Saturday, July 02, 2005


Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat and a member of the committee, told reporters it would be "a shame" if Mr. Bush makes his nomination "without real face-to-face, back-and-forth consultation." Democrats argue that this is the correct meaning of the Senate's constitutional "advice and consent" role.
Schumer and the other "already-hot-under-the-collar and itching-for-a-fight" Lefties misunderstand and abuse the US Constitution. The US Constitution says that the presdient shall nominate jugdes and that the Senate shall "advise and consent." The US Constitution DOES NOT say that the president shall ask advise of the MINORITY PARTY in the Senate.

Lefties love to bring up that Clinton consulted with Hatch before he made his two nominations. Well, When Democrat President BJ Clinton consulted with Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, was CHAIRMAN of the Judiciary Committee because the GOP was the MAJORITY PARTY in the Senate; therefore Clinton HAD TO CONSULT if he wanted to get a nominee confirmed by a majority vote.

Therefore, I suggest that Bush consult with Frist and Spector.

In a democracy, MAJORITY RULES.

ASIDE: I wish that the Democrats and the Left felt as angry and aggressive about the neojihadists as they do Bush and the GOP! Sadly, they are more concerned about the folks like Clarence Thomas and Alberto Gonzales than they are folks like Zarqawi and Bin Laden. This goes hand-in-glove their insane notions that Gitmo is a gulag, and Saddam was not involved with terrorists. Sheesh!


This ain't no way to make peace or found a state:

GAZA, July 2 ("Reuters"):
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has invited militant factions, including the Islamic group Hamas, to join his government before an Israeli pullout from the Gaza Strip, a Palestinian Authority official said on Saturday. ... Samir al-Mashrawi, a top Palestinian Authority negotiator, said he had contacted Hamas and other armed groups, by order of the government, to discuss the formation of a unity government whose prime topic on the agenda would be Israel's pullout plan. ... Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurie announced a similar invitation last week but Hamas and Islamic Jihad said they did not respond to it because he had made his comments to reporters rather than to them directly.
The ROADMAP FOR PEACE - which Abbas signed - dictates that the Palestinian Authority must actively make every effort to get the militant groups disarm. What Abbas and Qurie are propsoing is NOT DISARMING TERRORISTS, but capitulating to them. This is a BREECH of the Agreement.

I posted on June 30, that Abbas had to "take on" the terrorists. I meant "take on" to me that he had to CONFRONT them; it seems Abbas has interpreted it differently: Abbas is "taking them into his government."

Pity. There will be no peace and no Palestinian state unless and until the terrorists disarm. Abbas and Qurie either do not have the courage or the desire to do what they must. Allawi and Jafari (and the vast majority of the Iraqi peole) have confronted and are fighting their jihadists. They have more courage in their little pinkies than Abbas and Qurie and all the other so-called "Palestinian moderates" have in their entire bodies.


FROM CRONACA/The Scotsman:
Rewriting history: the Romans in Britain

BRITAIN was home to Roman citizens some 50 years before the AD43 "invasion" date that generations of schoolchildren have been taught, new research has revealed.

The previously accepted version of the Roman invasion has its origins in the work of ancient spin-doctors trying to boost the reputation of the Emperor Claudius. Archaeologists believe that a series of military artefacts unearthed in Chichester, Sussex, and dated decades before the AD43 date will turn conventional Roman history on its head.

The experts also believe that when the Romans arrived in Chichester they were welcomed as liberators by ancient Britons who were delighted when the "invaders" overthrew a series of brutal tribal kings guilty of terrorising southern England.
The first version sound as if it was written by Leftists about Bush and Iraq! IOW: perhaps the "empire" analogy the Left is so fond of using in regards to the USA and Iraq has a bit of truth in it after all! ANOTHER INTERESTING ASIDE: it seems the "academy" was a biased in the time of Claudius as it is NOW!

Thursday, June 30, 2005



Gaza Strip - Hundreds of Israeli soldiers raided a Gaza Strip hotel Thursday to remove about 150 Jewish extremists who barricaded themselves inside several weeks ago to protest Israel's planned Gaza pullout. The raid took place hours after the army sealed off Gaza, declaring it a "closed military zone" to prevent Jewish extremists from going in following several violent confrontations between settlers and soldiers.

About 10 busloads of soldiers and paramilitary police went room-to-room to remove the squatters who had stockpiled food and surrounded the Palm Beach Hotel with barbed wire. Some squatters were carried out by soldiers, and arrests were reported.

When Abbas is willing to take on the Palestinian Arab militias in a similar way he will have earned his followers a state. Until then - there can be and will be no state.

HERE'S ANOTHER ANALOGY: The ALTALENA AFFAIR. (IN SHORT: The New nation of Israel made the unavoidable decision that it had to have only one miltary, and NO militias, NO PARAMILITARIES. The IRGUN militia had to first disarm to be absorbed. When it was discovered that they still were gun-running, the new president of Israel - Ben Gurion - ordered the IDF to destroy the ship - the ALTALENA. Sixteen Irgun fighters were killed. But Israel became a nation.)

Unless and until Abbas - or some other Palestinian president - has his "Altalena moment" - there will be no state.

I'm not holding my breath. HAMAS and Hizb'allah and Iran and Syria will not stand by and see their neojihadist proxies disarmed. IOW: unless and until we confront Syria and Iran - with military reprisals - they will not cease and desist their support of Palestinian terror.

Then again: This may come sooner than we think. The road the Ramallah goes through Damascus and Tehran. And Assad's intransigence and the new president of Iran may briong things to a head. STAY TUNED!



A ship carrying United Nations' food aid to Somali victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami has been hijacked. The freighter, the MV Semlow, was sailing from the Kenyan port of Mombasa to Bossaso in north-eastern Somalia when it was attacked by armed pirates. Waters off the Somali coast are among the most dangerous in the world, the International Maritime Boards says. Some 28,000 people who lost their homes and livelihoods when the tsunami struck on 26 December are being fed by the UN. Somalia is awash with some 60,000 militia men and has been without a functioning national government since 1991, which hampered relief efforts to tsunami victims. ...

"The hijackers are asking for $500,000 but we've told them we're just a small boat with relief cargo to feed your Somali people," Inayet Kudrati, director of the Kenya-based Mokatu Shipping Agency which leased the ship to the UN, told Reuters news agency.

The UN World Food Programme (WFP) has appealed for the immediate release of the vessel carrying food aid donated by Japan and Germany. "We're urging local leaders and elders to allow the boat to go on with its journey," WFP spokeswoman Rene McGuffin said. Earlier this month, the International Maritime Board warned of a surge in piracy in the region and advised vessels to stay at least 85km away from the lawless coast if possible.

Piracy is small potatoes for Muslim fanatics who behead infidels, suicide-bomb mosques and stone sinners to death.

Remember the Barbary Pirates? They were the ones we sing about when we sing the Marine Hymn, you know the part: "to the shores of Tripoli." Well, the Barbary Pirates were Muslims, too. And President Jefferson dispatched the US NAVY to north Africa to kick their butts. It worked. That's why we sing about it!

Well, these modern day "Barbary Pirates" (operating offf a different coast of Africa) will not respond to any appeal from the UN - no matter what stationary they use!

So, what's the answer? SIMPLE: I think Bush ought to do the same with these Muslim pirates as Jefferson did with his. WHACK them into submission.


Last week they met to discuss it; this week they announced tacit approval of it. I'm so glad they devoted so much time to such an important issue. SHEESH!
Here's the excerpt:
Doctors have voted to drop their opposition to changes to the law which would allow terminally ill patients to be helped to die. The British Medical Association conference said it should end its current stance against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. When the BMA discussed the issue earlier this week, doctors spoke powerfully for and against change. But delegates backed a neutral position at Thursday's vote.
This is a SLIPPERY SLOPE - and they're already sliding down it. I posted on this last week. I wrote that allowing doctors employed by the state to euthanize patients is a fundamental conflict of interest. WHY? Because the state benefits from the DEATH of the patient; in fact, the state benefits TWICE: first, they save on medical expenses; and second, they save on pension payments.

I know of no more powerful argument for the personalization/privatization of health and pension benefits.


ASIA NEWS (hat tip LGF):

Suspected Muslim insurgents shot and then beheaded a local official in southern Thailand on Wednesday in an attack believed to be part of ongoing sectarian violence in the area, police said. Surin Somchit, an employee of the community water authority, was shot and wounded by four bullets fired near his office in Narathiwat province’s Rangae district, police Capt. Songphol Juimanee said. The as yet unknown number of attackers then cut off their victim’s head with a machete and dumped it by the roadside, he said. ...

The beheading was the sixth carried out this month and the second to take place in daylight hours. Only three other beheadings have taken place in the 18-month wave of violence, one in May last year in Narathiwat, and two others in November.

Now would the Dem/Lefties PLEASE explain to me what these beheadings in THAILAND have to do with either: Bush; Israel/Zionism/the Likud/neocons; oil; Iraq; or the Crusades?

They cannot because it DOES NOT. Global Jihad is a proactive program of terror against all infidels (including, but not limited to): Buddhists (Thailand); Hindus (India); Muslims (Shias and Sufis); and of course "Jews and Crusaders."

The neojihadists have killed more Muslims than anyone EXCEPT Saddam. The neojihadists have killed more Americans than anyone since Vietnam.

They are the ENEMY, and they have chosen to make war on ALL infidels.

It's really LONG PASSED TIME folks on the Left accepted that neither Bush or the West is to blame for the GWOT. We didn't start this war. And attempting to appease the enemy will only embolden them. It's long passed time the Left abandoned their idiotic attacks on Bush and UNAMBIGUOUSLY support military efforts to defeat the enemy.

I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath. I have long held that the Left is not anti-war (that's a sham); they're on the other side. Which is why they're NOT the "loyal opposition" - because they're NOT loyal.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

DEMOCRAT CRITIQUE OF BUSH'S SPEECH IS FALSE: Congressional Resolution HR RES #114 - authorizing war on Saddam - cited BOTH 9/11 and al Qaeda

Many Lefties and Democrats - like Senators Boxer and Rockefeller and Dodd and Feingold and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Pelosi and DNC Chairman Howeird Dean - have critized Bush's speech last might because it - in their opinion - incorrectly conflated 9/11 & al Qaeda with Saddam and Iraq, AND incorrectly argued that the War in Iraq is-or-ever-was part of the GWOT.

They further argued that Bush was cynically USING 9/11 to shore up public support for him and the war in Iraq.

PARAGRAPHS #10, 11 and 12 - (AS PASSED):
" ... Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations; ..."
IN FACT, the resolution was exactly correct in this regard: many terrorists and terrorist organizations WERE given safe-haven in Iraq: Abu Nidal, Abu Zarqawi; and Ansar al Islam and al Qaeda - were but a few of the many. Zarqawi - who is leading al Qaeda in Iraq now was there at least a year BEFORE THE WAR!

For the Left-wing Democrats to claim NOW that Bush is "once again changing his reasons for getting us stuck in a 'quagmire' of Iraq" is an idiotic LIE. And it's pure assinine demagoguery. That the MSM buys it and promotes it UNCRITICALLY only proves that they are still dominated by the Left. (The above link listing the offending Democrats is to the NYTIMES - which did NOT critique the Dems charges; neither did "REUTERS" in their article on the BASELESS Democrat charges against Bush - in fact: they made it their headline!)

Bush and Joint Resolution #114 (and UNSC Resolution 1441) offered many reasons for confronting Saddam with force - and AT THE TIME THE CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION PASSED these included 9/11 and al Qaeda AND and this Congressional Resolution and the UNSC Resolution even included the spread of democracy! (QUOTE: Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime; " [HR #144; paragraph #18 (same link as above)].)

Before 9/11, there were MANY terrorist attacks against the USA (most on Clinton's watch): 1993 WTC attack; the twin African embassy bombings; the BLACKHAWK down in Somalia; and the USS Cole attack. Unfortunately, Clinton NEVER went on the offensive after any one of these attacks, and by appearing WEAK Clinton sent the signal to UBL and al Qaeda and neojihadists everywhere that the USA was weak and could be terrorized into submission.

But 9/11 changed things in the GOP - and for MOST Americans. POST 9/11 - and with a Republican in the White House and controlling Congress - America will NEVER appease or surrender to the ENEMY. Or "cut & run" by setting an artificial deadline for withdrawal. And most Americans have ALWAYS seen the War against Saddam and our current
"counter-insurgency" as part of the GWOT.

The Democrats apparently do not see it that way. And they are willing to "revise" history - and LIE - in order to promote their view that the Iraq War is and was a mistake and a diversion (AND THAT THEY ALWAYS SAW IT THAT WAY!).

I think that today's Democrats are correctly seen as "doves" who don't have the stomach for war. Unless and until the Democrats are seen as being as hawkish as the post-9/11 GOP, the Dems will NEVER get control of either the White House or Congress.

Thank God.


Tuesday, June 28, 2005


Before the speech ALL the MSM talking heads were touting negative poll numbers on Iraq (as if they weren't mixed, but were uniformly BAD!) and saying that Bush had to give a GREAT speech.

Then Bush delivered a GREAT speech, and ALL the talking heads on the MSM said that speeches don't count; they said "facts on the ground - outside of Bush's control - would determine how the American public feels about Iraq."

Sheesh: can these Left-wingers EVER argue WITHOUT moving the goal-posts!?!?



Strengthening the USA-India alliance is CENTRAL to pressuring China and Pakistan into "good citizenship."

More is occuring on this front; hat-tip FJORDMAN, who writes: What has really mattered — and most Indians, barring the leftist ideologues and those still living in the Cold War era, accept this — is that the US has come to recognise India as a regional power. Not only that, the US has come to depend upon its solidarity and support on a number of issues. This is, of course, because American national interests coincide with India’s on many counts. (More Fjordman on this issue here.)

I blogged on this in April, HERE and HERE.

BBC: Psychiatrists hit back at Cruise

Actor Tom Cruise has been criticised by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), following remarks he made on US TV attacking psychiatric medicine. "It was irresponsible for Mr Cruise to use his movie publicity tour to promote his own ideological views," it said. Cruise called psychiatry a "pseudo science", after NBC host Matt Lauer questioned the 42-year-old's stance against anti-depressant drugs. The actor criticised Brooke Shields for taking drugs for post-natal depression.
Choosing sides in this battle is like choosing sides in the 1980's Saddam-Iran War.


Dr Michael Wilks, chairman of the BMA's [British Medical Association] ethics committee, said ... they would explore whether there was a difference between assisted suicide, whereby medics provide the means for a patient to kill themselves, and voluntary euthanasia, when a patient is too ill to administer the lethal medication, but consents to someone else doing it.
I can see why the SOCIALIZED National Health Service of Britain might want doctors to begin practiicing euthanasia and also assist in patient suicides: it will save money for the National Health Service!

Which is another reason you don't want the STATE to be your medical provider: they have a basic conflict of interest. Especially if your early exit means you won't be drawing down all your social security payments - WHY THAT'S LIKE A DOUBLE -DOWN WIN FOR THE WELFARE STATE: they save on medical expenses and on pension benefits!


Betsy's Page has an excellent commentary on a speech given by Senator Obama on Lincoln's Emancipation Proclaimation; (the speech was first linked to by DRUDGE; link below). She demolishes Obama, and exposes his utter ignorance of Lincoln and the US Civil War. GO THERE AND RTWT! Here's further proof he's not just ignorant, but that he's an immoral phony:

After graduating from Harvard Law, the then utterly unknown Obama was contacted by a bright aggressive literary agent who thought he might have a story to tell. They signed a contract. The agent sold his book.

After his pretty convention speech in 2004 - (and before he was elected to the Senate)- he unilaterally broke this contract in order to sign with another bigger agent (who he was introduced to by Clinton, they say!). He eventually "settled" with his first agent.

I think Betsy proves Obama is a demogogue who is happy to regurgitate the kind Leftist propaganda that the MOVEON.ORG base of the New Democrat Party loves.

My little story proves Obama has no scruples or loyalty.

But he sure talks pretty.

Which means he's a perfect running mate for Hillary in '08: She likes fast-talking immoral disloyal men. So does her party.


Monday, June 27, 2005

SCHROEDER AND THE USA: with friends like him who needs enemies...


Bush - a man known to settle scores - fixed the German Socialist but good: HE PRAISED GERMANY'S EFFORTS IN HELPING TO RECONSTRUCT POST-SADDAM IRAQ!

This'll SURE help Gerhard with his base! YEAH RIGHT! Bush is a political GENIUS

"NOBLE DREAMS" : Ignatieff, Vietnam and Iraq

Libs just can't help themselves: they MUST mention Vietnam every time they discuss Iraq.

Michael Ignatieff (Carr professor of human rights at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard is no exception) - and like most libs, even contemporary lib-hawks (many of whom seem to be getting wobbly lately -- "when the going gets tough the Left gets packing!") - and in his NYTIMES article he writes the following:
It would be a noble thing if one day 26 million Iraqis could live their lives without fear in a country of their own. But it would also have been a noble dream if the South Vietnamese had been able to resist the armored divisions of North Vietnam and to maintain such freedom as they had. Lyndon Johnson said the reason Americans were there was the ''principle for which our ancestors fought in the valleys of Pennsylvania,'' the right of people to choose their own path to change. Noble dream or not, the price turned out to be just too high.
Well, well, well: Ignatieff may not have intended it, but he has revealed the one and only true connection between Vietnam and what the Left is trying to do now. HOW? Well, by ADMITTING that Vietnam "WOULD HAVE BEEN" a NOBLE DREAM but foe the fact that the SVG failed to hold off the North Vietnamese totalitarians.

BUT, Ignatieff elides the CRUCIAL FACT: that the SVG ONLY FELL AFTER THE DEM/LIB CONTROLLED CONGRESS CUT OFF FINANCING FOR THEIR FLEDGLING DEMOCRACY. AND THIS WAS 1975, A YEAR AFTER MOST US TROOPS HAD ALREADY BEEN WITHDRAWN! It was the LEFT-WINGwhcih forced the US to CUT & RUN, and then shamelessly cut off our allies at the knees - condemning the Vietnamese people to 30 years of tyrnanny and poverty! (Not to mention giving rise to Pol Pot and theBoat People!)


The Left does NOT have a NOBLE DREAM - and even if they did, they do not have the COURAGE to stay the course. Proof of this is the fact that so many lib-hawks have gone wobbly on Iraq just as we are entering a new and great AND NOBLE PHASE. And just as the Sunnis are entering into the political process.

Ignatieff argues that the price of Vietnam was too high. HE IS WRONG. The cost was not too high; there were just too many appeasing liberals in Congress. If Bush had the same immoral liberal-Democrat Congress today GERALD FORD HAD IN 1975, then he'd be unable to override a bill to cut-off funding to Iraq. And we'd have the same type of disaster.

Which is why we should never EVER trust the Left with the defense of the USA or the free world.

The sad thing is that uber Dem-lib FDR would've endorsed what Bush is doing; in fact, by today's standards FDR WOULD BE A NEOCON! (Just check out his FOUR FREEDOMS speech if you doubt me!) Which illustrates again how the Left has become the focus of reactionary ideology in the Western politics.


BBC: French finance ministry searched -
Police acting on a judge's instructions have searched the offices of the French Finance Minister, Thierry Breton. The investigation is reported to be linked to a probe into the accounts of French chemicals firm Rhodia, where Mr Breton was previously a board member. Mr Breton, appointed finance minister on 2 June, is on a visit to the US. The authorities are investigating claims of inaccurate accounting and insider trading at Rhodia between 1999 and 2002.
He might be corrupt - like his boss CHIRAC - who would have been indicted already except for the fact that he gets immunity as long as he is "le president.".

MAYBE WE SHOULD START A POOL: how many weeks will pass - after Chirac leaves office (in 2007) - before he is indicted?

AND/OR: Which corrupt African nation will give a self-exiled Chirac safe-haven when he flees France and several indictments?


The Democrat Party was always the party of a grand coalition between urban machines (like Tammany Hall in NYC), blue collar unions (mostly in old industrial cities), immigrants (mostly in cities), populist farmers (mostly on the midwest), and southern Democrats who had never stopped fighting the Civil War.

Most of that coaliton is KAPUTSKI! (1) Blue collar unions ONCE accounted for 35% of the workforce; they now account for JUST 15%! (2) LBJ knew he would lose the south for the Democrat Party - for a few generations - by signing Civil Rights legislation (mostly with GOP support) but he COURAGEOULY dissed that important part of the Party's base and did the right thing. (4) Farmers are relatively culturally conservative and have been voting more GOP since Reagan. (5) Blue collar workers started drifting to the GOP when the blue-collar HARDHATS told the anti-war Doves of the Democrat Party to "LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!).

REALLY: a casual examination of the 2004 election result "RED/BLUE" map of the USA - BY COUNTY PROVES that the Democrats are down to 1 part of their old coaliton: the cities. They have the cities mostly because of (a) INERTIA: people tend to assume and keep whatever partisan affiliation their parents had; (and UNLIKE the Southern Democrats, cities have NOT YET HAD SOME GALVANIZING EVENT TO MAKE THEM REACCESS THEIR PARTY AFFILIATION. (b) Cities have higher concentration of UNIONIZED white collar workers - most of whom work for the government and are therefore TAX-EATERS. (AFSME and the NEA come to mind). (c) And cities have a higher concentration of gays and lesbians.

If and when the GOP lays out AN URBAN AGENDA FOR THE 21st Century, that will spell the END of the Democrat Party - and with it THE LEFT!

President Rudy ANYONE!?

Sunday, June 26, 2005


Since the Fall of the Wall, the Left is deep in the thrall of cognitive dissonance and denial. WHY? Rather than admit they've witnessed the demise of their ideology - and rather than "move on" (you should pardon the expression!) - the Left denies, denies, denies, and attacks, attacks, and attacks with inane vitriol. Here are a few examples of one of the most common and inane defensive refrains the Left employs - COINICDENCE:

(1) Reagan sent Pershing's to Europe (the Left protested) and the USSR collapsed - and then the Left said: "COINCIDENCE! The USSR collapsed of its own weight."

(2) Congress - under Clinton - "changed welfare as we know it," reforming it and cutting it. Abuse, waste, and an "anti-personal-independence" attitude were demolished; yet, poor people DID NOT stream on to the streets (as the Left predicted). IOW: IT WORKED, and the Left cries: "COINCIDENCE! The economy grew, and that took care of it."

(3) Mayor Giuliani ramped up police efforts and got tough on ALL criminals, and crime DROPPED. And the Left cries: "COINCIDENCE! Demographics did that!"

(4) After 9/11, George W. Bush cut taxes (and contrary to what the Left predicted) the economy grew; (by the time of the last election 1.5 million payroll jobs had been created). And the Left cries: "Coincidence! It's just a phony expansion fueled by a housing bubble."

(5) Bush declares that democracy and universal human rights will be the focus of USA foreign policy; he liberates 50 MILLION people, and foments democracy or democratic movements in dozens of countries; he liberates Afghanistan, and Iraq; he forces the Palestinians to have real elections; Kuwait enacts universal suffrage for women; Egypt makes positive changes for the first time EVER; Lebanon gets rid of its occupiers (after 25 years!) and has its first elections; Gerogia and Ukraine elect free democratic governments, and even Saudi Arabia starts to change for the better. And yet the Left cries: "Coincidence! Arafat and Hariri died; that caused the changes!"

I say: it was NO COINCIDENCE that conservative policies worked - in fact, it's why I became a conservative: their policies achieve what we ALL aim for: greater liberty and prosperity for all.

I say: it was NO COINCIDENCE that 25 years of appeasing neojihadists - (from Reagan's Beirut debacle at the hands of HAMAS, to Bush Sr.'s failure to finish the job ib 1991, to Clinton's failure to respond adequately after Somalia, OR to the 1993 WTC bombing, OR to the embassy bombings, OR to the attack on the USS Cole) - led to al Qaeda's growing threat and the advent of the GWOT/WW4.

BOTTOM-LINE: coincidence is the safe-haven of a bankrupt ideology; coincidence is the refuge of the Left; the Left's attempt to explain our great leaps forward through coincidence is a form of denial and a sham and an affront to logic and reality.

I urge folks on the Left find the strength to admit that conservative policies are not only logical and moral, but they JUST PLAIN WORK! I think once they do, they'll find the experience very LIBERATING. I did. AND IT WAS "NO COINCIDENCE!"


WILLISMS (hat-tip MICHELLE MALKIN) has collected a few QUOTATIONS from ALL OF THE DEMOCRAT LEADERS (Reid, Durbin, Dean, Pelosi, Rangel, and Hillary) which exposes their insane LEFTIST positions these days. GO THERE; THE POST HAS PRETTY PICTURES, TOO!

As WILLISMS concludes, "The lesson here is clear:

The radical left owns the Democratic Party. MoveOn.org and DailyKos and the others bought the DNC, and they expect results. Results they have gotten. Congrats to the frothing fringe for their Pyrrhic victory."

That says it ALL!

UPDATE: Well, that ALMOST says it all... Here's a delicious tidbit from Ann Coulter - who ABSOLUTELY NAILS the reason why the Democrat Party can NO LONGER BE CALLED THE LOYAL OPPOSITION, (because they're NOT loyal!):

The only question is: Why do Democrats take such relish in slandering their country?

If someone was constantly telling vicious lies about you, would you believe they supported and loved you?

"I love John Doe, and that's why I accuse him of committing serial rape and mass murder. Oh, he doesn't do that? Yes, but how dare you say I don't love John Doe!" And now back to our regular programming on Air America ...

If the Democrats ever want to be trusted again - with the NATIONAL SECURITY, by a majority of the electorate, then they'd better stop MALIGNING AND SLANDERING OUR MILITARY, AND STOP PARROTING THE PROPAGANDA OUR ENEMY. Ditto the MSM: only when their editiorials and "reporting" no longer read like al Qaeda fatwas will their ratings go UP!