…and his retinue are apparently encountering some degree of resistance, at long last.

British environmental analyst Christopher Monckton says Al Gore’s latest attack on global warming skeptics shows the former vice president and other climate alarmists are “panicking.”

And well they should be.

On Sunday, CBS News correspondent Leslie Stahl asked Al Gore on the television show 60 Minutes what he thinks of people like Vice President Dick Cheney who doubt that global warming is caused by human activity.

“I think that those people are in such a tiny, tiny minority now with their point of view, they’re almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, and those who believe the earth is flat,” replied Gore. “That demeans them a little bit, but it’s not that far off.”

However, Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy advisor for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during the 1980s, says the former vice president can enjoy his “flat earth fantasies” for a few months, but in the end, the world will be laughing at him.

“The alarmists are alarmed, the panic mongers are panicking, the scare mongers are scared; the Gores are gored. Why? Because global warming stopped ten years ago; it hasn’t got warmer since 1998,” he points out. “And in fact in the last seven years, there has been a downturn in global temperatures equivalent on average to about [or] very close to one degree Fahrenheit per decade. We’re actually in a period … of global cooling.”

Hmmm…

Mr. Monckton, my hat is off to you!

Monckton contends Gore is now “panicking” because he has staked his reputation as a former American VP on “telling the world that we’re all doomed unless we shut down 90 percent of the Western economies.” He also contends that Gore is the largest “global-warming profiteer.”

It’s pitiful that Algore, a typical modern Democrat, is willing to screw the rest of us, using a typical liberal agenda, in order to make megabucks for himself. Nancy Pelosi, another leftist hypocrite, is probably foaming at the mouth in anger that she didn’t think of this racket first.

Gore’s group The Alliance for Climate Protection is currently launching a new $300 million ad campaign that demands reforms in environmental law to help reduce the supposed “climate crisis.” But Monckton points out that in the U.K., Gore is not allowed to speak in public about his “green investment company” because to do so would violate racketeering laws by “peddling a false prospectus.” He says that fact came about after a British high court found Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, riddled with errors.

Emphasis mine, and speaking of emphasis, bravo, U.K.!

It’s good to see that someone, somewhere, has exposed Algore for the opportunitic fraud he really is. Now let’s see some prosecution for same: After all, an individual who commits fraud on a bank or other business to the tune of a few hundred bucks gets a felony sentence. Gore has swindled the world at large for millions, yet he’s still walking around free.

What’s wrong with this picture?

…of New York Governor Eliot SPITzer’s liberal do as I say, not as I do moment. Or, I should say, many do as I say, not as I do moments.

ALBANY, N.Y. - Gov. Eliot Spitzer has decided to resign, completing a stunning fall from power after he was nationally disgraced by links to a high-priced prostitution ring, a top state official said Wednesday.

I posted about one or two of the witch hunts in which he engaged as the Empire State’s attorney general a couple or so years back, all in the name of furthering his political career at the expense of any company or individual he could find to prosecute, guilty or not. His most high profile targets were Wall Street based, though he also added to his resume by crusading against organized prostitution.

The recurring theme of his campaigns has been ethics “enforcement”, and, well…

The scandal erupted Monday when allegations surfaced that Spitzer, a 48-year-old married man with three teenage daughters, spent thousands of dollars on a call girl named Kristen at a swanky Washington hotel on the night before Valentine’s Day.

Client 9 apologizes:

“I have acted in a way that violates my obligations to my family and violates my — or any — sense of right and wrong,” the governor said at a news conference with his wife, Silda, at his side. “I apologize to the public, whom I promised better.”

Yes, you have, Eliot, you weasel. Now be a good chap and see if you can arrange pardons for all those you successfully prosecuted for the same thing and volunteer to do all their time for them.

Calls for his resignation came immediately. Republicans began talking impeachment if he didn’t step aside. Meanwhile, Spitzer stayed holed up in his Manhattan apartment, where he was reportedly weighing his options, including waiting to use resignation as a bargaining chip with federal prosecutors to avoid indictment.

Laying low, huh? Good luck with that! I hope the federal prosecutors indict you to hell and back, your inevitable resignation notwithstanding. Leaving office isn’t an option for you, resignation is simply a less messy way of arriving at that destination than having to be kicked out.

Since your wife’s not seeking a political career and yours is at its end, Eliot, what do the future prospects of your marriage look like? I only ask this because your wife’s name isn’t Hillary. What have your three daughters had to say about all this, knowing that their father not only cheats on their mother (paying tens of thousands of dollars to prostitutes, no less!), but is also a hypocrite of the first order?

Of course, Eliot has long been a hemhorroid on the political landscape, anyway. His anti-family policies and his aborted attempt to issue driver’s licenses to criminal aliens were in anything but the best interests of his constituency.

So, as they say, the riddance will be good.

Bye bye, you schmuck!

…to return to the United States, I wasn’t kidding.

You simply can’t trust any politicians in that G-d forsaken liberal hell hole — just before leaving San Francisco, for example, I voted for Gavin Newsome for mayor. Why? Because he was the most conservative and businesslike of all the candidates, despite being the usual liberal. And what was his first big move? To personally and massively conduct same sex marriages!

Previously, I had voted for Arnold Schwartzennegger to replace lying left winger Gray Davis as governor during the recall election. Under Arnold, the state’s government has now produced this.

The holidays are a busy time, so there’s a pretty good chance that you weren’t aware of a new California state bill which was passed a few months back and took effect last month. Better sit down for this one, it’s a doozy! On October 12th Govern-ator Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law California Senate Bill 777. That bill eliminates Education Code 212, which defines “sex” as “the biological condition or quality of being a male or female human being.”

In effect the bill redefines the term “gender” for all schoolchildren by adding Educational Code 210.7, which will read: “‘Gender’ means sex, and includes a person’s gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether of not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.” In other words, it is a redefinition of gender that says you are whatever you choose to be regardless of your anatomical make-up. It tells kids that just because you are born a little girl or little boy, that doesn’t mean you are.

Unbelievable! Well, perhaps not for California. The word “tolerance” out there means forcing liberal agendas down peoples’ throats, and doing so by writing such efforts into law.

The ridiculous law has effectively banned use of the terms “mom” and “dad” from California schools. The reason? Using those terms promotes a discriminatory bias against alternative lifestyle parents. I never thought I’d live to see the day when “mommy” and “daddy” would be considered bad words. All kinds of vulgarity and foul language are just fine in these modern, progressive times - but you better not say “mom” and “dad!” That’s wrong! What country am I living in anyway?

It’s important to understand that this stuff will be taught to all children in the public school system beginning in kindergarten! Indoctrinating five and six year-olds to favor sodomy as a healthy and normal lifestyle choice has rankled some parents to say the least. Various Christian grassroots organizations have now joined together in calling for an “exodus” from the California public school system. The coalition includes Eagle Forum, the Campaign for Children and Families, and Exodus Mandate, as well as ten others.

Here is where we see why liberals oppose school vouchers; Such a program would enable children to escape the clutches of a public school system that seeks to indoctrinate them into beliefs that run contrary to those embraced by mainstream American society since our nation’s beginnings.

Because several million California families can’t afford to send their children to private schools (and is there enough room in said institutions to handle all the children of right thinking families?) or have them home-schooled (and just imagine how difficult it would be to find enough home-school teachers to accommodate the numbers involved!), the kids are literally trapped in this situation that will have a negative effect on their futures and those of California society, such as it is.

The California school system has been effectively turned into a wingnut farm.

I applaud the efforts of the various organizations that support an exodus from California schools and wish them luck, but also have to wonder what, exactly, they can accomplish as a bottom line. It seems to me that the only realistic alternative, since the population of the state is mostly liberal-voting, would be for concerned parents with average household incomes to move their families out of California altogether.

Alternative lifestyle groups claim that all they want is the end of discriminatory bias. Officials with the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center already have outlined what they believe to be nondiscriminatory treatment in the school system. “If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity … you should be allowed to do so,” the groups advise. “Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible.”

Further, the groups advise, “If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you.” Get it? Take your choice. Who do you feel like being today - Max or Maxine? The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students. Yeah, keep those parents out of this by all means. It takes a village, not parents.

California is a supremely beautiful state, but what festers among its population and political body far outweighs any reason I, as a right thinker, would have for living there again.

Attorneys are an integral part of our Constitutional legal system. That is, they are as necessary under our form of government as are litter boxes to cat owners, composters to serious gardeners, carpet stain removers to hotel housekeeping departments or grease traps to restaurant kitchens.

There are a lot of honest, hard-working lawyers out there, but there seem to be an equal or greater number who are parasites that prey on any situation they can in as despicable, sleazy and dishonorable a fashion as they need to in order to milk the most money possible out of said situations.

These latter include liberal trial lawyers whose victimization of defendants via manipulation of the legal system has created a litigious atmosphere (and cottage industry) in this country that has businesses and individuals investing large sums of money and man hours in protecting themselves from frivolous lawsuits. One biproduct of this is a lot more work for lawyers who enjoy large retainers on the defensive side of the equation.

One thing I don’t miss, spending a paucity of time nowadays in front of the television, is all those commercials you see for law firms that specialize in sueing companies. You know, “if you’ve ever worked for a company that employed (name the chemical or compound) in their manufacturing process, you may be entitled to a significant cash award. Call Joe Schmoe Law Associates at 1-800… Now!”, or that tele-ambulance chaser’s ad a few years back that ended with an obvious welfare case bragging that “Ah got five thousand!”

These unscrupulous toilet cakes have corrupted our courts, severely damaging and making a mockery of our legal system for the sole motive of making money for themselves. Now don’t get me wrong, greed is good in its own arena, but these people are “officers of the court”. They are licensed to practice law, not to twist it and bend it according to their financial desires, nor to make victims of law abiding individuals, hospitals or business firms for the purpose of personal gain.

Also of the same low degree are attorneys found at such political institutions as CAIR and the ACLU. The former use the threat of lawsuits whose legal costs alone would bankrupt the average citizen as a way of stifling freedom of speech, the latter use lawsuits against all levels of government in order to stifle religious expression.

I won’t even go into the prophalactics who make careers of specialization in defending sexual predators, celebrity murderers, terrorists or drug traffickers.

But the sleaze doesn’t end at private sector level. It also seeps into the courts themselves, in the form of activist judges who legislate from the bench by way of decisions that reflect their own political agendas rather than the letter of the Constitution or even the will of The People. Remember, also, that these judges are lawyers, and if the “loser” in one of those politically motivated decisions needs to appeal to a higher court, such as SCOTUS, one or more lawyers will make a lot of money representing him/her/them on the appeal.

Moving right along, we go upstairs to the attorneys who become politicians and find their respective ways into lawmaking capacities.

The Senate. State or U.S., take your pick.

Think about that — lawyers making the laws.

Hmmmmm……

While it makes sense (musicians make music, engineers engineer, artists create art, writers write, designers design, etc)… I mean, pornographers create pornography, so why shouldn’t lawyers be allowed to create laws?…

Sidebar, as they call a conference at the bench between opposing lawyers and a judge: I am reminded of the term nepotism, only changed to replace family members with colleagues.

Back from sidebar: The more laws these lawyers in elected office enact and the more technically complicated they make them, the more work they generate for fellow lawyers and for themselves as well, in the event that they lose an election and have to go back into private practice.

We have are a society ruled not by government, per se, but by lawyers.

With that thought in mind, I need a good, stiff drink….

…in liberals’ war on Christianity,

(CNSNews.com) - With Dec. 25 only days away, a central image in the celebration of Christmas — the manger scene featuring replicas of Joseph, Mary and the baby Jesus — has become the focus of attacks by vandals and leaders of “the secular Left,” Christian groups charged on Wednesday.

Okay, so how far do some of these G-dless folks take this? What’s all the hubbub about? Well, here’s one example:

While the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights was erecting a nativity scene in New York City’s Central Park, the group issued a news release condemning three dozen instances in which manger scenes were vandalized or stolen from Antioch, Calif., to Leesburg, Va., this Christmas season.

“In perhaps the sickest incident, a public school coach in Marietta, Ga., drove students around the area in his pickup truck, instructing them to thrash Christmas displays after dark,” League said.

During their Dec. 8 vandalism spree, 46-year-old John Hayes and several middle school students damaged a number of Christmas displays, let the air out of inflatable figures and rearranged plastic reindeer into X-rated sexual positions.

According to the WGCL TV, Hayes has been charged with trespassing, contributing to the delinquency of minors and reckless conduct.

(above emphasis mine)

So this Hayes fellow is one of those modern, “progressive” school faculty members to whom parents entrust their children and the minds of said children for several hours a day, five days a week. Now isn’t that special…

In addition to physical attacks, nativity scenes are “part of a larger war that the secular Left is waging on all things Christian,” said Gary McCaleb, senior counsel with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) - which describes itself as “a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation” - in a news release.

During the past week, ADF attorneys have offered to defend free of charge two cities in Wisconsin that faced legal action from the secularist Freedom from Religion Foundation (FRF) if those governments did not remove nativity scenes from their public holiday displays.

Thank G-d that there are some people like those at the Alliance Defense Fund out there to counter satanic wingnuts like FRF.

Face it, these self appointed grinches fall into two and two categories only:

1) Socialists with communistic leanings who understand that as long as the majority among the masses are united by common religious beliefs, these beliefs will stand between the people and total government control of hearts and minds, and

2) Spiritually empty pond scum who feel it is their duty to force their atheism on the rest of us. The mutts described in “1)” do all they can to encourage these soulless losers to do whatever it takes to dumb down Christian religious expression, and Christmas is the most accessable target because being the holiest, it invokes the most outright public symbolism of any Christian holiday.

The claim by liberals (liberals, atheists, same thing) that Nativity scenes on public property constitute the ironclad merging of church and state is pure fallacy, another piece of lying propaganda by a segment of our society that has been eroding the core values of our nation, principally through left leaning courts and portside politicians, for the last three decades, increasingly gaining momentum along the way.

The linked article, in its entirety, can be read here.

…I was kind of tied up yesterday and so, since key aspects of the below described affair have been sources of outrage to me, both as an advocate of justice and an American, since two dedicated Border Patrol agents were railroaded into prison by a scumbag in Federal Prosecutor’s clothing.

The allegasd {Seth’s note: Obvious misprint, mispelling or typo of “alleged” — disgraceful editing} Mexican drug smuggler shot by Border Patrol agents as he tried to dodge arrest in 2005 will appear in federal court in El Paso, Texas, on Friday afternoon.

Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, 27, was arrested Thursday on a drug smuggling offense at a U.S. port of entry. A federal grand jury handed down a sealed indictment on Oct. 17.

Aldrete was granted immunity in 2005 in exchange for testifying against ex-border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.

The two Border Patrol agents were sentenced to 11 and 12 years, respectively, for shooting Aldrete as he tried to sneak about million dollars’ worth of marijuana into the country. He was shot in the buttocks while running toward the Mexican border.

Right, the mutt was granted immunity by a legal representative of the United States Government, whom, unless he was on the payroll of a Mexican drug cartel, profoundly stupid or peaking on pure L.S.D. (actually, to be fair, I believe Sutton was kissing up to The Boss, who is paradoxically pro-homeland security and pro-an open border with Mexico at the same time), knew beyond any shadow of a doubt that he was calling to the witness stand a career criminal whose resume included felonies in at least two countries, including the U.S., to testify against and decimate the careers and futures of these two agents, Ramos and Compean, destroying their families at the same time.

I seem to recall, however, that while the testimony of felons (other than those willing to convict themselves — often with immunity to prosecution though more often a reduced sentence) as an incentive to testify against their own organizations or comrades is considered admissible, the same does not apply to those of questionable background in other circumstances.

I mean, giving official creedence to a drug smuggler who is testifying against a couple of people whose job is to catch and arrest them is beyond the absurd.

Aldrete now faces two counts of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, one count of conspiracy to import a controlled substance and one count of conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with intent to distribute.

The alleged offenses happened between June 1, 2005 and Nov. 30, 2005, which is when the government gave Aldrete a pass to enter and exit the country unsupervised, primarily to get medical treatment for his bullet wound.

Aldrete and his co-defendant, Cipriano Ortiz Hernandez, conspired to import and distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana on Sept. 24, 2005, and again on Oct. 22 and 23 that same year, according to the charges. (The second alleged offense happened after Aldrete was granted immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony against the agents.)

I don’t know how anybody else feels about this (though I have a good idea where the sane are concerned), but this whole Aldrete immunity thing, to my way of thinking, makes the DOJ look pretty foolish. They grant immunity to a Mexican drug trafficker in exchange for his testimony crucifying American law enforcement agents and he uses the immunity as an opportunity to smuggle more drugs.

Sutton also is prosecuting the Aldrete case. He has been blasted by advocates of the border agents for not bringing charges against Aldrete sooner.

“I have repeatedly said that if we obtained sufficient competent and admissible evidence against Aldrete, we could prosecute him,” Sutton said in a statement. “Members of my office have worked closely with agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration for many months to investigate Aldrete’s alleged involvement in drug trafficking.”

At a Senate hearing this summer on the border agents case, Sutton was non-committal in answering questions about the October drug offense by Aldrete. Some senators pressed Sutton to explain why Aldrete was allowed to enter and leave the country in the run-up to the border agents’ trial.

Advocates of the border agents also have complained that the Aldrete’s alleged October drug smuggling did not come up at the trial of Ramos and Compean.

So Sutton is reneging on his deal with Aldrete, if not in a letter-of-the-law manner, in a “sorry, pal, but you’re cooked… My career is more important than honoring any agreements I make with criminals.”

What a sleazeball this guy is! He sells out both sides in order to further his own career. This is as contemptible an excuse for a…

At any rate, the entire article is here.

There has been no excuse for GWB not pardoning Ramos and Compean without reservation.

Truth to tell and actually a repetition of what I expressed among my earlier posts on this situation, I actually believe that a mere pardon wouldn’t be anywhere near enough.

1. The two agents should be pardoned and reinstated, with all accumulated and earned seniority, to their jobs, and receive all retroactive pay.

2. They should be compensated by the gov’t for all their legal fees and,

3. They and their families should be restored, via full taxpayer expense, to the exact same situation (homeowners with X mortgage debts, etc) that they were in prior to the screwing they received from their own government, the one they served.

What these two guys are being screwed for, coming right down to it, is thinking on their feet.

When a bunch of bureaucrats who’ve never been in danger are empowered to make the rules for those who work in danger, this is what we get.

Fun example: Over 30 years ago, in the early stages of my security career, I worked undercover on the wharves in New Orleans (not that it’s applicable, but my CW was a Colt Python). This was not the same kind of post as the lobby of an office building or whatever, it was a perpetually violent situation. Whenever the job got exciting, both the New Orleans Harbor Police and U.S. Customs were also involved.

As a UC, I held supervisory authority over our uniforms on the wharves, and as such had to deal with management contact.

At one such meeting, I was actually told by a company founder/owner, concerned about liability, that the new policy was that should anyone pull a weapon on me, I should “shoot it out of his hand”.

After I was done laughing, I said, “I have a better idea. How ’bout if I call time out, call you and have you come down and shoot the gun out of the guy’s hand!?”

My point here is that when you hire and train people to protect you, you need to allow them to handle situations as they see fit…you know, think for themselves, as they’re there and you’re not, and you have to back them up.

If I were a U.S. Border Patrol agent, knowing that the Bush Administration condones prosecuting agents for doing their jobs, I would quit. There are too many other ways to serve our country without being punished for doing what we were told we were hired for.

this is very definitely the way to go — as a state project, not a federal affair.

When Louis Brandeis praised the 50 states as “laboratories of democracy,” he didn’t claim that every policy experiment would work. So we hope the eyes of America will turn to Wisconsin, and the effort by Madison Democrats to make that “progressive” state a Petri dish for government-run health care.

This exercise is especially instructive, because it reveals where the “single-payer,” universal coverage folks end up. Democrats who run the Wisconsin Senate have dropped the Washington pretense of incremental health-care reform and moved directly to passing a plan to insure every resident under the age of 65 in the state. And, wow, is “free” health care expensive. The plan would cost an estimated $15.2 billion, or $3 billion more than the state currently collects in all income, sales and corporate income taxes. It represents an average of $510 a month in higher taxes for every Wisconsin worker.

Employees and businesses would pay for the plan by sharing the cost of a new 14.5% employment tax on wages. Wisconsin businesses would have to compete with out-of-state businesses and foreign rivals while shouldering a 29.8% combined federal-state payroll tax, nearly double the 15.3% payroll tax paid by non-Wisconsin firms for Social Security and Medicare combined.

Talk about ruthless mathematics…

Given the trial and error (hit or miss?) process that seems to accompany the regular dose of Murphy’s Law whenever government descends and the inevitable resulting demand for additional funding via taxes collected from We, the People, I am reminded for some reason of dominoes.

In countries whose citizens “benefit” from socialized medicine, taxes are well beyond oppressive by American standards — and all too much of that is due to the cost of their government administrated health care.

By the time a healthy taxpayer is done being taxed, he/she will have been charged more of his/her hard earned pay by the government than it might have cost for a private HMO — or because he/she is in satisfactory or better physical condition, been, quite simply, ripped off: Perhaps he/she hasn’t felt the need for medical coverage just yet. But he/she must be protected whether he/she likes it or not.

Hmmm…that sounds awfully like a personal choice that belongs exclusively to said taxpayer, not unlike to wear or not to wear a motorcycle helmet, strap on a seat belt, order a blood-rare burger, etc, etc…

But it doesn’t strike me as anything the framers of the U.S. Constitution would have endorsed.

But…back to the issue at hand –

What we have here is a state experimenting with socialized medicine. While I brook none of that bullshit on a federal level, I am a fervent believer in states’ rights; If a collection of idiots living within the confines of their own political subdivision exercise their voting rights to elect leaders of the socialist persuasion, so be it. Look at California.

For that matter, look at what the left is trying to do in Wisconsin (damn, I’d love to deliver a “cheesy” pun, but who wants to kick a state when it be about to be “down”?).

Moving right along,

There’s absolutely no mystery why our greatest complaints are in the arena of government-delivered services and the fewest in market-delivered services. In the market, there are the ruthless forces of profit, loss and bankruptcy that make producers accountable to us. In the arena of government-delivered services, there’s no such accountability. For example, government schools can go for decades delivering low-quality services, and what’s the result? The people who manage it earn higher pay. It’s nearly impossible to fire the incompetents. And, taxpayers, who support the service, are given higher tax bills.

Oh — kay!

Before we buy into single-payer health care systems like Canada’s and the United Kingdom’s, we might want to do a bit of research. The Vancouver, British Columbia-based Fraser Institute annually publishes “Waiting Your Turn.” Its 2006 edition gives waiting times, by treatments, from a person’s referral by a general practitioner to treatment by a specialist. The shortest waiting time was for oncology (4.9 weeks). The longest waiting time was for orthopedic surgery (40.3 weeks), followed by plastic surgery (35.4 weeks) and neurosurgery (31.7 weeks).
As reported in the June 28 National Center for Policy Analysis’ “Daily Policy Digest,” Britain’s Department of Health recently acknowledged that one in eight patients waits more than a year for surgery. France’s failed health care system resulted in the deaths of 13,000 people, mostly of dehydration, during the heat spell of 2003. Hospitals stopped answering the phones, and ambulance attendants told people to fend for themselves.

So now, we have problems on both the buy side and the sell side of government run healthcare.

Bummer.

I don’t think most Americans would like more socialized medicine in our country. By the way, I have absolutely no problem with people wanting socialism. My problem is when they want to drag me into it.

That has got to be the single most perfect definition of belief in the rights of Americans that I’ve ever seen. What happens to we believers in the Constitution once that great document has been violated and pissed upon by our very Congress?

The long and the short of it should be that we can thank our lucky stars that this entire exercise is as it should be, a single state event. The only problems I can envision there are the inevitably tragic probable results for Wisconsin taxpayers and what they would invite: FAILURE.

Failure attracts today’s liberal-ruled Democrats — while socialism has long since proven itself a blatant mistake, these so-called intellectual elites, followers of eco-socio-economic theories based solely on Utopian fantasies, want to repeat this same failure.

On the other hand, ownership of immense bureaucracies also attracts the Democrats, and the number of bureaucracies that would emanate from a parasitic healthcare core would constitute tax money negligently flushed down the commode of liberalism. So what’s new?

…or wait ’til later?

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Thursday blamed the Republican minority for sinking congressional approval ratings, calling recent poll results “a referendum on Republican obstructionism.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) blamed President Bush.

Schumer told reporters that Republicans - who earlier this week blocked a Democratic amendment that would have mandated a troop withdrawal from Iraq, and who in June blocked a comprehensive immigration reform bill - are frustrating Americans who are hungry for change.

That is hilarious!

From the time George W. Bush took his first oath of office as President of these here United States, the Democrats have aggressively obstructed his every agenda, with the notable exception of the amnesty bill a couple of weeks ago, a shared interest of the White House and the Democrats. Even now, they’re in hot pursuit of his nominee for Surgeon General, fighting any chance of confirmation tooth and nail — the Surgeon General for G-d’s sake, an almost entirely ceremonial position!

And all this purely in the name of partisan politics, screw the interests, will and even the safety of the American people.

Since winning the Congressional majority, they’ve thrown almost every iota of effort into continuing to attack Bush and the Republican Party, seeking subpoenas and indictments at every turn for invented transgressions, and continuously hammering away at their cut-n-run ambitions for Iraq. Otherwise, they have made little effort to do the job they are payed to do, that of governing the nation.

Now that their chickens have come home to roost in the form of performance poll results that border on a no-confidence vote, they have the chutzpah to whine that the Republicans (and of course Bush, for whom they always save some blame) are “obstructing” them. It’s all the GOP’s (and Bush’s) fault!

They cite two cases:

The Republicans’ steadfast refusal to support the Democrats’ Iraq surrender agenda and the Republicans’ steadfast refusal to grant amnesty to twenty million criminals who are trespassing in our country.

“The American people are demanding change,” Schumer said. “The one thing standing in the way is the Republicans in the Senate.”

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Idiot!

I can’t caution enough against the successful propagandizing power of the liberal mainstream media, which never stops working to misinform the public on every issue that can be politicized to make George Bush the Snidely Whiplash of global politics.

Now the Democrat controlled Congress, which is running on fumes in the perceptions of American voters, is also fair game, because they’re not browbeating hard enough to convince their Republican colleagues to support the Iraq Cut and Run agenda.

Here’s some hydro-Couric acid courtesy of Newsbusters, for example.

In my opinion, the most WTF!!!?-earning line in the entire article is,

As Couric pointed out how “nearly three out of four Americans say the troop surge is not working, that it’s having no impact, or actually making matters worse,”

…citing “a CBS/NYT opinion poll”.

The operative question here is, of course, how the hell do three out of four Americans know anything about what the troop surge is doing?

The answer is they don’t, but the media is feeding them the usual liberal political disinformation which, for three out of four Americans, is probably the only source of news in town. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NPR, NYT, etc, etc…, and they think they know. And of course, what they think they know but don’t forms their opinions.

It really sucks big green donkey… well, suffice it to say that it is somewhat frustrating when one realizes that the lion’s share of U.S. public opinion is compiled via the process of lying to the people and then polling them based on the same lies. Garbage in, garbage out.

There’s a disturbance in the Force First Amendment. It has been created by unscrupulous political partisans taking fraudulent advantage of a perfectly wonderful Constitutional right in an effort to engender opinions among the American public without giving us all the facts. This is not reporting, it is marketing.

In many ways, it’s like news being replaced by spam.

For a breath of fresh air, however, regarding the troop surge, Kimberly Kagan weighed in on the subject in a WSJ Opinion Journal piece back on 11 July, which I had been saving to spring when I thought we’d heard enough defeatist MSM/ Congressional Democrat mallarkey re “the surge”.

In Washington perception is often mistaken for reality. And as Congress prepares for a fresh debate on Iraq, the perception many members have is that the new strategy has already failed.

This isn’t an accurate reflection of what is happening on the ground, as I saw during my visit to Iraq in May. Reports from the field show that remarkable progress is being made. Violence in Baghdad and Anbar Province is down dramatically, grassroots political movements have begun in the Sunni Arab community, and American and Iraqi forces are clearing al Qaeda fighters and Shiite militias out of long-established bases around the country.

This is remarkable because the military operation that is making these changes possible only began in full strength on June 15. To say that the surge is failing is absurd. Instead Congress should be asking this question: Can the current progress continue?

Read the entire article here.

…tedious in their efforts to “interest” society in their menu of micromanagement.

Of whom do I speak?

The portside media, researchers who are probably compensated, in large part, by grants financed by our tax dollars and assorted blank-minded, modern flower children who need a cause, any cause will do as long as it isn’t in any way conservative.

The people who feel it is their mandate from On-High to tell the rest of us what we can and can’t eat, the more enterprising among whom will probably soon be selling Trans-fat Credits.

The usual suspects, liberals from the Land Of The Lotus Eaters (The Odyssey) whose ambitions include snatching meat from the jaws of human carnivores and spooning yogurt into our mouths in its place.

The folks who now deem attending a good, old fashioned backyard barbecue a dangerous risk.

While my own inclination is to tell such critters to mind their own business, that what I choose to eat is my affair, I’ve had liberals tell me that the reason these people are so aggressive about their beliefs is that they are concerned that “unhealthy eaters” will one day cost taxpayers a lot of money on health care.

“Since when,” goes my stock reply, “did liberals give a flying f–k about spending the taxpayers’ money on social services related issues? You guys even endorse spending our money on illegal aliens!”

The truth is, American liberals are quite sure, and with good reason, that their efforts to trump our present form of government with socialism are succeeding. Thinking liberals are actually looking past their initial political victories at the practicalities to follow: Their social programs will cost the U.S. taxpayer dearly, and they need to find ways to cut costs, one being to put the proletariat on a diet of tofu and rice, unsweetened green tea and spring water to keep them healthy.

This program would never work for me, I was born by Occident and could never Orient myself to such a diet.

Of course, during an exchange of ideas with the flower kids who have long enjoyed desirable sustenance therein, I understand: There are benefits to be had from consuming a lot of tofu.

Indeed.

I recall an afternoon about three years ago, at an IHOP in rural Illinois, when the waitress informed me that they could not, by law, serve me a rare cheeseburger. I always order/cook my steaks and burgers rare (except prime rib, which I do medium), and requested a visit from the manager. After some debate, I explained, “It’s not how long you cook something that kills bacteria, it’s how hot you cook it.” He finally agreed on condition that “no matter what happens”, I would tell nobody that I’d been served a rare burger under his auspices. He was from India, somewhat recently to judge by his accent, and if he ever returns to the old country he’ll be a superb candidate for Bangalorian telephone Tech Support. He’d undoubtedly make a great Fred, or a passable Bill (Beel?). I only mention this because our conversation would have made an outstanding comedy skit based largely on his accent.

Relax, there’s no bigotry here, just a paucity of political correctness. I grew up in a Jewish family wherein one of our favorite holiday dinner table (or Passover seder) customs was sharing the most irreverant-but-funny Jewish jokes we’d run across. Even my grandmother, who played a puritanical role in the family, shared jokes gleefully, and hers were some of the most risque, go figure. The way I grew up, PC has never stood a chance with me and never will.

Back on track, these “healthy choice” advocates seem to assume that everybody will leap onto a government program at the first sign of illness. No one, they presume, has an HMO as back-up or sufficient wealth to obtain timely and quality medical care rather than substandard and often demeaning, government bureaucracy administered Socialized Medicine offerings.

Wrong! At least as long as the government doesn’t make it legally mandatory that all citizens participate in the program (Senior Ministers Pelosovitch and Reidakov would have no trouble with that, nor would any other mega-wealthy, double standard liberal)…

Right, while you and I are comparing tofu and rice recipes, Pelosi and Murtha would be sitting down to a chateaubriand dinner. Perhaps a platter of canard a’la orange, which the public, or non elite, can’t be allowed because of the fat content in a duck. Quack!

Michael Moore will be doing humongous pig on a spit for one.

Rosie O’Donnell will be chowing down on camel tripe and the fatty parts of a whole uncooked lamb using her bare and greasy hands, clamoring for ten pounds of pork chops as liquified provender drips down the front of her blouse.

For the rest of us, well, please pass the rice….