Saturday, March 31, 2007

Where is the anti-torture crowd?


Sorry. I have not heard anything from the anti-GITMO crowd regarding the obvious violations of the Geneva Convention.

Have you seen this
video:

"
Article 13

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. […]
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity."

Where are the marches calling on Iran to stop abusing these British troops?

We are either strong or weak!


You can't have it both ways. We are either strong or weak.

Bad guys respect force. This is why Khadafi gave up his WMDs after we invaded Iraq. Khadafi saw Saddam's capture and decided that life was too short for that!

Bad guys respect force. This is why Castro never tried a "Mariel" exodus during the Reagan presidency.

Bad guys get emboldened by weakness. This is why they took the hostages during the Carter presidency. This is why Saddam violated the 1991 cease fire and kicked out the UN inspectors in 1998.

Bad guys smell blood. They think that the West is weak. They watch Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats making stupid statements about a premature departure from Iraq.

What we are witnessing is a huge test. I'm not suggesting that we invade Iran this afternoon. However, Iran must be advised that our patience is limited.

P.S.
INVITING ATTACK By RALPH PETERS is worth reading!

Tornado watch: The Dems will raise your taxes


Please hide your wallet. The Dems are back and taxes are not too far behind.

See
All Democrats Agree: RAISE TAXES! Dem Leadership, Progressives, CBC, Blue Dogs, Mesmerized by Tax Increases:

"This week, the Democrat leadership introduced the largest budget in history which included the
largest tax increase in history to be forced upon American families."

Hide your wallet.

Friday, March 30, 2007

Does anybody in the UK or Europe care that Iran just committed an act of war?


Iran just kidnapped 15 British sailors. Does anybody care? Besides Pres. Bush and PM Blair, does anybody else in Europe care? Frankly, is anyone willing to stand up for anything in the old continent?

Today, I saw IRAN'S OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR CONTINUES:

"It's become obvious that Iran simply does whatever it wants.

They keep pushing the envelope because nobody wants to push back.

With each shove a new norm is created.

The Iranian weird-beards know that we've lost the will, or the political ability to do anything about their nuclear weapons program, so they continue to develop the bomb.

They know the Euro-weasels are too spineless and too addicted to their oil to do anything about 15 kidnapped British soldiers, so they parade them on TV.

And they know the United Nations will never really pass serious sanctions...well, because China and Russia like that oil too.

So now things are the way they are."

So true. Nobody cares except for Pres. Bush or PM Blair.

Rick Moran is right:

"What will it take for Britain and the rest of the western world to wake up?

A better question might be is there anything that will accomplish that goal?

Have Britain and Europe fallen into a permanent stupor, a languid state of denial and equivocation that will spell the end of the great alliance between America and Europe, allowing the enemies of democracy to simply grow themselves into a majority?" (BRITS YAWN AS IRAN DECLARES WAR)

What can we say about much of the West? It doesn't want to fight for anything. (Do We Even Want Someone to Stop Iran? By David Warren)

Europe has another problem. It can not deffend itself. See Houses of Straw (The EU’s delusions about the sufficiency of “soft” power are embarrassingly revealed) by Victor Davis Hanson:

"In the future, smaller nations in dangerous neighborhoods must accept that in their crises ahead, their only salvation, even after the acrimonious Democratic furor over Iraq, is help from the United States."

Like in the late 1930s, the Europeans do not want to deal with problems.

Like in the late 1930s, the Europeans will painfully learn that you can not stick your head in the sand. Hating Bush or the US won't pacify those who want to blow up Western cities!

What will it take to wake up Europe? How about losing 100,000 Europeans in a chemical attack against one of their cities?

PM Blair must give Iran an ultimatum. Pres. Bush will support Great Britain 100%.

If necessary, take out Iranian refineries and let them run their economy on rhetoric.

Most polls show that a Republican will win in 2008


According to another round of polls, our next president will be Rudy Giuliani or John McCain. I have not seen a poll that indicates that it will be Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama.

What's going on? Why are two strong supporters of the Iraq War leading in the polls.

Take a look at Poll: A Surprising G.O.P. Edge for '08 by Jay Carney:

"So why, in poll after poll, including the new TIME poll, does that advantage seem to disappear whenever voters are asked to pick a President in hypothetical head-to-head matchups among front-runners with solid name recognition.

In our poll, Hillary Clinton loses to John McCain, 42%-48%, and to Rudy Giuliani 41%-50%.

Even though Clinton maintains a 7% edge over Obama among Democratic respondents, Obama fares better in the general election matchups.

It's so close that it's a statistical dead heat, but Obama still loses: 43%-45% to McCain, 44%-45% to Giuliani."

What is driving this? Could it be our old reliable "national security" advantage? It appears that it is:

"Democrats also may have a residual disadvantage going into 2008 — a long-standing disposition among voters to view Republicans as stronger on issues involving national security."


The answer is leadership. Yesterday, McCain and Giuliani blasted the Congress for their Iraq votes. McCain was outstanding on Hannity's radio show. Giuliani was equally impressive on several appearances.

Of course, there are polls and the first primary is still 10 months away. However, it does not look like any kind of Democrat wipe out in 2008.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Democrats have gone from bad to worse


Here we are. The poll readers, aka Democrats, are now against the war. They were for the war but now they are against it.

What will happen next? I don't know. Check the polls!

Frankly, this is political cowardice from Reid & Pelosi. They understand that their bill will never become law. They know that their Iraq plan will be never implemented.


Hooray for Thomas Sowell. See Dangerous Demagoguery(Everyone sees through it) By Thomas Sowell:

"If the war in Iraq is such an unnecessary and futile expenditure of blood and treasure as Pelosi et al. have been saying, why not put an end to it?

But to do that would mean taking responsibility for the consequences — and those consequences would be disastrous and lasting.

They would probably still be lasting when the 2008 elections come around.

The Democrats cannot risk that.

They have taken over Congress by a very clever and very disciplined strategy of constantly criticizing the Republicans, without taking the risk of presenting an alternative for whose results they can be held responsible."

The Democrats are shameless and irresponsible.

Of course, there are profiles in courage. Yes, there is Lieberman. And there is McCain, who has been brilliant on this!

Senator McCain was great on CBS and on CNN. Here is a guy who is leading rather reading polls.

Power Line has a great post on Senator McCain:

"To repeat just one line:

"Success or failure in Iraq is the transcendent issue for our foreign policy and our national security."

Rick Moran just posted the best description of Democrats. See ASTONISHING CYNICISM SHOWN BY THE DEMOCRATS:

"They can’t claim to be standing on principle – not after those votes yesterday in the Senate and two days ago in the House where members were literally bribed with pork to support the leadership’s position on withdrawal from Iraq.

They can’t claim to be supporting the troops – not after being told in no uncertain terms that their bill was subject to a veto by the President while the Secretary of Defense informed them that without the emergency appropriation, our boys will be left high and dry in Iraq and Afghanistan by April 15.

And the certainly can’t claim to be promoting peace in Iraq – not when anyone with half a brain knows the consequences of our withdrawal before the Iraqi government and security forces are prepared to defend the streets against the brutal thugs and terrorists who bedevil the country today."

So sad. Can you believe that this party nominated Harry Truman?

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Why is everyone so shocked with the new Harris poll?


Drudge has a huge headline about a new Harris poll. See Fifty percent of adults would not vote for Clinton By Kelly McCormack:

"Half of voting-age Americans say they would not vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, according to a Harris Interactive poll released Tuesday.

More than one in five Democrats that participated in the survey said they would not vote for Clinton. Overall, 36 percent say they would vote for the former first lady and 11 percent are unsure of their top choice.

Forty-eight percent of Independent voters also said that they would choose another candidate over Clinton, the poll, which surveyed 2,223 potential voters, states.

Fifty-six percent of men said that they would not vote for Clinton, while 45 percent of women said that she would not be their pick. In addition, 69 percent of those 62 and older said that they would not vote for Clinton.

Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Clinton’s political opinions and Clinton as a person. Fifty-two percent of people also said that “she does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.”

That's fine. However, it is consistent with popular vote results for Democrats since 1948. In fact, the Democrats have won 5 elections since Truman surprised Dewey in the first post-war election:

In 1948, Pres. Truman wins 49.6%

In
1960, Senator John F Kennedy wins 49.7%

In
1964, Pres. Johnson wins 61.1%

In
1976, Gov. Jimmy Carter wins 50.1%

In
1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton won pluralities.

Why is everyone so surprised that 50% would not vote for Hillary Clinton?


In fact, most Democrats have had a real problem cracking the 50% popular vote threshold since 1948.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Snoopy is a smart dog


Poor Charlie Brown. Now Snoopy wants Charlie to try the pet food first!

It appears that the economic sanctions are hurting Iran


Over the weekend, I heard a lot speculation about Iran's decision to attack British sailors.

Let me try this: Iran is having a lot of domestic troubles.

Iran is falling apart.

Meanwhile, On the Other Side of the World by JOHN MCINTYRE is right on target:

"The capture of 15 British servicemen is clearly an intentional provocation on the part of the Iranian dictatorship and is almost certainly tied to Iranian internal politics. It is also not coincidental that this action was timed alongside the most recent UN Security Council action on Iran. In fact, it's very similar to the Hizbullah provocation last summer that sparked Israel's brief incursion into Lebanon, which also happened to coincide with Security Council action on Iran."

What's next? Iran is being hurt by sanctions.
American Sanctions Bite Iran by Ed Morrissey has a long list of sanctions and consequences. In a few words:

"The Bush administration has successfully conducted an indirect war on Iranian interests, and it is a progressive war.

The effects of these efforts will be cumulative, and the Iranians have not much time left before their economy begins to completely collapse under the weight of them.

Oil production accounts for 80% of their exports, and once those facilities start to fail, they will have nothing left with which to bargain -- and it will take years to repair the damage.

When they reach that stage, Iranians will find plenty of motivation to shake off the disastrous reign of the mullahcracy, and even the Revolutionary Guard will not find much motivation to protect them."

Let's hope that this is true. Iran may collapse without putting a single F-16 over Tehran.

I have always preferred a regime of sanctions backed by the threat of force. It appears to be working.

Monday, March 26, 2007

McCain is right again!


This morning, Senator McCain was on The Bill Bennett Show. He was great:

"“Given the situation that is going to be on the floor of the Senate, I am going to head back first thing tomorrow morning, and try and beat back this new recipe for defeat that the Democrats are trying to hoist off on the American people.”

Check out the interview.

Over the years, I've had my differences with McCain. Yet, he is right on the big issues. Like Giuliani and Romney, the big 3 Republicans are correct on Iraq and the war on terror.

Cheer up and don't buy all of this doom and gloom


For years, I have never understood the doom and gloom mentality of so many people.

How can anybody wake up in the US and be negative about anything?

How can you live in the most prosperous nation in the history of the world and be full of doom and gloom?

How can you walk around in the freest nation ever and be negative about your future?

Of course, some of this doom and gloom is partisan. Many of these "doom and gloomers" are still counting votes in Florida. These people will not give Pres. Bush any credit even if the US economy has 4.5% unemployment and steady GDP growth.


Frankly, how can the US economy be any better? By any historical measurment, it is extremely good.

Some of this doom and gloom is misinformation and a crisis rhetoric from our politicians. There are just too many people preaching the end of the world, such as former VP Gore. (WHERE AL'S WRONG By BJORN LOMBORG and Gore's Faith Is Bad Science By Michael Barone)

Despite political partisanship, the negative NY Times and all of the hot air from VP Gore, here is the bottom line:

Thank God that you are living in 2007 rather than 1907.

Furthermore, thank God that you are living in the modern West, specially if you are woman!

Indur M. Goklany is the author of The Improving State of the World: Why We're Living Longer, Healthier, More Comfortable Lives on a Cleaner Planet (Cato Institute, Washington, DC, 2007).

He just published Now for the Good News:

"Indeed, the 20th century saw the United States’ population multiply by four, income by seven, carbon dioxide emissions by nine, use of materials by 27, and use of chemicals by more than 100.

Yet life expectancy increased from 47 years to 77 years.

Onset of major disease such as cancer, heart, and respiratory disease has been postponed between eight and eleven years in the past century.

Heart disease and cancer rates have been in rapid decline over the last two decades, and total cancer deaths have actually declined the last two years, despite increases in population.

Among the very young, infant mortality has declined from 100 deaths per 1,000 births in 1913 to just seven per 1,000 today."

Capitalism and free enterprise have been good for the US and those parts of the world who have tried it. In other words, free and open societies have prospered whereas controlled and undemocratic ones have not.

Freedom works. Free enterprise works.

Hooray for Hernando de Soto---ILD, Dr. Walter E. Williams, and Napoleon Hill Foundation.

Hooray for those who have been fighting socialism and all of those "-isms" that don't create jobs or promote prosperity!

Of course, no one denies that there are problems on the table and issues pending. Yet, all of this "doom and gloom" is driven by cynical politicians who want to make you feel bad so that you will vote for them.

So cheer up. You are living a lot better than your grandparents did. You have a longer life expectancy, better medicine, cleaner cities and a better life overall.

Cheer up and stop buying all of the hot air from the promoters of doom and gloom.

P.S. If my post fails then try The Essence of Friedman, a list of articles from the late Milton Friedman!

Europe needs a massive makeover



For 60 years, Europe has been built under the US military umbrella. As the EU celebrates the big "50", it looks like a lady in desperate need of a massive makeover.

Take a look at Europe's self-serving illusion by James Lewis:

"The European Union could not exist without sixty years of American sacrifice for Europe.

Today, a mass of Eurohype evades the truth: That Europe even today cannot defend itself, that it is spending less than half on defense than twenty years ago, and that in consequence it is utterly dependent upon American blood and treasure to keep it secure."

The Wall Street Journal spoke for many of us this weekend. (Europe, Old and New (The good, the bad and the--well, the French):


"In reality, its peace has always depended on the will to spend blood and treasure, often American. Others, especially the French, imagine Europe as a check on the U.S. "hyperpower." Both delusions have helped keep the EU a small fry in foreign affairs. To become a more mature player, Europeans will have to pull their weight in the likes of NATO."

What would we do without the French? (See How to Buy a French Veto By Dick Morris)

Beyond economics and defense, Europe is suffering from a bad case of malaise:

"Bruce Bawer makes this point in his book, "While Europe Slept: How Radicalism is Destroying the West from Within."

One of the most disgraceful developments of our time, he writes, "is that many Western intellectuals who pride themselves on being liberals have effectively aligned themselves with an outrageously illiberal movement that rejects equal rights for women, that believes gays and Jews should be executed, that supports the cold-blooded murder of one's own children in the name of honor."

Young Europeans in Che Guevara t-shirts and Palestinian scarves, to identify with a "glamorous" revolution that exists only in their naive imaginations, are dangerously out of touch with the authentic peril in the world." (Moral equivalence revived By Suzanne Fields)

Europe is losing its soul. It has walked away from its Judeo-Christian heritage and replaced it with mindless secularism. (Pope: Europe Losing Faith in Its Future)

Thankfully, the old communist states are pro-American and favor free enterprise. However, the old Europe needs massive change. It needs lower taxes and more babies! It needs a new attitude based on realism.

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Pedro Pan: A wonderful chapter of the Cuban experience in the US


In the 1960s, many Cuban children were sent to the US and raised by Pedro Pan:

"From December 1960 to October 1962, more than fourteen thousand Cuban youths arrived alone in the United States. What is now known as Operation Pedro Pan was the largest recorded exodus of Unaccompanied minors in the Western Hemisphere."

Many of those Cuban kids did not see their parents again. Some of their parents were executed. Others spent years in political prisons.

Father Bryan O. Walsh was behind Operation Pedro Pan. Today, the children of Pedro Pan run a website, support the organization and remember those who cared for them forty years ago!

This is the amazing story of 14,000 lives. It shows the evil of the Castro communist dictatorship and the kindness of the many who raised them in the US.

and check the photos. Many of your Cuban friends are in those photos!

Saturday, March 24, 2007

A vote about spinach and not Iraq


It's a sad day. The Democrats have their antiwar vote but Pres. Bush's veto will kill it.

So much for profiles in courage!

Of course, the new bill (supported 218-212 with 5 members too busy to vote) is not a war vote.

According to the liberal Washington Post:

"The legislation would also appropriate $75 million for peanut storage in Georgia and $15 million to protect Louisiana rice fields from saltwater. More substantially, there is $120 million for shrimp and menhaden fishermen, $250 million for milk subsidies, $500 million for wildfire suppression and $1.3 billion to build levees in New Orleans." (
Retreat and Butter)

I guess it was a good day to be in the peanut, rice and shrimp business! I did not know that spinach farmers had such influence with liberals.

Is anyone proud of these people? How can you be?

The new religion



Czech President Vaclav Klaus is a smart man:

"'Communism has been replaced by the threat of an ambitious environmentalism...." (
Czech leader Klaus fights global warming 'religion')

I agree with him. The so called ecology movement is not about clean air but a hatred of capitalism.

Chlorine gas spoils the Bush lied nonsense


How about that? Chlorine cache found in Iraq:

"U.S. troops sweeping Baghdad have found containers of nitric acid and chlorine, raising concerns that insurgents are expanding their use of chemicals in the war for power in Iraq, military officials said yesterday.


The containers were found as part of a larger cache of weapons discovered as U.S. and Iraqi troops cleared house after house in the Sunni-majority Ghazaliyah neighborhood in western Baghdad."

Of course, all of this matters a lot. See The Chlorine Gas Attacks in Iraq and the Specter of Suicide Attacks with CBRN Weapons By Assaf Moghadam:

"Last week’s triple chlorine-gas suicide attacks that hit Falluja and Ramadi sent shockwaves around Iraq, while raising the specter of more widespread use of chemical weapons by terrorist groups in Iraq and beyond.

The bombings followed a series of earlier chlorine gas attacks, although no chlorine gas attacks were recorded prior to January 2007."

So it's real. The terrorists have chemicals and will use them against civilians. Of course, didn't Pres. Clinton, VP Gore, Sen. Kerry, Sen. Clinton et al say that in 1998 and 2002? (Bush Lied is the Big Lie By Debra Saunders)

Friday, March 23, 2007

Let's get serious about the firing of the attorneys


Hooray for the liberal Washington Post. See Political Spectacle :

"It's worth stepping back and putting the supposed scandal in perspective. President Bush is entitled to replace his U.S. attorneys; he'd be entitled to do so if he thought they weren't pursuing his prosecutorial priorities with sufficient vigor, or even if he just wanted to give other lawyers a shot at the jobs. The many e-mails that the administration has released for the most part suggest nothing nefarious in the dismissal process."

So what is the big deal? The Democrats need to distract their voters because they do not have the courage to stop funding the Iraq War.

This is more than silly....it's pathetic




How did Nancy Pelosi get her 218 votes today? She bought votes (Shame on Pelosi)

I'm not saying that Republicans are angels. We have our share of problems.

Yet, this vote should be an up or down vote on the merits of funding the Iraq War.

Vote yes or no.

The Democrats are silly (and will get) very very very silly!


The Democrats are silly and getting sillier.

By the summer, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats will be begging the people to put them back in the minority.

Why? It was a lot easier when all they had to do was yell anti-Bush-isms from the bleachers.

They can't legislate. They can't even finalize a minimum wage increase.

On immigration, they are hoping that Pres. Bush and Senator McCain will take the lead because they can't agree on anything.

On Iraq, they are caught between the angry left and a lot of centrist Democrats who understand the big picture in the Middle East.

On entitlement reform, they don't have a clue except to fall back to the demagoguery that Bush wants to privatize everything.

Now, the angry left is turning on its leaders, as many of us predicted. CODEPINK plans takeover of Pelosi’s office:

"Protesters plan to play “Pin the war on the Donkey” to show their frustration with the Democratic leadership’s inaction of ending the war in Iraq."

Will they say "Nancy lied, people died"! I'm sure that the Code Pink ladies will yell a few more things than that!

What's going on? Look at some headlines:

Democrats Undone Over Iraq by Ed Morissey:

"The Democrats thought they rode to power on a wave of anti-war sentiment, but they have discovered that their victory had much more to do with Republican failures than with Democratic platforms.


Most of their new members come from center-right districts where Democratic messages about corruption and abuses resonated -- but where they see Congress' role in Iraq as limited at best."

Can the Democrats get their House in order? by Dick Pollman:

"Pelosi can ill afford many defections, especially since virtually all Republicans – supine to the bitter end - are still maintaining their lockstep discipline in support of their commander-in-chief.

And further complicating the Democratic scenario is the fact that many newly-elected Democrats hail from traditionally red districts (for instance: three in Indiana, one in Texas, one in North Carolina), and they are reportedly tempted to vote No – because their constituents might see the Pelosi measure as going too far.

As political analyst Michael Tomasky has
noted, 62 House Democrats currently represent districts that Bush carried in 2004.

And even though Bush’s popularity has since waned in many of those locales, there are probably lingering concerns about Congress “micro-managing” the war in ways that might encumber commanders in the field."

And there is more.

Democrats In Disarray by The Power Line.

The Associated Press reports:
Dems Struggle to Unite Caucus on Iraq:

"Democrats are divided on the issue and hold only a narrow majority in Congress. Their leaders, hands tied if just a few members stray, are finding it tough to pass legislation that would require Bush to start bringing troops home."

As a Republican, I should find all of this amusing. However, we are in the middle of a war where our enemy will use chlorine gas and blow up innocent people.

This is no time for silly and immature people. We live in very dangerous times but the Democrats are still trying to "get Nixon" and dancing at Woodstock.

In the next few weeks, you will hear a lot silly things from the mouths of Democrats. Unfortunately, the silliness will only get worse!

Unpatriotic and idiotic


Witness to a US soldier effigy burning By Michelle Malkin has pictures of antiwar protesters.

Frankly, it's hard to believe that any US citizen or resident would go after US soldiers.

First, these soldiers are volunteers. Secondly, they put their life at risk to protect us.

This is from HotAir:

"Here’s another fringe actor reserving space in the Capitol for CAIR.

Here’s what a few fringe actors left behind in Milwaukee. They attacked an Army recruiting office and spread human feces around inside.

Also in Milwaukee, sons of local Democrat bigs were convicted last year of slashing the tires of Republicans on election day 2004, and got jail time for it. One of the perps is the son of US Rep. Gwen Moore, a Democrat."

Shame on those who do this. They are idiots, unpatriotic idiots!

Thursday, March 22, 2007

McCain leads Clinton by 8 points!


According to the latest Rasmussen:

"Arizona Senator John McCain (R) leads New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) 48% to 41% in the latest Rasmussen Reports poll on the 2008 Presidential campaign."

So get ready for more "right wing conspiracy stuff"!

Global warming and Al Gore, chapter too many!


Yesterday, former VP Gore was in the Congress and answered questions about global warming. (Gore Implores Congress to Save Planet)

At one point, some challenged him:

"You're not just off a little, you're totally wrong," said Texas Rep. Joe Barton, the leading Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, as he challenged Gore's conclusion that carbon dioxide emissions cause rising global temperatures. Barton and Gore's exchange grew testy at one point - Barton demanding that Gore get to the point and Gore responding that he would like time to answer without being interrupted.

"Global warming science is uneven and evolving," Barton said."

Of course, this is not about global warming. This is about a man who has been lost in space since he could not win Tennessee in 2000.

For a little perspective on the latest Gore-ism, see Plutonic Warming By Fred Thompson:

"NASA says the Martian South Pole’s “ice cap” has been shrinking for three summers in a row. Maybe Mars got its fever from earth. If so, I guess Jupiter’s caught the same cold, because it’s warming up too, like Pluto.This has led some people, not necessarily scientists, to wonder if Mars and Jupiter, non signatories to the Kyoto Treaty, are actually inhabited by alien SUV-driving industrialists who run their air-conditioning at 60 degrees and refuse to recycle."

That's it. It's a shame that Mars and Jupiter did not sign the Kyoto treaty.

Of course, the Clinton-Gore administration did not either. The treaty sat on Pres. Clinton's desk for the entire second term because they couldn't get 2 Democrats to support it.

The subpoena bunch



Pres. Bush is right about this and should not back down. My guess is that he won't.

Let's have the fight! (
Bush Aides Facing Subpoenas Over Firings)

A new way to look at an abortion?


Over the years, expecting mothers have seen an ultrasound. It's a way of taking a look at the little baby growing inside them.

How about requiring an ultrasound before an abortion? In South Carolina, they are
talking about it:

"Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester and York Counties), said, "I'm just trying to save lives and protect people from regret and inform women with the most accurate non-judgemental information that can be provided."Delleney is the main sponsor of the amendment.


Currently, there is already a South Carolina law requiring women to pass prerequisites before abortions, including reviewing abortion information and undergoing a waiting period. Still, Delleney says women need more information to make a final decision."

From the calls I've gotten, I think some people wished there was an ultrasound requirement at the time they underwent the abortion procedure," he said."

It's a great idea. Let women see what an abortion really is. It is the taking of a human life, which is why they call it an abortion!

P.S. For more, see
VIDEO: Representatives Consider Ultrasound Amendment - Jocelyn Maner reports.

Go Aggies!


Our favorite Texas A&M University plays Memphis tonight. Can the Aggies win. It depends on Mr. Law, their best player! (Law clutches to Kimball lessons)


Wednesday, March 21, 2007

We need a larger army



Do we need a bigger army? I say yes!

"At 4 percent of GDP, defense spending is one and a half percentage points of GDP below the 45-year historical average and well below Cold War and Vietnam War levels."

More: The crying need for a bigger U.S. Military by Jim Talent is one of the most interesting articles I've read lately. He looks at defense spending over time. I like this:

"This program -- called the "4% for Freedom Solution" by the Heritage Foundation -- would send the clearest possible message to America's friends and enemies that, whatever happens in Iraq, America will remain a force to be reckoned with. For some purposes, defense policy is foreign policy. Imagine the impact on China and North Korea, for example, of realizing that the U.S., by using only a small fraction of its economic resources, can guarantee an increased and highly capable naval presence in the Western Pacific for years to come."

The 4% solution commits us to spend on defense, specially in today's difficult world.

We must do it! 4% is little for a great nation!


Furthermore, we don't have a choice. We must defend ourselves against a tough enemy that won't quit because we do!

Some good news on the federal deficit





This blog is a postive place. We do not dwell on the negatives. We see a good economy and talk about it.

Let's talk about the federal deficit. It went into the red for three reasons:

1) The March 2000 stock market crash;

2) The 2001-03 recession; and

3) 9-11 and the war on terror.

Yet, our federal deficit is going down in a hurry. See the numbers:

"Since the 1960s, deficits driven largely by increased levels of spending have been the norm, while surpluses were a transient exception.

The current 2006 deficit -- 1.9 percent of GDP -- is slightly below the 45-year historical average of 2.2 percent of GDP."

The deficit is down because tax collections continue to exceed spending.

Remember those tax cuts? I guess that they worked!

Tax cuts always work. They worked for Kennedy, Reagan and now GW Bush!

P.S. Where Are the JFK Democrats? by Rich Karlgaard recalls the pre-1972 Democrat party and tax cuts.

So there were no WMDs in Iraq?


Did I miss something? Reuters reported yesterday that:

"Three suicide bombers driving trucks rigged with tanks of toxic chlorine gas struck targets in heavily Sunni Anbar province including the office of a Sunni tribal leader opposed to al-Qaida."


What? No WMDs in Iraq? by Douglas Hanson describes the importance of this gas:

"Use of chlorine gas by the jihadists is not about using an industrial chemical of opportunity. Chlorine is actually the grandfather of chemical weapons having been first used by the Germans in World War I at Ypres. Almost immediately after the shells burst, French and Algerian soldiers' respiratory organs were incapacitated or destroyed resulting in severe choking attacks and for some, an agonizing death. The development of Phosgene followed. This is another choking agent, but more deadly since it does not cause as much coughing, so more of it is inhaled by the victim."

Will there be more? Probably so. Our recent surge is hitting the terrorists hard. So get ready for more gas attacks.

What about the "Bush lied" crowd? They will probably say that Bush planted the gas in Al Qaeda's inventories.

P.S. No doubt: Iraq had weapons By Ted Oglesby is worth reading!

Enough on the federal attorneys


Pres. Bush made a good move. He told the Dems that enough is enough. (The phoniest scandal of the century (so far) By Dick Morris)

I agree that Gonzalez has mishandled this whole episode. As I wrote before, the President can fire any political appointment. They work for him period. However, Gonzalez got "too cute" with his explanations.

In fact, Pres. Bush has been rather modest in his dismissals. See
Attorney Firing Precedent By Bruce Bartlett:

"However, Democrats should be wary of pressing Bush too far because there is ample precedent on their own side of Democratic presidents who fired U.S. attorneys and other high-ranking officials just to halt investigations of their political allies. For example, two Democratic presidents -- Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman -- worked for years to protect a notorious racketeer named Thomas Pendergast because he ran a Democratic machine in Missouri."

Despite the above, I still think that Pres. Truman and Roosevelt had the right to fire them. The public can react by changing our elected leaders.

Enough is enough. The Democrats unfairly introduced this when Pres. Bush was out of the country. That's a cheap shot! It was rude to have Pres. Bush answer these questions in Mexico or elsewhere.

Also, the Democrats are motivated by a lack of ideas or legislative agenda. Where is their plan for Iraq? Social Security? Entitlements? Immigration?


Speaking of "lack of ideas", the Democrats are having a hard time getting anything done. Sure, it's early. Yet, the signs are not encouraging.

It’s tough to get 218 votes, so Speaker gets tough, too
By Jonathan E. Kaplan:

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is holding the implied threat of lost committee seats over the heads of Democratic Caucus members who may vote against her $124 billion Iraq war supplemental bill. Faced with the possibility of losing the first really big vote since taking majority control in the November elections, Pelosi is talking tough to wavering lawmakers and isolating those opposed to the bill."

So Pres. Bush has low ratings? The Democrats are even lower. See Power Line:

"How many times have you heard that President Bush's approval ratings are low? Guess what: the Democratic Congress's approval rating is lower."

What about the "6 for 6" agenda. So far, it's batting .000!

See Democrats 0 for 6 in Congress; agenda sidetracked by Iraq war By Christina Bellantoni:

"None of the elements of the newly minted Democrats' congressional agenda have made it to President Bush's desk, and the prospects of signature bills such as federal funding for stem-cell research or homeland-security improvements becoming law any time soon are doubtful."

The Democrats have nothing except phony scandals.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

The Valerie Plame (Mrs. Joe Wilson) show is still hard to figure out


Frankly, I don't get it. Was she or wasn't she? So far, I can't tell. ("Covert" To Whom? by Andy McCarthy)

Rick Moran summarized it best:

"There are two sides to this story. And while it is clear from the Libby trial that there was a concerted effort by the Administration to inform selected members of the press that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA, it is much less clear that Libby, Rove, Armitage, and others knew of her covert status and deliberately tried to ruin her career." (
PLAME STILL LEAVES US WONDERING)

If she was then somebody needs to go to jail. After all, it is a crime to reveal an agent's identity. If she wasn't then what's the big deal?

Again, was she or wasn't she?

It gets more confusing. See
Senate Intel Committee: What Valerie Plame Didn’t Tell Us (The differences between her House testimony and the Senate’s findings) By Byron York.

It gets even more confusing. See
Did Valerie Plame Lie? By John Tabin:

"There's no question that in her testimony, Plame Wilson omitted inconvenient facts and put an inapt emphasis on others. If Bond's characterization of the evidence is correct, she may actually have lied. Lying under oath before Congress constitutes perjury and a violation of the False Statements Act -- the same crimes that accounted for three of the four charges that Scooter Libby was recently convicted of. Wouldn't it be ironic if Valerie Plame Wilson were to share Libby's fate?"

Like most people, I'm tired of this whole episode. This is silly. The White House had every right to defend itself against Joe Wilson. You can't have a guy like Joe Wilson running around writing lies at a time when the administration was making the case for the war.

Anyway, let's move on. Pres. Bush should pardon Scooter Libby. And the Wilsons? Let them make their movie and leave DC.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Just a thought: What are the Dems going to do if the surge keeps working?



In Washington, it's scandal for breakfast, scandal for lunch and more scandal for dinner. The Democrats are in scandal mode. They can't govern but they can serve scandal. (David Broder: Investigate, but please legislate, too)

Will this scandal strategy work? My guess is no. The public is not interested in scandal unless there is real evidence of breaking the law. At some point, all of this "subpoena and scandal" strategy will backfire.

Yet, there is good news coming out of Iraq. Incredibly, good news in Iraq is bad news for Democrats!

It started with
The 'Surge' Is Succeeding By Robert Kagan:

"Some observers are reporting the shift.
Iraqi bloggers Mohammed and Omar Fadhil, widely respected for their straight talk, say that "early signs are encouraging."


The first impact of the "surge," they write, was psychological.


Both friends and foes in Iraq had been convinced, in no small part by the American media, that the United States was preparing to pull out.

When the opposite occurred, this alone shifted the dynamic."

It makes sense. The Iraqis sat back and waited to make their bets. They are now convinced that it's OK to bet on the US. It makes a big difference. Why bet on someone who is leaving? Why expose yourself to people who will kill you after the US leaves? Does anyone remember Vietnam?

In Baghdad, early signs are good. See Idiocy in D.C.
(Progress in Baghdad--The surge is working--that's what matters) by William Kristol:

"The cocksure defeatism of war critics of two months ago, when the surge was announced, does seem to have been misplaced.


The latest Iraq Update (pdf) by Kimberly Kagan summarizes the early effects of the new strategy backed up by, as yet, just one additional U.S. brigade deployed in theater (with more to be added in the coming weeks):

This "rolling surge" focuses forces on a handful of neighborhoods in Baghdad, and attempts to expand security out from those neighborhoods. . . . A big advantage of a "rolling surge" is that the population and the enemy sense the continuous pressure of ever-increasing forces. Iraqis have not seen such a prolonged and continuous planned increase of U.S. forces before. . . . The continued, increasing presence of U.S. forces appears to be having an important psychological, as well as practical, effect on the enemy and the people of Iraq. . . . [Meanwhile] in Ramadi, in the belt south of Baghdad stretching from Yusifiyah to Salman Pak, and northeast in Diyala Province, . . . U.S. and Iraqi forces have deprived al Qaeda of the initiative.

This sense of momentum is confirmed by many other reports in the media, and from Americans and Iraqis on the ground."

There is good news from Iraq.

Incredibly, the Democrats are so invested in defeat that good news from Iraq is bad for them.

Hard to believe.

For more, see Michelle Malkin's website: The Surge - Recent Photos!

P.S.
Can Gen. Petraeus Turn War in Iraq Around? By Victor Davis Hanson is a good history.

Well done, Mike Modano


Over the weekend, Mike Modano scored his 503rd career NHL goal.

It means that he is top American scorer in NHL history. (Modano hits 503, Stars fall 3-2)

Hockey is not my first sport. However, I do like The Dallas Stars.

Modano is a great player and a good community guy. (http://www.mikemodano.com/)

Again, congratulations to a great guy and NHL player.

Of course, go Stars!

PLEASE SUPPORT OUR BLOG AND RADIO SHOW

MY BOOK: CUBANOS IN WISCONSIN

Follow by Email

MY TWITTER

Search This Blog

Loading...