Nov

30

2005

Everybody’s An Expert!

Filed Under Science | Comments Off

To borrow a line from James Taranto of the Opinion Journal, What Would We Do Without Experts?

What does this study (by a psychologist who teaches at Berkeley and began his research twenty years ago no less) tell us, given that most of the pundits on the Sunday morning shows and talking heads in the MSM are left leaning at least and outright liberals at the most? I think it tells us just what Louis Menand of the New Yorker concludes, and what conservatives have been saying for years… “Think for yourself.”

Jane Galt via Dr. Reo Symes at Ace of Spades

Nov

28

2005

Truth Will(is) Out

Filed Under War and Terrorism | Comments Off

Actor Bruce Willis has visited the Iraq war zone, has offered a million dollar bounty for the capture of top Al Queda leaders, and now is set to honor our soldiers with a true portrayal of the good works they have done.

“I am baffled to understand why the things I saw happening in Iraq are not being reported,” he told MSNBC, the American news channel.”

Willis plans to make a film based on the exploits of the “Duece Four”, (1st Battalion, 24th Infantry), and may star as their commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Erik Kurilla.

“He is expected to base the film on the writings of the independent blogger Michael Yon, a former special forces green beret who was embedded with Deuce Four and sent regular dispatches about their heroics”.

Small Dead Animals

Nov

28

2005

Separated at birth?

Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments

Ace (Daschle pic from Ace’s archives)

Nov

27

2005

Levin’s Foxy Nonsense

Filed Under Foreign Affairs, Liberty and Democracy, Lies, Corruption and Scandals, Politics, War and Terrorism | Comments Off

On today’s Fox News Sunday Senator Carl Levin took a logical stumble as he attempted to walk the party line on the Iraq War troop levels.

After Levin criticized the administration for not putting enough men into the Iraqi theater, the show’s host, Chris Wallace, reminded Levin that the Democratic line now is that the troops need to come home. And then asked which is it, there are too few there, or we need to bring them home?

Levin responded that there were too few troops before, and too many now.

So, how did we get to a situation where he now estimates we have too many troops if we had too few? To accept Levin’s conclusions one must then assume that we have achieved a military position over there where we now have too many because the force we had there has over-achieved and succeeded in its mission. I am certain the Secretary of Defense will appreciate the compliment, but, doubtless would point out that we never had too few in the first place.

I am equally certain that if challenged on his stumble, Levin would seek to re-balance with a reply that a too small force achieves more, and thus a draw-down to zero will cause us to achieve total victory. Nonsense. We have made progress with the force level the adminstration has provided. President Bush takes the advice of the Defense Department on this matter (troop level), and thus far has been well served. We are seeing progress in Iraq, even if the President’s domestic enemies refuse to concede the point. I trust that we will draw down our force level in reaction to the increased stability in Iraq, but only after stability is achieved not as a method to achieve stability.

Nov

22

2005

Aid and Comfort!

Filed Under Foreign Affairs | 14 Comments

Read this!

It seems that in 1993, Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) was one of the movers and shakers in Washington DC urging then President Clinton to pull out of Somalia. You remember Somalia right? The “Blackhawk Down” incident! So he and his cronies get Clinton to pull us out of Somalia, and then in 1998, Osama bin Laden sites Somalia in his declaration of war against the United States, declares that it is proof as to why al Qaeda will defeat us, and uses that as motivation to this day as to why his fighters should not give up hope even though they are suffering massive losses. And now, the same John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) is urging that we pursue the same course in Iraq that we did in Somalia.

Huh?

If Osama bin Laden used the US pullout of Somalia as a source of motivation and propaganda in 1998, wouldn’t logic dictate that he or some other jihadist wannabe would use a pullout of Iraq in the same way? And if that is logical to assume, isn’t it also logical to conclude that Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) is actually helping Osama and his ilk achieve their goal at most, and as a tool for motivation and propaganda at least?

Sorry, I forgot: Democrats don’t like logic – gets in the way of their world view!

Nov

21

2005

Murtha’s Proposal: “The Great Trap”

Filed Under History | Comments Off

In today’s Best of the Web, James Taranto comments on the vote in the House of Representatives this past weekend to continue the Iraq campaign.

Late Friday night the House took a vote on Rep. John Murtha’s proposal for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. The vote was 403-3 against, with Murtha among the 403….

Some Republicans have labeled Murtha a “coward,” which strikes us as unduly personal. But he does seem to lack the courage of his convictions.

Ever since Rep. Murtha came out with his proposal, I have had the same snippet of video rolling through my head: the great liberal icon Martin Sheen portraying Robert E. Lee in Turner Picture’s epic Gettysburg.

In one scene, just before the great battle began to turn horribly wrong for the Confederates, Sheen recites a monologue as Lee issues instructions to his deputy commander, James Longstreet.

General, soldiering has one, great trap. To be a good soldier, you must love the army. To be a good commander, you must be willing to order the death of the thing you love.

We do not fear our own death, you and I. But there comes a time… we are never quite prepared for so many to die. Oh, we do expect the occasional empty chair, a salute to fallen comrades. But this war goes on and on, and the men die, and the price gets ever higher. We are prepared to lose some of us, but we are never prepared to lose all of us.

And there is the great trap, General. When you attack, you must hold nothing back. You must commit yourself totally. We are adrift here in a sea of blood, and I want it to end.

Rep. Murtha, a decorated Vietnam veteran and a former Marine of decades of service, is surely not a physical coward when his own neck is the one in danger. But the Robert E. Lee in Gettysburg understood the difference between personal courage and the courage required by a commander, who must be willing to order other men to their deaths in the hope of victory – and the peace that follows.

Sheen’s portrayal of Lee speaks to us now, in this age. We can shirk our duty and give up our country and its ideals, or we can fight for it. Fighting courageously will not assure us victory, but at least gives us hope we can achieve it. We “must hold nothing back,” because we, like Lee, “want it to end.” But should we lose our nerve, we must be “prepared to lose all of us,” because the enemy will be at the gates, and they have shown us they will offer no quarter and show no mercy.

Nov

19

2005

How TBR Honored Service

Filed Under History | 1 Comment

Seven Score and Two Years Ago,

“that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom”
– A. L.

Nov

18

2005

House Vote 403-3 To Stay In Iraq

Filed Under War and Terrorism | 5 Comments

In following the lead of Rep. Murtha D-Penn the Democratic Party elites have shown once again why America does not trust them to defend this country. Murtha’s message, as the Democrat message always is, was a confusing montage of tugs at heart-strings fueled by pessimism and defeatism.

The Democrats know that they have a deservedly poor reputation on National Defense issues, and were eager to back Murtha’s position because it endorsed their own strategy of capitulation, while allowing them to walk in the light of Murtha’s service to this country (37 years a Marine). In truth, most of them hate the military, would not have it in our schools, and would do everything possible to dissuade all young people from serving. When Murtha offered his own resolution on 11/17 they immediately pointed out his military career as evidence that his views were presented by a pro-military Democrat, and they wanted to be seen under the umbrella of his heroism as well. They are afraid to be whom they really are, and that is why so few of them voted their hearts on H. Res. 571 today. (“Three Democrats, Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, voted for withdrawal. Six voted present: Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington; Jerrold Nadler, Maurice Hinchey and Major Owens of New York; Michael Capuano of Massachusetts and William Lacy Clay of Missouri.”)

The Democrats in the Congress voted to give the President permission to go to war, only because they sensed the sentiment in the country would not allow them to obstruct, at that time. So, they voted to do the right thing, even though they did not really want to, knowing that they could snipe at the President afterwards. Their votes then, and now, were based not on their convictions, but rather on their political appraisals. We saw through them then, and we see through them today. They don’t care if America is weak; they are more interested in their War on Bush, than our War on Terror.

This resolution, H. Res. 571, did not allow any wiggle room. And, during debate before the vote the Republicans countered Murtha’s service with veteran after veteran who declared that we must stay the course.

It was so important to call their bluff on the Murtha resolution, and its simplistic proposition, and this vote today did that. It forced the Democrats to do the one thing they fear most, put themselves on the record. (Rep. Duncan Hunter was not satisfied to allow this to be a voice vote, and at his request it was a recorded vote) Now, we can point to this vote each time a lib calls for retreat. And we can clearly and irrefutably state that staying the course is the real mainstream position.

Nov

18

2005

House Republicans Grow A Pair

Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments

Drudge is linking to a news item that House Republicans are forcing a vote on Rep. Jack Murtha’s Iraq-pullout bill that everyone expected had no hope of seeing the floor.

“We want to make sure that we support our troops that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. “We will not retreat.”

…By forcing the issue to a vote, Republicans placed many Democrats in a politically unappealing position – whether to side with Murtha and expose themselves to attacks from the White House and congressional Republicans, or whether to oppose him and risk angering the voters that polls show want an end to the conflict.

It’s. About. Friggin. Time.

The article includes this absolute gem: “House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi had no immediate reaction to the planned vote.” That’s gotta be the first time since she took over the minority that the darling of San Fran has shut her big fat mouth.

Nov

18

2005

Reality Check: Who Needs Nine On Court?

Filed Under Politics | 1 Comment

Senator Chuckie Schumer of New York State, one of the more disingenuous people on the planet, weighed in on the nomination of Sam Alito the other day. And, as comparison to Alito, he referred back to the work on the Supreme Court of Sandra Day O’Connor, time and again.

“Now, it’s sad that the president felt he had to pick a nominee likely to divide America instead of choosing a nominee in the mold of Sandra Day O’Connor who would unify us.”
Reality Check Part A: And when did O’Connor accomplish that feat? We were last unified when?
“The president had an opportunity to nominate someone in the mold of Sandra Day O’Connor, a mainstream, albeit conservative, who would unite the country, not further decide us. At first blush, Judge Alito does not appear to be a Sandra Day O’Connor.”
We can only hope you are right Chuckie that Alito isn’t an ill-defined Justice like O’Connor, whom, by the way failed to unite us.
“Sandra Day O’Connor has said she will serve until the position is filled.”
This can not come too soon to suit this writer.
“I’d say this is a more serious decision than the vote on Judge Roberts, because Sandra Day O’Connor is such a swing vote.”
This was his last mention of O’Connor on this transcript, and perhaps the most telling, especially when coupled with this concept:
“This is a nominee who could shift the balance of the court, and thus the laws of the nation, for decades to come.”
It is that “swing vote’ the Democrats are really looking for. A “swing vote”(r) is like a moderate, someone who doesn’t hold a consistent belief, but, rather, changes according to the whim of the day. And it is that malleability which the Democrats hope to continue to exploit, they wish to maintain the “balance” of the Court, by which they mean they wish to have the Ninth justice be a person lacking in convictions that they can coddle and nurture and thereby persuade to vote their way.

Reality Check part B: If Sandra Day O’Connor was the Solomon they insinuate her to be, the other eight Justices would not have been needed for the last twenty five years; we could have just let Sandy decide all of the cases. So, according to the Democrat’s thinking, we wasted the salaries paid to the other eight over the last quarter century. We could have just let Sandy decide everything with her balanced, swinging vote; and we could have used the money saved to throw a keg party, I suppose. Now, that is swinging.

Nov

18

2005

The 9th Circuit Court: Consistent or Hypocritical?

Filed Under Religion | 1 Comment

Well, isn’t this precious! The 9th Circuit Court says teaching children to be Muslims is fine with them!

Christian students and parents cannot sue a school district where some seventh-graders pretended to be Muslims for three weeks during a course in world history, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
Brooke Carlin encouraged her students to play at being Muslims – adopt Muslim names, recite a line from a prayer and give up candy or television to simulate fasting, for example. Students were permitted to opt out. On the final exam they were asked to critique elements of Muslim culture.
So if I understand the 9th Circus correctly, it’s perfectly fine to immerse a child totally into a religious culture, but it’s totally forbidden to say “under God” while reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Hmmmm. I wonder what grade Ms. Carlin (Oh yes, I am positive it’s Ms. and not Miss or Mrs.) gave out to students who dared to critique those Muslims who promote blowing up buses full of infidels or cutting off infidel heads? Somehow I don’t thing Ms. Carlin had to worry about such comments because I’m sure the little darlings were never taught about those “elements of Muslim culture.”

However, not all is lost! There may be a silver lining to all of this.

San Francisco U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton dismissed the suit two years ago, saying Carlin was merely teaching and not indoctrinating. Hamilton found that the students did not engage in actual religious exercises.

The 9th Circuit upheld her decision in a five-sentence ruling, saying only that the activities weren’t “overt religious exercises” that would raise concerns under the First Amendment prohibition of “establishment of religion.”

I think this means the schools can now resume performances of Christmas Nativity and Easter Passion plays without the worry of litigation. After all, if pretending to be Muslims for three weeks is not considered an “overt religious exercise,” then acting out a play about the birth or death of Jesus Christ on stage for a few hours should be perfectly acceptable to the tolerant and honorable 9th Circuit Court judges, right?

Right!

Hat tip to Sue and Stop The ACLU

Nov

18

2005

Friends don’t let friends blog happy

Filed Under Internet and Blogging | Comments Off

I was asked this morning to post the following:

Allow me to express my sincere apologies to all TBR readers out there who are frustrated by the nearly complete lack of postings. Chris and Steve determined this morning that this seeming complete lack of interest is because of me. You see, everyday Chris and I start the day out discussing various items that we see in different blogs as well as in the MSM. Because he is far more passionate about these things than I am, I both encourage and allow him to carry on until he wears himself out. This has been by design. If this “morning vent” does not occur, he sits at his desk and mopes all day which, in turn, casts a shadow all over my day.

I see now that I have been selfish. I hope you can forgive me for my selfishness. I will cease to encourage the morning release and will allow him to vent again in his forum.

With my sincerest apologies…

Sue

Let that be a lesson to all the friends of aspiring bloggers out there.

Nov

16

2005

The Puffingtons are Toast

Filed Under Internet and Blogging | Comments Off

The future has arrived, and its name is Open Source Media.

OSM.JPG

Nov

9

2005

Dr. Moonbat or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Michael Moore!

Filed Under Internet and Blogging | Comments Off

OK… one look at the website name and I know going in that this is parody, but why does the logic employed by this – ahem, writer – sound exactly like that of so many people I see protesting in Crawford, Texas or hear on Sunday morning network news shows? I think some enterprising independent film maker could make a fortune with a movie documenting how this kind of thinking actually goes on – and often in front of TV cameras no less! I’ve even got a suggestion for the title. Call it: Dr. Moonbat or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Michael Moore!

John Derbyshire over at The Corner

Nov

8

2005

Where’s the backbone?

Filed Under Liberty and Democracy | 1 Comment

As usual, the smartest man in the country – Thomas Sowell – articulates so easily and with such grounded common sense the root cause of most conservative’s frustrations, all I can add is “Yea! What he said!”

If the Republicans are not willing to fight for the things that people elected them to do, then some of the people who elected them may not turn out to vote for them at the next election.

People who have for years not only voted for the Republicans, but donated their time and money to the Republican party, who have volunteered to stuff envelopes, man the phones and walk the precincts to get out the vote on cold election nights, deserve something better than Senators who wimp out at crunch time.

If the fate of the legal system in this country is not enough incentive for Senate Republicans to show some backbone, maybe concern for their own re-election will be.

Next Page →

  • Featured Sponsor

  • Recent Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories