for MONTHS when a Catholic Priest molests a child. NO ONE is afraid of offending Catholics by suggesting that the Catholic church was coordinating an effort to protect these morally deviant Priest. But God forbid we discuss the fact that NOT ALL Muslims are terrorists, but that ALMOST ALL terrorists ARE Muslim. Under Sharia law (look it up), women are stoned to death for being in a relationship with a Christian or for leaving the Islamic faith. If a woman is raped, under Sharia law she has to produce have FOUR witnesses to the rape that will testify on her behalf or no charges can be made. Under Sharia law, homosexuals are stoned to death. Say it out LOUD! Under Sharia law, HOMOSEXUALS ARE STONED TO DEATH! Gotta love that religion of tolerance and peace!
This video is NOT attacking Islam. This video is NOT lumping all followers of Islam in with the terrorists. No one in the Stuck Mojo organization is a racist or a bigot, but I refuse to ignore these events so as to keep from offending anyone."
"(O)n sober reflection, things in fact are hardly lost. There has been no repeat of 9/11. The U.S. military has killed thousands of jihadists. The Taliban and Saddam are gone. There are still democratic governments in Afghanistan and Iraq struggling to make it, the first in the history of the region. Our troops in the field have high morale and believe they can secure Iraq. And the world, especially in Europe, has become vigilant against Islamic fundamentalism.
We are in much better shape that during any of the crises that Churchill, Roosevelt, or Truman all weathered. And while 50 dead every month since 9/11 is a high toll in this war against jihadism, it does not compare to the 8,000 plus killed from December 1941 to August 1945, a war that similarly started out with a surprise, though less lethal attack on the United states." -- Victor Davis Hanson
Here's the first Duncan Hunter ad which he's running in South Carolina. It's about "fair trade," which, along with national security and illegal immigration is one of Hunter's three big issues, but is that really the issue to start a campaign on?
On the upside, it does differentiate Hunter from the other '08 contenders and to be certain, this message will resonate with a certain group of conservatives out there. But, most conservatives are free traders and I'm not sure that this message is going to necessarily appeal to them. Personally, I think Hunter would have been better off doing a commercial bragging about his role in getting the wall through the House. That would have also set him apart from a lot of the other contenders and there would have been a larger, more receptive audience for what he had to say.
40) "I just the other day got, an internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday and I just got it yesterday. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the internet commercially...They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the internet. And again, the internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material." -- Senator Ted Stevens explains how the internet works.
39) "I wouldn't want to be a Senator or Congressman. I'm able to influence politics much more effectively doing what I do. Now I can shape the national political debate. The only way I could exert mor
