all-encompassingly

Advice From a Syrian Executive

Another bit from loyal blog participant, Marshall:

As an intern in a Damascus based multi-national company, I took every opportunity to glean nuggets of business wisdom from the Syrian owner-founder Khalid Mahjoub. Although some of it went over my non-marketing head, one piece of advice stuck with me:

The U.S. needs to watch out for the E.U. and China. China is becoming a large competitor for natural resources, not to mention direct business. An example of this is their role in driving up demand, and thus prices for that most important raw material: petroleum. The E.U. wants to replace the U.S. as the dominant economy by focusing its efforts and finances on asset (including human through education) building.They hope to accomplish this by allowing the U.S. to spend all of the money on security organs (such as the military and arms), then hiding behind us and our capability.

Khalid, If you ever read this, let me say that your words are proving to be prophetic. Read Thomas Friedman's editorial this week about the the E.U.'s arms deal to China. This is scary stuff. Read the article here (login required).

doug's note: Marshall points out that "China is becoming a large competitor for natural resources."

Imagine for a moment the global demand for oil when China is even half as industrialized as we are. This is truly an impending geopolitical apocalypse. Our mutual thirst for black bubbly will inevitably create major problems if we don't invest heavily in alternative energy now.

ward churchill continues to wow crowds with his use of free speech

the wise and irreproachable sage, ward churchill, recently dispensed his unique and valuable Speech to bill maher and his audience on HBO. watch the video here or here. i am inclined to think churchill really believes the things he said in the interview--BUT!--i have recently learned an important lesson: the channel on which a person's comments are made may affect the meaning of those comments.

for example, nancy soderberg was on COMEDY CENTRAL when she expressed her hope that the newly emerging democracies in the middle east will collapse, so it was a JOKE! get it? speech on comedy channel = jokes, ok? likewise, since bill maher and ward churchill were on HBO (a movie channel) when maher told us that it was wrong for us to bomb nazi germany at the end of world war II, and churchill promised us that many of the world trade center victims were evil, they must have just been acting--merely reciting their lines.

i mean, come on! its just entertainment! if we are to see who these people really are, we'll need to see them on an actual news channel! perhaps this video of ward churchill would be useful. [video & transcript]

see also our previous coverage of ward churchill, as well as some informative blogs: pirateballerina and wardchurchill.blogspot. and finally, i don't agree with the characterization of the family member that jeff jarvis makes in his post, but his comments are worth the read.

Jon Stewart - Cautiously Optimistic; Nancy Soderberg - Hoping For the Worst

If you want to enter the twilight zone of liberal foriegn policy wonkery, watch the six minute clip of Jon Stewart interviewing Nancy Soderberg, author of The Superpower Myth: The Use and Misuse of American Might.

Favorite quotes (courtesy James Taranto):

Stewart: He's gonna be a great--pretty soon, Republicans are gonna be like, "Reagan was nothing compared to this guy." Like, my kid's gonna go to a high school named after him, I just know it.

Soderberg: Well, there's still Iran and North Korea, don't forget. There's hope for the rest of us.

---------------------

Soderberg: There's always hope that this might not work.

Amazing stuff...

I love how the bulk of the segment was devoted to debunking the premise of the book, namely that American might has been misused by the Bush administration.

Watch the video here, click on the Nancy Soderberg clip.

The Supremes Have Spoken

From all-encompassingly reader Marshall:

This week the Supreme court voted 5-4 in favor of a ban on capital punishment for offenders under 18. The ruling drew cheers from Amnesty International, who stated that, "Today's ruling we see as one of the final milestones in the road to global abolition of the death penalty for crimes committed by children" (Reuters). Amnesty International's standard for "children" is apparently 17 and under.

The greatest cause for concern in the ruling comes from the list of justifications that Justice Anthony Kennedy presented in favor of the ban:

1. International Opinion

" The European Union, human right lawyers from the United Kingdom and a group of Nobel Peace laureates had urged the court in friend-of-the-court briefs to strike down the juvenile death penalty.

In saying that this strong expression of international sentiment 'provide[s] respected and significant confirmation for our own conclusions,' Kennedy lengthened the recent string of decisions in which the court has incorporated foreign views -- and decisively rejected the arguments of those on the court, led by Scalia, who say it should consider U.S. law exclusively" (Washington Post).

2. The American Psychological Assosiation

The American Psychological Association is a liberal politicians' lap dog. On one hand, they assert that

"First, psychologists can continue to bring forth existing and new data on the limits of adolescent reasoning, judgment and decision-making" in reference to the death penalty.
[source]

On the other hand they are are quick to defend the right of teenage girls to receive abortions without the consent or knowledge of their parents, claiming that:

"Psychological theory and research on cognitive, social, and moral development support the finding that adolescents, as a group, are able to understand, reason, and make decisions about important life situations. When comparing adolescents to adults, research has found that adolescents who considered abortion were generally as competent as legal adults in their decision-making; however, adolescents under age 15 who did not consider abortion were generally found to be less competent in their decision-making than adults (Ambuel & Rappaport,1992)."
[source]

So which is it??? Do adolescents have "limits of reasoning, judgement, and and decision-making" or are they "as a group, able to understand, reason, and make decisions about important life situation"? Please, somebody help me understand!

3. "National Consensus"

20 states permitted the execution of minors up until yesterday, including major population centers such as Texas. The other 18 death penalty states already had restrictions against capital punishment in juvenile cases. If my math is correct, that's less than 50 percent. Hmmm, if this were baseball that would be a pretty awesome percentage.

At this point, all of the reasoning for the decision seems point to the fact that our justices suffer from envy of the Legislative branch. I mean, does this country really need a separation of powers in the state anymore? Come on.

hilarious end to ward churchill's university of hawaii visit

i just got done listening to "professor" ward churchill's Q&A with reporters in hawaii. the first four-fifths of the discussion are relatively normal, if you disregard the screeching introduction offered by the host, which sounded more like a rousing international A.N.S.W.E.R. protest than a civilized, academic Q&A.

but as the Q&A went on, the fawning churchillites dropped back into the pack and some tough questions actually got asked. showing his maturity, churchill became enraged at a question about his disputed ethnicity and abruptly ended the meeting by leaving the room.

When asked by Hawaii Reporter in a Feb. 21, 2005, press conference if he is American Indian, Churchill became enraged by the question, said it was irrelevant and would not answer. When pressed by Hawaii Reporter and other media present on the American Indian issue, Churchill called the question "racist," and asked if President George W. Bush should have to confirm he is white. When KITV Reporter Denby Fawcett said to Churchill, "We'll take that as a 'no,'" Churchill lunged at Fawcett shouting "What did you say?" Fawcett said since he would not answer "yes" and confirm his heritage, he must not be American Indian. In a fury, Churchill stormed away from reporters, ending the press conference.

earlier on, he had trouble answering a question comparing the september 11, 2001 attack to the assault on pearl harbor in 1941. his answer implied that, while the empire of japan might not have been justified in attacking hawaii (it was mainly inhabited by polynesians), if the attack had targeted an area full of white businessmen it would have been more justifiable.

some good information on churchill comes via ann coulter here and here. written coverage of churchill's visit to hawaii is provided by the hawaii reporter. the audio is here. my favorite ward churchill quotation?

"The only thing I can do is to pursue a different slogan: U.S. out of America, U.S. off the planet, U.S. out of our lives, U.S. into the dustbin of history." --Ward Churchill

let's get this man some tenure!

UPDATE: don't forget ward churchill's copyright infringement problems.

The United Nations: Does it have any legitimacy?

First this:

A Frenchman has become the first United Nations worker to confess to having sex with under-age girls in the Democratic Republic of Congo, but 19 peacekeeping troops implicated in the abuse scandal are likely to escape prosecution.
[source]

Now this from the UN's new blog:

Disturbing numbers published by UNICEF: "One in 12 of the world's children is involved in the worst forms of child labor, including slavery, forced labor, hazardous work, militant action and the commercial sex industry, according to a report published Monday by the U.N. child welfare agency, UNICEF."
[source]

Still no word on how many of these 1-in-12 kids are working for the UN...

Does the UN even have any legitimacy left to squander?

Another Karl Rove Coup?

Every Republican's favorite Democrat was officially elected DNC Chair.

Linda Fasulo - UN Reporter On the Dole

Over at Accuracy In Media they have a series of great articles on how Linda Fasulo, a reporter for NBC who covers the UN, was actually on the payroll of Pro-UN foundations.

Linda Fasulo, the U.N. correspondent for NBC News and MSNBC, has written a pro-U.N. book, An Insider's Guide to the U.N., which reads like the U.N. paid for it. Actually, the pro-U.N. lobby paid for it. In a monstrous conflict of interest for a supposed straight news reporter, Fasulo acknowledges Ted Turner's U.N. Foundation and Better World Campaign for "their generous financial support" of her book project. She also thanks the Rockefeller Brothers Fund "for helping to fund the project."

The book is about "one of the finest and most important governing bodies," she says. Of the U.N. chief, she writes like a school girl with a crush. "It is hard to find anyone who can mount a serious criticism of [Kofi] Annan's performance as Secretary General," she claims. His performance is so "impressive" that she wonders if a "cult of personality" has risen up around him. One U.S. official is reported to be "astonished by just how good a Secretary General Kofi Annan has been."

Read all about Linda Fasulo here.

Heroes

hero: A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life

Here are some experiences of Iraqis while voting.

Ali:

As I got out it was still early and I saw no one on the streets but as I got near to the voting center I started seeing people in groups heading the same way. Most of them were women. I saw a crippled man and my old neighbor and his older wife leaning on their walking sticks going to vote. An old woman cleaning her door step stopped me, "Say son, can I go and vote?" She asked after she saw many people going to vote. "Sure Khala (aunt)! Everyone can". She thanked me and went inside apparently to change and get her IDs.

....

The voting center that was chosen in our district is a high school in the middle of the Neighborhood . This was the same place I went in 1996 to cast my vote in a poll asking if we wanted to have Saddam as a president for life or not. I had to go at that time. The threats for anyone who refused to take that poll were no less than the death penalty.

...

This time we went by choice and the threat was exactly the opposite. As I was walking with many people towards the center explosion hit and gun fire were heard but most were not that close. People didn't seem to pay attention to that. Some of them even brought their little kids with them! It's like the Eid but only a thousand times better.

...

As I left one of the gurads said to me as he handed me back my cellular phone,"God bless you and your beloved ones. We don't know how to thank you. Please excuse any inconvinience on our part. We wish we didn't have to search you or limit your freedom. You are heroes" I was struck with surprise and felt ashamed. This man was risking his life all these hours in what has become the utmost target for all terrorists in Iraq and yet he's apologizing and calling us heroes. I thanked him back and told him that he and his comrads are the true heroes and that we can never be grateful enough for their services.

Mohammed & Omar:

We would love to share what we did this morning with the whole world, we can't describe the feelings we've been through but we'll try to share as much as we can with you.

We woke up this morning one hour before the alarm clock was supposed to ring. As a matter of fact, we barely slept at all last night out of excitement and anxiety.

...

We had all kinds of feelings in our minds while we were on our way to the ballot box except one feeling that never came to us, that was fear.

We could smell pride in the atmosphere this morning; everyone we saw was holding up his blue tipped finger with broad smiles on the faces while walking out of the center.

I couldn't think of a scene more beautiful than that.

From the early hours of the morning, People filled the street to the voting center in my neighborhood; youths, elders, women and men. Women's turn out was higher by the way. And by 11 am the boxes where I live were almost full!

Anyone watching that scene cannot but have tears of happiness, hope, pride and triumph.

The sounds of explosions and gunfire were clearly heard, some were far away but some were close enough to make the windows of the center shake but no one seemed to care about them as if the people weren't hearing these sounds at all.

I saw an old woman that I thought would get startled by the loud sound of a close explosion but she didn't seem to care, instead she was busy verifying her voting station's location as she found out that her name wasn't listed in this center.

How can I describe it!? Take my eyes and look through them my riends, you have supported the day of Iraq's freedom and today, Iraqis have proven that they're not going to disappoint their country or their friends.

...

I walked forward to my station, cast my vote and then headed to the box, where I wanted to stand as long as I could, then I moved to mark my finger with ink, I dipped it deep as if I was poking the eyes of all the world's tyrants.

I put the paper in the box and with it, there were tears that I couldn't hold; I was trembling with joy and I felt like I wanted to hug the box but the supervisor smiled at me and said "brother, would you please move ahead, the people are waiting for their turn".

Yes brothers, proceed and fill the box!

These are stories that will be written on the brightest pages of history.

It was hard for us to leave the center but we were happy because we were sure that we will stand here in front of the box again and again and again.

Today, there's no voice louder than that of freedom.

No more confusion about what the people want, they have said their word and they said it loud and the world has got to respct and support the people's will.

God bless your brave steps sons of Iraq and God bless the defenders of freedom.

Aasha Al-Iraq….Aasha Al-Iraq….Aasha Al-Iraq.

And more to come...

social security calculator

calculate how much money you'll get back when you retire. you'll need a box of tissues, sucker.

for what i really think about social security, read this.

hat tip to the heritage foundation and to gopbloggers

november vote mandates conservative agenda

how's this for evidence of a conservative mandate: about 115 million people voted for right-leaning presidential candidates in the last election. according to politicalcompass.org (as well as many insightful political commentators) john kerry was running as a republican. fortunately for america, slightly over 50% of the people could tell he was lying.

as for kerry's 2008 aspirations, dusty at pathetic rim suggests how he might make himself more attractive to more voters.

cell phone users: deserved of guevaraian justice?

read about it here: This Liberal: Che Guevara at BYU

Ban the swastika?

Apparently some German lawmakers, seizing an opportunity provided by the outrage at Prince Harry's wardrobe malfunction, are suggesting that there be a Europe-wide ban on Nazi insignia.

"All of Europe suffered under Nazi crimes in the past, therefore, it would be logical for Nazi symbols to be banned all over Europe," said Silvana Koch-Merin, vice president of the Liberal group in the European Parliament.

[source]

It seems to me that the best hope for not repeating history is remembering it. Remembrance doesn't imply that honoring (or wearing the insignia in public) would be necessary.

If this ban simply bans favorable public displays of Nazi insignia then I would be inclined to applaud the effort. But I can't see the benefit of trying to outlaw symbols (anywhere and everywhere) associated with Nazism.

want to laugh/cry? read these insights from provo's best, brightest

Tsunamis | ProvoPulse.com

doug and i have both chimed in on the discussion, but most of the gargantuan BS is coming from joseph price (aka provojoe) and r. blades (aka mr. marbles). here are a few excerpts from the discussion:

UPDATE: as is the case in many discussions that pit liberal BYU students against conservative ones, this thread has degenerated into a battle over whose political ideology is more righteous. indeed, the post makes fascinating reading, and i cannot attempt to do it justice with a summary. provo pulse

when powell called the united states generous (in response to a UN official who called us "stingy") price called powell's statement "tacky".

price would apparently be opposed to putting any country on the terror watch list until we fully cleanse our nation of al-qaeda's presence. his rebuttal to one of my arguments was, "Al-Qaeda operates in the United States, too. Remember?".

he is also the king of cliches and overused talking points. i'll note the best ones here:

Life is not a football game

I hope Bush will think twice before "wrapping himself" in 9/11...

You can't understand the world from an easy chair.

blades is no dud either. he enters the discussion late, but piles on the BS real quick to catch up! for example, he suggests that osama bin laden doesn't hate americans and calls such an idea a false "paradigm" we all have.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

the thread is kind of getting that "democratic underground" feel to it.

then, blades, in sputtering disbelief, demands, "On what evidence do you base your statement that entire populations are taught that we are the Great Satan?".

maybe it's the fact that muslim schools, muslim religious leaders, and muslim political leaders all teach the young and impressionable that we are. see the results here and here.

update: it's getting worse. blades excused the fact that while arab leaders were sending condolences to the united states, palestinians were dancing in the streets on september 12 "because they thought the war against us was over" and they had won (not because they saw news reports that thousands had been killed).

he then goes on to claim that LDS church president gordon hinckley was actually advocating peace when he cited the war prophet moroni in justification for taking up arms against aggressors. laughably, blades called it a "semantic matter".

blades justified muslim aggression against us (like the september 11 attacks) because of US investment in saudi oil. seriously. he claimed this link supported his point.

the inconsistency of both price and blades' positions is appalling. for example, someone noted that blades had made both of these statements:

"I'll give you pictures of us celebrating the death of 90,000 Japanese civilians."

"I'm not saying that we were celebrating the death of Japanese civilians"

perhaps it was a semantic matter.

the blog administrator points out price's history of rabidly demanding the separation of church and state, and notes the inconsistency of his current position with that stance. in the thread, price argues for a theocratic government that will never fight a war, only turn the other cheek repeatedly, and have "unconditional" love (an unscriptural term) for our enemies. as i said, this is one of their many inconsistencies.

one of my favorite inconsistencies, which both seem to espouse, is, "muslims don't hate us!" alongside "muslims hate us because of x !"

i'll keep updating the discussion from here, but you can read the entire thread at provo pulse.

christmas anti-cheer

recently, while watching television, i overheard the most retarded quotation of the modern era. i blogged it here, and mason of provo pulse kindly quoted me on his blog.

the reaction on this blog centered on whether jesus could really be said to be the "reason" for christmas celebrations, because of the pagan origins of ancient december 25th celebrations.

the discussion on provo pulse, on the other hand, focused on my sloppy journalism, my failure to capitalize the name of diety, and my "abrupt" use of epithets. [link] i have added my response in the comments on that site, and below:

first catch up on the discussion here: http://provopulse.com/home/?q=node/view/571#comment
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

i am the author of the piece in question, and i think i should say something in my own defense. i watched the entire exchange on hannity and colmes the other night, and the discussion centered on the issue of whether or not public buildings (especially schools) should allow the singing of christmas carols, the use of the phrase "merry christmas", and the mention of jesus to be sanctioned within their walls.

i posted my thoughts at all-encompassingly before the transcript became available, and when i did get access to the transcript, i read it and put it online immediately. i saw what everyone else here saw--the guest qualified his statements in such a way so that they didn't sound quite as retarded as i claim. but i maintain that his argument is wholly moronic. the fact that his comment is consistent with an utterly absurd argument may trick the likes of the provo princess and laurence burton into accepting it as reasonable [but what would i know: "he didn't capitalize the savior's name or duly acknowledge his official priesthood office (gasp)! he is, therefore, discredited and we must shun him in favor of those who properly punctuate their arguments!"]

GORSKY: What I'm saying is, if you have government-funded events, and they're turned into religious events to promote the idea that Jesus is the reason for the season, that that is wrong.

first of all, how often do government-funded events turn into religious revivals? the final sentence of my post is in response to this claim by gorsky. i never left my elementary school auditorium after singing in the christmas concert feeling "saved" or converted. neither can i envision an instance in which such an event morphs into a religious service. his main point is without merit.

secondly, when timothy gorsky goes on to say, "for (any non-christian religious group), jesus is not the reason for the season" he implies that these groups celebrate christmas alongside christians, but just leave the messy 'christ' part out of their observances. this is pretty ridiculous. jews, hindus, muslims, and buddhists generally do not celebrate christmas. for example, check out this website [http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=8895], where there is discussion about whether american muslims should celebrate christmas. ironically, the one reason given to celebrate it is that muslims DO believe that jesus was a prophet. whoops! looks like christ could be "the reason for the season" for one muslim out there. but the response from someone else is that, though christmas has become a national holiday, it is still a christian holiday. strike two! and whether or not people of other religious groups see christ as the center of the festivities participated in, with religious connotations, by 80-90% of americans is completely irrelevant. he is.

kc ushijima (who is neither royalty or a good researcher, both of which he claims: "i scoured the transcript--which i found camouflaged in a text link at the bottom of his entry--and located key discrepancies!"), writes:

I'm not a scholar on the Jewish Religion, but to my knowledge, Chanukkah is not about the birth (or even death) of Jesus.

nope. but like the crucifixion, it is meant to counteract his influence. let me quote from judaism 101:

Most American Jews feel a sort of ambivalence about Chanukkah. On the one hand, most of them know that Chanukkah is not a big deal, and they don't want to make a big deal about it. On the other hand, Christmas is everywhere, unavoidable and overwhelming, and Jews want something of their own to counterbalance it. This is the primary motivation behind elaborate Chanukkah decorations and enormous Chanukkah menorahs in public areas: Chanukkah is not very important, but asserting our Jewish identity and distinctiveness and existence in the face of overwhelming pressure to conform to a non-Jewish norm is important. [source]

looks like christmas is the reason for the season--even for jews! and if jesus is the reason for christmas, well...just put together this simple hypothetical syllogism: if jesus then christmas, if christmas then chanukka. therefore if jesus then chanukka. in addition to this perfectly logical argument, chanukka celebrates something to do with the temple, which (LDS know) had EVERYTHING to do with the messiah.

but going back to your statements...

I think that Jewish people may still celebrate Chanukah around the "holiday" season, even if it weren't for the Christian celebration (and market commercialization) of Jesus' birth.

if either yom kippur or rosh hashana (the two biggest jewish holidays) fell on december 25, your argument might be somewhat convincing. too bad they don't. as jewfaq.org admits, chanukka is hyped because of christmas, and christmas is because of jesus.

and i'm still searching online chat rooms for the huge (but SECRET!) hindu holiday that falls in december and that is the cause for so much december revelry among members of that religious sect.

getting back to the real question: what kind of learning have we engendered in our public schools? isn't it odd that our schools (purpose: to educate america's youth) are being asked to disguise or ignore the real story of christmas in the name of the oft-misapplied 'separation of church and state'? it's insane, if you ask me. and i still argue that gorsky's words were retarded--no matter how consistent they have been shown to be with his ludicrous position.

most retarded quotation of the modern era

some guy from some atheist organization went on national tv last night and defended the expelling of christmas carols from public schools with this statement:

"jesus is not the reason for christmas."

hey idiot! if christ isn't the reason for christmas, then what's the problem with singing about him in the darn songs? he must not be the reason for the songs, either (the songs all just happen to mention him).

hey, i think we've found our solution! normal americans go on singing the songs. you go on telling yourself that god doesn't exist and that christ is a figment of people's imaginations. sweet!

on the other hand, christmas (besides the curiously religious-sounding root of the word--i'll look into it!) is a federal holiday. religion--civil religion, not some state church--is an integral part of our national culture. it does contribute to public morality (without which the people could not be governed). crapola, it's important!

so give us all a break, moronic atheists, from your assumptions that EVERY.SINGLE.MENTION.OF.GOD. is somehow an unpardonable proselytistic act by an oppressive state religion.
- - - - - -
UPDATE I: here's the transcript. the guy's name is timothy gorsky, from the church of free thought.

UPDATE II: for further discussion, check out the comments below the post here.

taxes and fairness

when you put it this way, it seems the only way to be fair is to tax workers less:

"What if, instead of paying taxes in money, the government forced you to work on a chain gang in order to pay taxes? If you have to work until 5PM every day, but everyone else gets to go home at noon, would that be fair?"

"Although an income tax seems like a confiscation of your money, it is really a confiscation of your time. After all, you earn your income by sacrificing your time. If you work 40 hours each week, and you pay 50% of your income in taxes, that means you work 20 hours a week for yourself and 20 hours for the government. Sure, you don't notice, but that's only because you spend your 20 government hours sitting at the same desk, drinking the same coffee, and talking to the same co-workers that you do during the 20 hours each week you spend working for yourself."

"Imagine it wasn't like that. Imagine, instead, that you worked your 20 government hours each week busting rocks on that chain gang. Some of the other folks on the chain gang only have to bust rocks for 10 hours a week, because their tax rate is 25%. You spend twice as much time on the chain gang."

"That's how the graduated income tax discriminates. (Proponents like calling it a "progressive" tax, because that sounds like progress, and how could progress be bad?) By setting different rates for different people, the government forces some citizens to sacrifice more of their lives on the IRS chain gang. If taxation is partial slavery, why should some slaves be more partial than others?"

"People who favor a graduated tax say it's fair because it makes people pay more as they earn more. True, but that would be the case under a flat tax as well. Suppose there's one tax rate, at 20%. Someone making $50,000 a year pays $10,000; another person making $250,000 pays $50,000. According to my calculations, $50,000 is more than $10,000 by about $40,000. Even under a flat tax, higher earners pay more. What progressive tax advocates really want is for the high earners to pay more than more, to penalize them for their success by making them spend disproportionately more time on the IRS chain gang. That doesn't sound fair to me." [link]

the above text was lifted from brain-terminal.com, which means we didn't write it. to read another post that we didn't write on the subject of taxes, go here.

how to enjoy a dictator

are you a democrat who is depressed at the prospect of living the next four years under the evil dictatorship of george w bush? try being more positive! perhaps you could learn something about this from the little north korean girl, mo kin. she lives under the iron thumb of kim jung il and loves it!

see also smiling, my parents kiss, and the song that specifically references father kim jung il and his "gift grapes of love that are huge like candy!"

link via weasel manor

our non-replicating liberal foes

read michelle malkin's post red states, blue states, and babies for more on how democrats have fumbled away the stranglehold they once had on american politics.

outrage of the day

courtesy of flynnfiles:

A school bus driver outside of Buffalo was fired for telling school children that not a single cure has been developed through embryonic stem-cell research in twenty-three years. She didn't molest a child. She didn't drive drunk. She didn't even slip up and wish a student Merry Christmas (verboten) instead of Happy Holidays (gelobt). She merely said something that was true. [link]

speaking of the first amendment, check out evan coyne maloney's new film, brainwashing 101, a documentary chronicling the unbelievable measures many of america's universities take to stifle free speech. you can watch a preview or download the 46-minute film here.

you mean, "what's the frequency, dan?"

in celebration of dan rather's recently announced retirement, we'd like to take a look back at one weird moment in his life.

One night in October 1986, Rather was walking down a Manhattan street when he was punched from behind and thrown to the ground. His assailant kicked and beat him while repeating, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?"
- - - - -
The attack inspired the 1994 R.E.M. hit "What's the Frequency, Kenneth." Being a good sport, Dan Rather even accompanied the band when they performed the song on a Late Show with David Letterman appearance.

In 1997, based on a tip from a psychiatrist, Rather's attacker was identified as William Tager. According to the psychiatrist, Tager, who was currently serving time for killing an NBC stagehand, blamed news media for beaming signals into his head, and thought if he could just find out the correct frequency, he could block those signals that were constantly assailing him. Hence the enigmatic inquiry. [link]

ratherbiased.com has great stuff on the life of the CBS anchor here.

u.s. marines in falluja

the NBC News "get" of the week -- a video sequence of the Marine in question shooting a wounded Fallujah fighter after shouting that the man was "faking" his incapacity -- has been airing at half-hour intervals as if it were the Lost Episodes of Abu Ghraib. [link] [via LGF]

at the same time, one must ask, where is the breathless, accusatory coverage of the french shooting spree in ivory coast?

NPR: "we are pretty much a bunch of right-wing kooks"

NPR, one of the news organizations most often guilty of political bias to the left, has come up with the whopper of all whoppers: "there is conservative bias in the media." [link]. and the story takes the cake. i laughed out loud when they implied that jon stewart's daily show is non-partisan. (does 1 kerry joke equal 19 jokes bush jokes? not in math class. but on NPR, that's called "unbiased!"). the story is about 5 minutes long; just go listen.

who did NPR interview for the story?
*ABC "nightline" host, ted koppel
*comedy central's "daily show" co-producer, stewart bailey
*mother jones magazine publisher, jay harris
*filmmaker of "outfoxed", an anti-fox news documentary, robert greenwald.

all of the above lean left. there was a four second sound-byte from a conservative radio personality at the beginning of the segment, which presumably served to balance the piece out.

in NPR's attempt to highlight the "underlying conservative bias" in the media, they were unable to find more than one conservative media personality to interview. not too convincing.

this "conservative bias" theory is about as dodgy as bill maher's claim that hollywood is a hotbed of conservatism. i swear, these liberals will advocate any theory--no matter how outlandish--to convince themselves that they're still fighting against the "system".

in another story, NPR wasn't happy with the pew research poll's findings that american journalists are, by far, more liberal than conservative. so they asked them to throw the study out in favor of a study would reflect--get this--the probability that the "media owners, publishers and upper management of news organizations are conservatives" who are putting pressure on the journalists. no joke.

jeffrey dvorkin, 2 June 2004, "pew study: journalists and liberal bias": I hope that Pew -- a highly respected polling organization -- would try again. A better poll would be to look more deeply into how journalistic checks and balances work: Do editors find that they are dealing with bias more than they used to? Do reporters and editors sense more or less pressure to deal with the campaigns in a certain way than they did in 2000? How does commercialism impact on the quality of reporting? Where does that pressure come from? Self-censorship or managerial fiat? Do readers, viewers and listeners sense a reticence on the part of journalists to go after the story in a post-Sept. 11 political environment?

mr. dvorkin, how about this: how about we look at the media publications and productions themselves? the journalists' finished products don't lie. why are you in favor of ignoring existential evidence so we can ask such touchy-feely questions, the responses to which can be manipulated?

for real, actual examples of bias against conservative viewpoints, there have been some excellent pieces in the last few weeks. a hilarious must-read from mark steyn provides excerpts to expose the cheerleading much of the media has done for kerry. then steyn goes on to provide perhaps the best analysis of the frenzied, pre-election al-qaqaa news:

the Qaqaagate story is fascinating. What happened and when in Saddam's al-Qaqaa facility is somewhat murky. Had the shameless gang at "60 Minutes" had their way, the missing explosives story would have aired 36 hours before the polls opened, with no time for anybody to put the alternative to the Bush incompetence scenario -- i.e., that the stuff was moved to Syria before the war began. But never mind that. And never mind that the source for this story is a discredited U.N. official, Mohammed el-Baradei, on whose watch the IAEA not only missed entirely Libya's WMD program but has proved remarkably accommodating of Iran's.

Forget all that. The main problem with this story is that it makes no sense in terms of the Democrats' own narrative. For a year and a half, they've told us there were no WMD, Saddam wasn't a threat, and "BUSH LIED!!!!!!!!!" about it all. I happen to disagree with that, but there's no doubt that simply by hammering it home all day and night the Dems had some effect. Now they're saying whoa, let's back up, yes, as it happens, these non-existent weapons that Bush lied about the non-threatening Saddam having he did, in fact, have -- and that fool Bush let the non-existent weapons get away. [link]

*see also the NY post

*charles at LGF notes how conspicuously absent the al qaqaa weapons story has been from the news since the election (suddenly it's not important?)

*alydaynet has some incriminating evidence from "unbiased" CNN.

*carole simpson echoes a deranged leftist author and equates conservatives with slaveholders.

this bias, coupled with the loss of the media's favored candidate, is why many are calling the main stream media (or MSM) one of the main losers this election year.

and i couldn't agree more.

Reed Irvine

Reed Irvine, the founder of Accuracy In Media and longtime media critic, has passed away.

You can visit the site dedicated to Reed and his work, where there is a more extensive biography of this great man.

simultaneously pitiful and hilarious

i haven't browsed through all the pictures on this site yet. i'm saving it for a day when i'm feeling really depressed and need some sort of pick-me-up.

it's called "sorry everybody", and purports to apologize to the world for the results of the recent presidential election. thanks for the great pictures! i promise they'll all be uploaded to uglypeople.com within the week!

another thing that has literally made my day is the newsweek story written from inside the kerry campaign. [link] it seems to confirm everything i've ever assumed about john kerry, but was afraid to actually believe.

UPDATE: if you've combed through kos, the democratic underground, and sorry everybody, but still thirst for more "inspiring obstinance" from the rabidly anti-bush, try this 14-year old kid's blog.

The Terrorist & The Whore

We are reminded, on this day of celebration, that The Terrorist was married. Many people are surprised to learn that Yasser Arafat's wife, Suha, had not seen the terrorist/Nobel Peace Prize recipient since 2002 (the start of the recent intifada). It must of been a joyous reunion when Yasser was wheeled into a Parisian hospital to receive treatment for his unknown illness. But alas, all disgusting and repulsive things must come to an end. Including the marriage of The Terrorist and The Whore.

According to dictionary.com:

whore n.

1. A prostitute.
2. A person considered sexually promiscuous.
3. A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.

intr.v. whored, whor·ing, whores
1. To associate or have sexual relations with prostitutes or a prostitute.
2. To accept payment in exchange for sexual relations.
3. To compromise one's principles for personal gain.

The beloved Suha Arafat fits at least three of the six definitions provided above. Since I am unaware as to her personal dallyings in Paris for the last two years while Yasser has been holed up in Ramallah, I'm not sure if the others are as descriptive of her dark and empty soul.

Allahu Akbar

God is great.

Seriously.

The wretched human life form known as Yasser Arafat has officially begun his long sojourn in hell.

al-qaeda, al-jazeera to merge

in a move that most are calling "unsurprising", al-qaeda, the world's foremost terror and death cult, and al-jazeera, the 24-hour beheading channel, today announced a merger that analysts expect to benefit the arab world for years to come.

al-qaeda has been looking to consolidate its propaganda and unfounded lies departments with a viable communication vehicle. al-jazeera's television and internet divisions will be a welcome addition to the al-qaeda family.

al-jazeera is expected to enjoy a much-needed popularity boost among it's viewers. having long been accused of being "a puppet outfit of al-qaeda, much like prime minister allawi is a puppet of the american imperialists", al-jazeera will now enjoy the status of a legitimate arm of the al-qaeda organization.

western contributors are likely to include the likes of michael moore, sean penn, barbara streisand, and al franken. keith olbermann was in consideration for a nightly show until executives began to suspect he is a jew, and the offer was withdrawn. olbermann said he took no offense, saying specifically, "no, i'm not offended. look, i'm an enlightened intellectual. i don't need to prop myself up with religious nonsense. i will continue to support any group that is anti-american, regardless of its other positions."

when asked if the break in beheading coverage would demoralize al-jazeera's viewing audience, an executive for the respected news group answered, "of course not. we'll be working with the religious freedom fighters to streamline the whole beheading process--the wailing, the threats, the invocations of the name of allah, and the actual hacking itself--to make things go as quickly as they need to go. i assure you that you'll be seeing more beheadings--not less."

UPDATE--breaking news: DUBAI (AFP) - Iraqi Defence Minister Hazem Shaalan branded the popular Arabic-language satellite television Al-Jazeera a "channel of terrorism", in a newspaper interview.

That brought a sharp reaction from the broadcaster, which expressed its "utter outrage" at what it said was an "unsubstantiated allegation".

"Al-Jazeera is a channel of terrorism. That is clear and we say openly and without hesitation: Al-Jazeera is a channel of terrorism," Shaalan was quoted by the London-based Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat as saying.

The Qatar-based station, which has been banned from reporting in Iraq since early August, has frequently been accused by US and Iraqi authorities of inciting violence by screening "exclusive" videotapes from Islamic militants, including Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Despite the ban, the 24-hour news channel is often first to announce breaking news from the war-ravaged country, including kidnappings and beheadings of foreign hostages as well as statements from militant groups.

Shaalan charged that Iraqi "terrorist" Omar Hadeed, who he alleged has links to Al-Qaeda, is a brother of Al-Jazeera's office director in Iraq, Hamed Hadeed.

He also said the journalist was receiving videos showing beheadings in the restive Iraqi city of Fallujah from his brother.

Al-Jazeera has denied that its Iraq director has any relationship with Omar Hadeed.

Asharq Al-Awsat reported on Friday that Omar Hadeed is a former bodyguard of Saddam Hussein and a top aide to Iraq's most wanted man, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and that he led the battle against US and Iraqi forces in Fallujah.

"We consider him a terrorist for attacking and killing national guard forces as well as multinational forces," said Shaalan.

Some 10,000 US troops, backed by 2,000 Iraqi forces, launched an assault on Fallujah on November 8 to wrest control of the city from rebels.

"Let God curse all those who terrorise Iraqi citizens and children of Iraq, be they journalists or others. The day will come when we will take (measures) against Al-Jazeera other than by words," the minister warned.

He said the channel continues to operate in Iraq "secretly, in contravention of the law."

In its response Tuesday, Al-Jazeera expressed its "deep concern about these allegations that are tantamount to inciting violence against the channel's employees.

"Consequently, the channel has initiated a process in which these claims are looked at from a legal perspective, with a view to ensuring the safety of its people, in addition to safeguarding its reputation.

"While Al-Jazeera channel is dismayed with this smear campaign, it nevertheless asserts that the only judge of its professional integrity is the millions of people around the world who look upon it as the news source of choice. [via LGF]

Mark Steyn

If there are any all-encompassingly readers who do not regularly frequent marksteyn.com, add it to your list of "must-read" sites today. Not only is he hilarious and brilliant, but his incisive commentary is right on the money.

My favorite from a recent Steyn column on the election:

On election day, I was driving through Vermont and found myself behind a car with a Kerry-Edwards sticker and an Instead of Being Born Again, Why Not Grow Up? sticker. Fair enough, the feeling's mutual: the secular, coastal, libertine Democratic Party has zero appeal to born-again Christians. The problem is the crude numbers: 40 per cent of Americans identify themselves as born-again. So right there you've written off 40 per cent of the electorate. What have you got in return? The gay vote? Five per cent? And Bush got a quarter of that.

So, go visit Steyn's site...and visit often. You won't be disappointed.

David Brooks With Some Interesting Insight

David Brooks hits the nail on the head explaining how the entire election wasn't decided exclusively on values. Or as he says:

This year, the official story is that throngs of homophobic, Red America values-voters surged to the polls to put George Bush over the top.

This theory certainly flatters liberals, and it is certainly wrong.

Although I think that if Bush had pushed values-oriented policies more (partial-birth abortion and gay marriage, in particular) the election would have been a true landslide.

Brooks goes on to point out:

The reality is that this was a broad victory for the president. Bush did better this year than he did in 2000 in 45 out of the 50 states. He did better in New York, Connecticut and, amazingly, Massachusetts. That's hardly the Bible Belt. Bush, on the other hand, did not gain significantly in the 11 states with gay marriage referendums.

Which I think reinforces the folly of not bringing values explicitly into the election.

look up "paranoid" in a dictionary and you'll see...

par·a·noid
--adjective
1. Relating to, characteristic of, or affected with paranoia.
2. Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others: a paranoid suspicion that the phone might be bugged.

--noun
One affected with paranoia, i.e., Dan Rather.

on election night, he seriously inquired of ed bradley whether the white house would be using the blogs again to further their sinister purposes to stop the provisional ballot count in ohio.

[video]
[transcript]

speaking of funny news anchors, did anybody see peter jennings stumble and almost fall after he finally signed off at about 6am EDT wednesday morning? it was a long night for these guys.

Daily Kos: The Gift That Keeps On Giving!

The liberal lunacy knows no end...may it continue for many moons to come!

From Daily Kos:

...the Democratic Party as currently constituted is on its deathbed. It needs reforms, and it needs them now. Quite frankly, the status quo simply won't cut it.

Howard Dean for DNC Chair.

Yeeaaarrrgghhh!!

Typical Reaction of Liberals

Democrats are so confused about their STUNNING defeat at the ballot box yesterday. Unable to accept the fact that they are outnumbered by conservative Americans, they will wander in the proverbial wilderness for a while now.

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I offer a glimpse of their confusion, courtesy of Democratic Underground (aka, The Net Nuthouse):

The reported results coming out of Florida and Ohio simply make no sense to me. I cannot comprehend how we could have such a massive increase in turnout and not win the election.

The public has spoken...the fools!

the "election trifecta" constitutes a mandate from the people

if you had asked me before the election, what three things would i have liked to see come wednesday morning, november 3, 2004, i’d have said the following:

*president bush re-elected
*state marriage amendments pass
*daschle out of office

i can’t believe all three happened. and so CONVINCINGLY. i am beside myself like a six year-old on christmas morning. america has spoken. liberals are calling us stupid, brainwashed, and uninformed, but we have drawn a line in the political sand.

there has been a noticeable reversal over the last few years of the cultural revolution that began to divide our country in the ‘60s. liberals are now sounding so completely wacko ("let’s marry people of the same gender!"), nominating such laughable candidates (unexperienced opie and the unathletic, french-sympathizing elitist), and getting endorsements from such hated enemies of our country (bin laden and arafat) that unless they get some classy people in their party, and scale back on the lunacy, they don’t have a bright future in america.

president bush has been re-elected with a majority of the vote--the first such instance for any presidential candidate since 1988. he won the popular vote and the electoral vote by generous margins.

he did this while the republican party picked up seats in the house and senate, adding to majorities they already had. they unseated a party leader for the first time in half a century, with daschle's (D-SD) loss to the thune.

the president got more of the women's, catholics', and hispanic's vote than most expected. voters have supported his moral leadership, amending state constitutions to ban acceptance of homosexual marriage in every state where the issue was called to a vote.

and this is the trend of all national elections since 2000--landslides for the GOP. this brings me to the obvious conclusion: this is a mandate from the people.

part I of the election trifecta: victory for bush
part II of the election trifecta: victory for traditional marriage
part III of the election trifecta: defeat for daschle

part III of the election trifecta: defeat for daschle

tranny daschle loses seat to thune

Daschle fell to former Rep. John Thune, [becoming] the first party leader to lose a race for re-election in more than a half century.

good riddance, sir. by the way, when the dust settles, republicans should have 55 seats in the senate.

part I of the election trifecta
part II of the election trifecta

part II of the election trifecta: victory for traditional marriage

BostonHerald.com - Election 2004 Coverage: Gay marriage banned in 11-for-11 state sweep

correct me if i'm wrong, but i think this brings the total to 18 states that have passed amendments reinforcing the unique status of traditional marriage.

In a resounding, coast-to-coast rejection of gay marriage, voters in 11 states approved constitutional amendments yesterday limiting marriage to one man and one woman.

The amendments won, often by huge margins, in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Utah and Oregon - the one state where gay-rights activists hoped to prevail. The bans won by a 3-to-1 margin in Kentucky and Georgia, 3-to-2 in Ohio, and6-to-1 in Mississippi.

"This issue does not deeply divide America," said conservative activist Gary Bauer. "The country overwhelmingly rejects same-sex marriage, and our hope is that both politicians and activist judges will read these results and take them to heart." [link]

part I of the election trifecta

part III of the election trifecta

part I of the election trifecta: victory for bush

The reaction from Europe is going to be something to savor for a very long time, as Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder realize how thoroughly their nuanced, post-modern, morally bankrupt ideologies have been rejected by the American public.

The New York Times and CBS News and the entire mainstream media tried their best to bring down George W. Bush, and only succeeded in bringing down... themselves.

The people have proven their mettle once again, in a time of great peril. God bless America. [lgf]

- - - - -

"Congratulations, Mr. President, on your reelection. Watch out for the legal coup." [avman]

thank you to everyone who prayed for, voted for, volunteered for, and otherwise supported the president. may god bless the american people.

part II of the election trifecta
part III of the election trifecta