Trick or Treat?

Apparently treat.

A Halloween Message

The poster boy for the pro-life movement has a message for you. So does milk boy.

I tend to use Firefox, but it has it's limitations. You will probably need something like internet explorerer to view the links. Incidentally, can you people tell me whether or not you can see my profile and links to the very top right of the page, and if not, what browser you are viewing with. Thanks. Whenever I open up IE, my profile and blogroll appears beneath the last post on the page

Stay safe this Halloween. Oh...and beware of the moonbats, out there! .

Gizoogled for the Weekend

I think the recent withdrawal of Harriet Miers nomination has really unhinged Hugh Hewitt, who bravely led the anti-anti-Miers charge to the (em)bitter(ed)-sweet end. I mean, just take a look at his latest post.

Or maybe, it's me. All of a sudden, none of my blogging buddies are recognizable to me:

A Soldier's Perspective

4 Rows Back in the Bleacher Seats

Patriotic Mom

Just a Woman

PebblePie

Freedom Eden

Mike's America

Jaymeister

That's just a small sampling. Even my own blog no longer looks right to me. If you wish to leave a comment, I suggest you do so only after running it through my new anti-spam filter. Or find your own.

Oh, and those 8 sample buddies I listed? Well, guess what? You've all been tagged (or "memed", but I don't even know what that word means). No specified number of blogs you need to tag back. Just choose however many you wish to annoy.


So git ta werk, suckas! And gots uh nice weekend! slap mah fro!

Quag-Miered No More?

Well, looks like the Right-Wing Noise Machine got their wish. All I can say is I'm relieved, but also disgusted by the in-fighting, which I think, in some instances has been rather ugly, unfair, and character-assassinating (not all, just some); and I do think it has hurt the President at a time when he's already hurting. I think he'll recover and that those who were anti-Miers will support him now.

I am glad, though, that Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination. I don't think even her staunchest supporters were ever really pro-Miers; as Hugh Hewitt coins it, they were anti-anti-Miers.

I'm listening to Laura Ingraham as I type and I think she's been one of the worst in some of her criticism. Can't even see her own elitism on the end of her nose. I strongly disagree with her first criteria for nominating a judicial candidate. The President's record on judicial picks have been outstanding. And character assessment does count. It's served this President very well. You cannot always rely upon a "paper trail", to guarantee that who you pick will vote the way you expect him to vote.

Anyway, I'd type more, but I have to go to work.

I will say, I'm optimistic that the next nomination to replace Miers will be one the conservatives will be able to stand behind.


10/28/05 UPDATE: Why the Right was Wrong, by Hugh Hewitt in the NY Times.

10/29/05 UPDATE: A couple more thoughtful posts on Miers from a fellow Hewitt listener and southern Californian

And more over at Mike's America.

Anti-War is not Pro-Peace

Dennis Prager pointed out something I agreed with today: The anti-war crowd is not pro-peace. They are anti-victory, anti-Bush, anti-war. But don't tell me they are pro-peace. The idea that pulling our troops out now would bring peace and stability is a stupid, thoughtless notion. What has pacifism ever achieved? Victory in Iraq is what will bring peace and stability. And the anti-war movement threatens that victory. Do you think the insurgents today in Iraq, picking up any of the news headlines and reading the articles, feel like they will lose the propaganda war? Some days, I feel like the hearts and minds of the American people are being won over by the terrorists; based on poll numbers, they most certainly seem to be won over by MSM.

In regards to the "milestone" number of U.S. soldiers who have died in service to their country, CJ puts it all into perspective. And I'd like to paraphrase him on something else he had written, which I found eloquent: "Even one soldier's death is tragic because to that soldier's family, that one soldier was everything". 2000 of those deaths don't make me take a single one, lightly. But neither does it give me cause for hand-wringing over whether or not we are doing the right thing.

At the beginning of 2004, 500 deaths was a milestone. Then in July of 2004, the death toll of 1,000 Coalition soldiers were "celebrated"; and in September, a thousand U.S. soldiers and Pentagon civilians dead. They were holding anti-war vigils then as well.

I'd say today's news headlines and the anti-war noise-makers just add fuel to the insurgency, sending a message to our enemies to keep it up; what they cannot achieve on the battlefield, they will do through roadside bombs and civilian-targeting to win the hearts and minds of the American people; to sap our will and resolve for victory.

Update: Ex-Donkey makes an interesting observation.

10/29/05 UPDATE: Check out what Sister Toldjah has to report regarding why the NY Times continues to be stigmatized, an agenda-driven news rag.

Liberally Conservative on the Drug War

"Policies are judged by their consequences, but crusades are judged by how good they make the crusaders feel."
- Thomas Sowell


I was talking to a liberal friend of mine today, regarding a news article last sunday in the LA Times by a former Seattle police chief making the case for legalizing drugs (if you can no longer gain access to the article, leave a comment requesting it, and I'll post it in the comments section). This article was also mentioned by Dennis Prager at the KRLA Townhall Meeting which I attended last Sunday. (Dennis felt that it is ridiculous to say that we are losing the war on drugs, trying to draw a comparative analogy to those who say we are losing the war in Iraq).

My friend was surprised by my position, which leans toward siding with those who wish to legalize drugs- all drugs. This is because she felt the legalization of drugs is a liberal position (and perhaps, libertarian). I think it all depends upon one's perspective on why it should be legalized. For me, as a conservative, the issue is one of practicality and realistic solutions. Like liberal policies such as the war on poverty and the desire to socialize medicine, I see the War on Drugs as doing the same thing: achieving exactly the opposite end to the desired results. We mean well, but the common sense approach makes matters worse (Mona Charen's book is a good read on how liberal policies hurt those they claim to help).

For the record, I absolutely am disgusted and appalled by the drug culture. Everything about recreational drug use turns my stomach. The need to "get high" by "artificial" means, and all the baggage it comes with. This includes alcohol. I accept that many of my friends like their alcohol and drink "responsibly". But secretly, I hate it. I see ABSOLUTELY NOTHING remotely redeeming about alcohol. In so many ways, it poisons our society. Many of our woes seem to involve alcohol. But as the Prohibition Act should have taught us, to ban it does not solve the problem of alcohol use and abuse. If anything, it creates new problems for society, and makes life worse all around. As Norm Stamper points out in the LA Times article, the issue should be a health issue, not a criminal issue.

I have John Stossel's book, Give Me a Break, which is now out in paperback (I got it right away in hardback, because I've always liked his ABC Specials). In it, he has a chapter devoted to the drug war and why it's been such a disaster. We pour so much money into waging it, with little to show for it. If anyone is of a different opinion on this, I'm open to listening to it. Like I said, I hate recreational drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, but think our laws against drug use creates more problems than it solves.

By the way, for anyone who missed John Stossel's Special, "A War on Drugs, A War on Ourselves", you can listen to the audio here; or read the transcript.

I think both liberals and conservatives/libertarians can both be in agreement on this (ie, the legalization of all drugs), even if it might be for different reasons.

Correction: I just realized the mp3 link to the audio doesn't work. Try this one.

Do Americans Speak the Queen's English (or Should that be "King's English"?)?

Ok...I'm sitting here listening to Dennis Prager, who has on as his guest, Paul Johnson, talking about Mr. Johnson's book, "George Washington", and it came out that Paul Johnson claims American pronunciation is much closer to 17th century English accents, because Americans were more conservative in retaining their English accents than their British counterparts were. That it is in fact the British whose accents have evolved. Whaaa-?!? Anyone here a linguist?

Divine Retribution? Only When it's Convenient....

Apparently the October 8th 7.6 magnitude earthquake has the death toll in Pakistan rising at 54,000 deaths. That's about 54 times the amount the United States suffered at the hands of Katrina. Oddly enough, I don't sense the same level of outpouring of grief, as we felt for Katrina. Perhaps this is only natural, showing greater intensity of loss when it's happening in your own backyard. Perhaps it's the news coverage, or lack thereof. Yet, when last year's tsunami hit Southeast Asia, it seemed the whole world responded to that. I suppose the only way to know for certain how the world's opinion and support is, for the victims of this disaster, is to compare the level of financial support between the three recent natural tragedies.

Actually, what I'd like to talk about is how, right after Katrina hit us, some of the America-haters in the Middle East were likening Katrina to that of a divine terrorist sent by Allah to punish America. Well, if a natural disaster visited upon the States and killing around a thousand of our citizens is explained away as "God's will".....how do they rationalize the deaths of 54,000 in a predominantly Muslim nation? Apparently, that's not God's work, but the work of The United States and Israel (uh huh...just like the government blew up the levees in New Orleans).

There's unsubstantiated speculation about the fate of Osama bin Laden, who may or may not be hiding out in tribal territories that were affected by the earthquake. Terrorist organizations, like al Qaeda, are said to have suffered losses from this catastrophe.

Even though Osama is probably inconsequential as far as being in a leadership position to command, he is still deeply symbolic and important to us, and to our enemies. I've on occasion pondered what the capture or killing of Osama would mean to the world. Would it martyr him? Would it give him even more power and honor, should he die fighting against the imperial giant, America? After all, the ideology he followed would live on, and he'd be an even bigger, larger-than-life folk hero.

Well, if Osama died in this earthquake (which again, is mere groundless speculating), and it was provable, I think that would be the perfect way for him to have been snuffed out from this world. The Al Qaeda leader squashed out of existence by a natural catastrophe, would have to be weighed into consideration by those Muslims who believe that the Hand of God flexes its muscle over the world; they would have to come to terms with the possible fact that God took his divine hand and bitch-slapped the holy hell out of Osama and his terrorist thugs, straight from existence: Do not pass "go", do not collect 73 virgins.

Let God kill him, and have the Muslims sort it all out.

WARNING!

The following photo contains graphic images which may be highly disturbing to the moonbat mind. Sparks from the Anvil accepts no responsibility in how you might react to it. Please repeat after me: "I am not a victim." If you accept the terms of the above statement, then please proceed and click here.

Rather frightening, isn't it?


Hat tip: Flopping Aces.

Sonuva......gun!

Mark memed me. I used to like him. The only thing I hate worse than these are the e-mail forwards you're "required" to pass along to fill-in-the-blank-number of friends.

These are the meme rules:

1. Delve into your blog archive.
2. Find your 23rd post (or closest to).
3. Find the fifth sentence (or closest to).
4. Post the text of the sentence in your blog along with these instructions. Ponder it for meaning, subtext or hidden agendas.
5. Tag five people to do the same.

So here we go:

5th sentence from my 23rd post: "Argghhh! and Blackfive".

That was hard to pick out, as I discovered I use a lot of semicolons and colons.

Hmmmm. Meaning, subtext, hidden agenda? Military bloggers make kickass posts. That's all I can see.


5 people (as if I even have 5 regular readers here): (Y'all are gonna hate me the way I hate Mark, right now.)

1. Patriotic Mom
2. PebblePie
3. CJ
4. Michael Whitt (Since it looks like he hasn't seen Mark's tag, yet)
5. Just a Woman


Today, I got to attend the 870 KRLA Townhall Meeting, featuring Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, and Mike Gallagher (and Larry Marino, moderating). It was incredibly entertaining, and I might post more on it, time permitting. Next to Hewitt, the others were as mimes (Hewitt forced us bloggers to say that!). I've been horribly busy with work, of late; hence my light opining and blogging.

Many thanks to my friend, Kimberly, for inviting me to this event (having won in as a call-in listener for tickets).

Update 10/19/05: Big Lizards was there. And here's a Glendale article...a bit incomplete in its reporting.

Millions Turn Out To Sip from a Glass Half.....?

Today is a historic day! What am I talking about? The million man march? No. The Iraqi election, of course!

I was poking around to see how news outlets are reporting it. Al Jazeera seems to be stuck on a glass half empty as all their headlines are about the bad. The top one says: "Iraqis begin Charter Vote amid violence" The other list of headlines read as follows:

• Power failure hits Baghdad, Basra
• Iraq seals borders ahead of vote
• Sunni party office attacked in Iraq
• Sunni parties divided over referendum

The NY Times looked fair to me. Here's the online headline on the LA Times: . A Disputed Constitution is Put Before a Divided Iraq. Accurate? Maybe, but certainly looking at the glass half empty. Must be their sagging subscription numbers affecting their sense of optimism.

Over at The Washington Post, the headline looks fair: "Iraqis Go to Polls to Vote on Constitution"; but then beneath it, the following quote: "Insurgent attacks lower voter turnout in some areas of the Sunni west." –John Ward Anderson. And to the right, this caption: "Iraqi Women Doubt Charter Will Improve Their Lives". On the online page of The Guardian, there's not even a mention.


Fox News' top headline: "Voting Amid Violence". Who says they aren't fair and balanced?

The news I hear is around 15 attacks with minor injuries during the voting, compared to over 300 during the election for an interim government.

This is just one more step in the right direction (The Iraqi election, that is....not the million man march).

Go Iraq!


Additional reads:

Iraq the Model

A Star from Mosul

Breitbart.com

One Marine's View

Al Gore is a blithering idiot. 'Nuff said.

The Atheist

THE ATHEIST

An atheist was walking through the woods one day in
Alaska,
admiring all
that evolution had created. "What majestic trees!
What a powerful
river! What beautiful animals!" he said to himself.
As he was
walking
alongside the river, he heard a rustling in the
bushes behind him.
Turning to look, he saw a 13-foot Kodak brown bear
beginning to
charge
toward him. He ran as fast as he could down the
path. He looked
over
his shoulder and saw that the bear was rapidly
closing on him.


Somehow, he ran even faster, so scared that tears
came to his eyes.
He
looked again & the bear was even closer. His heart
pounding in his
chest, he tried to run faster yet. But alas, he
tripped and fell
to the
ground.
As he rolled over to pick himself up, the bear was
right over him,
reaching for him with it's left paw and raising its
right paw to
strike
him....he yelled out, "OH MY GOD!"


Time stopped.......

The bear froze.......

The forest was silent............
Even the river stopped moving.

As a brilliant light shone upon the man, a
thunderous voice came
from
all around, GOD SPOKE: "YOU DENY MY EXISTENCE FOR
ALL THESE YEARS,
TEACH OTHERS THAT I DON'T EXIST AND EVEN CREDIT
CREATION TO SOME
COSMIC
ACCIDENT. DO YOU EXPECT ME TO HELP YOU OUT OF THIS
PREDICAMENT?
AM I
TO COUNT YOU NOW AS A BELIEVER?"


Difficult as it was, the atheist looked directly
into the light &
said,
"It would be hypocritical to ask to be a Christian
after all these
years, but perhaps you could make the bear a
Christian?"

"VERY WELL," said GOD.

The light went out...

The river ran...
The sounds of the forest resumed...

And the bear dropped down on his knees, brought both paws together,
Bowed his head and spoke: "Lord, thank you for this
food which I
am
about to receive. Amen."

Are Conservatives Stuck on Stupid?

Maybe.

I know there are good arguments being made by thoughtful conservatives (actually, I think some, more reactionary, than thoughtful) who are livid and demoralized by President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Now that the smoke has cleared, I'm on board in support of the President's decision. There's no question that others might be more qualified or more deserving of the position. But the President has made his decision and I think it's actually a brilliant, bold, strategic move. The only drawback, being the conservative in-fighting. At some point, the conservatives who stand in the way, wetting themselves and hand-wringing, are going to find themselves stuck on stupid. And if they keep it up, and Miers doesn't get confirmed, it will so severly damage the President that the chances of getting someone all conservatives would probably prefer, like a Janice Rogers Brown, will be much less likely; it would take the nuclear option, at best. It's the President's decision, and he's made it. Before he made it, was the time for debate and suggestions; now is the time where he needs our support.

Miers is no Souter. She has more in common with Clarence Thomas's background. The Democrats were preparing for a fight; I myself, was looking forward to a knock-out, drag-out fight with a serious debate over the role of judges; and the Constitution- whether or not it's a living, breathing document. But while Democrats were honing their blades for a pitched and bloody knife-fight, what President Bush has done is finessed his way with a rapier thrust. Is there little doubt that Miers will get confirmed? I think she will get confirmed quite easily, and conservative activists should not stand in the way.

Hugh Hewitt is on top of this one. Follow the link trail from there. Especially his links to Beldar, whom Hewitt describes as "the most fact-based blogger on the nomination".

Also read:

The American Thinker's "Don't misunderestimate Miers".

A Couple of Items...

Just to let you know I haven't dropped off the face of the blogosphere:

Yesteday I had to sit in my car and listen to Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus on the Hugh Hewitt Show, with Jed Babbin guest-hosting. The question came up regarding whether or not there should be concern about the number of battalions that are combat-ready and the 3 battalions that were at level one, now down to 1. Lt. Gen. Petraeus sets the record straight: Radioblogger has the transcript.

Radioblogger also points out ABC pushing for a misrepresentation of the actual story we have so far, regarding the espionage case that broke out in our mainstream yesterday.

If you missed today's Presidential speech on the War against Terror, you can see part of it here: one of the best parts of it, actually. Loved this speech.

Might post later tonight on my feelings regarding the Miers nomination.
If you can't wait to know how I feel, go over to Hugh Hewitt's. He pretty well sums it all up for me and will clue you in to which side of the conservative aisle I choose to sit in. For now, I bring you Letterman's Top 10 from Crooks and Liars.

What's Wrong with this Picture?

The Truth:



Actually....

The REAL Truth:



Read more from Flopping Aces. Loved the link to Democratic Underground. They never fail to provide moonbat entertainment. Good work Conservative Underground!

[Update]Another example of how photographs don't tell the whole story and can be manipulated to set an agenda. Hat tip to Hugh Hewitt, through Powerline. The photograph in question is one we've all probably seen if you were like me, channel-surfing the blogosphere and news sources for photographs last weekend of the anti-victory rallies. The San Francisco Chronicle is also defending itself, so do read and decide for yourself.


Previous posts on last weekend's anti-Victory marches:

Someone Pass Me the Thesaurus
Moonbats ANSWER the Call to Arms
Turn on the Tube Now
Capping off the Weekend
What's in a Number?