Friday, November 26, 2004

ABC News: New Details Emerge in Matthew Shepard Murder

ABC News: New Details Emerge in Matthew Shepard Murder

Well the story aired and 20/20 went to lengths to say that even if it was not a hate crime, it tought us all to be nice to gays. Huh? I doubt that there are more than two or three people that learned this lesson. I mean, the sort of stupid bigot who would be mean to gays only because they are so is not the sort to learn this lesson.

But this logic is exactly the problem with liberal thinking: If the result B of event A agrees with leftists ideology then A is good. It is consequentialism perverted beyond belief. Do not ask about event A itself, and if you do find out that event A is really a completely different event C, ignore that fact and maintain that result B is still valid.

Normal people, when they discover that event A is in fact event C, say something like, "well, maybe I should rethink my understanding of result B." Think McArthy, Japanese Internment, Viet Nam, etc.

Also, as I have argued in the past, this is another example of people confusing the simple and the complex. Surprise! The Shepard murder turns out to be more complex in its details. Liberals have been happy to think of it as simple hate crime and use it as a means to implement their stupidly complex code of gay rights. But what do they do when they find out that the details are very much more complex? They end up in fits.

Complexity does not bother us so much, since we do not lose sight of the simple truth. Matthew Shepard was murdered. That is the truth and no change in the circumstances will adulterate that crime. For Liberals, Matthew Shepard was not murdered, he was the victim of a hate crime. Worse, he was dehumanized into another "Cause." Remembering him that way is ugly and evil.

Reply to Steven's "Post Election Trauma"

Sub Cultro: Post-Election Selection Trauma

Honestly, it sickens me when I hear someone going on about the draft. That is the sort of person with which one can not reason. Do we counter that with our own hysterical, conspiracy story? I mean one that a liberal might believe? Do we need to construct our own big corporation, skull and bones, mustache twirling image of the Democrats and then spread the story around campi that Hillary is from a red state and is secretly a KKK queen who wants to nationalize health care in order to provide easy abortions for blacks thereby eliminating them from the American gene pool?

That should be easy because, since they have no ideas of their own, there is plenty of room in their mushy little heads for this sort of thing.

I think that smart people can end up like these morons because some people place politics in the non-rational portion of their lives. I mean, many people are smart but make stupid life choices. Money can be this way too. That is why you find mathematicians who go broke.

I know I've detected this before. You can just sort of feel it when you listen to them discuss politics -- they do not construct their sentences quite right: lots of "I feel", "everyone knows" and that sort of thing. The best give away is that they do not respond when someone knocks out the factual basis of their argument. They just restate their conclusion or simply deny the validity of the facts.

That 4th debate was quite funny. Speaking of that, those SNL debate skits were funny and not 100% against Bush either (like they normally are). Nice. Perhaps another signal that things are changing. I have heard it strait from a professor's mouth that SNL has the "right" politics. Well, if that is true, if SNL (and obviously the other Upper West Side media outlets) leads the way, then this really could be a sign that the Left is losing its monopoly on our media culture.

Monday, November 22, 2004

Desperate Housewives Controversy- aka The Lesson of the Superbowl Fiasco

Nick and I just watched a debate regarding the show Desperate Housewives.

A guest panelist was indignant that the producers of Desperate Housewives had intentionally advertised during football games.

I say it's inappropriate to advertise such content during family programming. Also, I say they would've been stupid not to. They knew that it would create a huge activist morals movement as it did against Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake. Who could ask for better advertisement than that?

The actual commercial itself is small change compared to the add time Desperate Housewives will get when the morality wars are fought.

The "opened minded" are salivating to tell off the uptight prudes, thereby demonstrating their hip open-mindedness. The prudes and the hipsters at home can't wait to yell at the TV about how offended they are.

It's guaranteed ratings for the show and any news program that discusses it.

I think D. H. producers and ABC are the ones who best learned the lesson of the Superbowl "fiasco".

Post-Election Selection Trauma

There are a lot of Kerry supporters who were majorly stunned by the election result. I can tell you that here at the University of Tennessee's Hodges Library (which during the campaign I referred to as "Kerry Country", the days after the election did not show many happy faces. Apparently it was so bad that some people in Florida are seeking therapy to fight the "trauma" they have experienced. Seeing the people's reactions around here (and this is in a state that everyone new was going to vote Bush, but still hoped the nation would choose "correctly") I can believe that people in Floriday are seeking help and (I AM NOT JOKING HERE) really might need help.

There was the impression here that Kerrey would win (I'll admit I thought he would) and an honest shock (I was not shocked, but pleased). Something else that was weird was how deep some of the people were biting into the "Bush and the Draft" spin, "Bush is a dumb person" spin, and the "Cheney's ex-company profiteering" spin. The draft and the dumb thing puzzle me because these are intelligent people, but it's like they threw up a mental block. The draft was an obvious political lie put out by the democrats and meant to spread misinformation. I don't approve of it, but that is part of politics today. The dumb thing I could kind of get my mind around because of the urge to mock the opponent, but it seemed to go farther than that in many of the peoples minds around here, and I am having more of a problem understanding that.

There was also a lot of dissatisfaction with the "no child left behind is a terrible program" which isn't quite a spin as much as a dislike of a program (although no alternative program seemed to ever be presented by those with this attitude).

Noticeably missing was the "I like Kerry's idea of changing ...." or" I think Kerry's idea of fixing ..." thoughts which you would think would be present in the candidate you support. This of course, supporting the already mentioned notion that people were voting against Bush, not for Kerry.

Check out this site for the therapy articl. The article seems good but the peoples comments at the end are predictable. For the short and sweet report: I actually first heard it on one of the television news programs but I can't remember which.

Also check out the "4th Presidential Debate skit" on . Ammusing even if no longer relevant.

Bush strikes blow in Culture War

President Bush Awards 2004 National Humanities Medals

I saw at Armavirumque that Bush awarded Hilton Kramer a National Humanities award. Don't know who that is? Well, that is not suprising since he has been a critic of Leftism and a proponent of objectivity for many years. Here is a snipet from First Things' review of his essay collection Twilight of the Intellectuals:
But it is when he turns to matters of art and aesthetics that Kramer’s strengths as a thinker come most fully into play. Though a host of his ideological enemies have branded him a "reactionary elitist" for his belief in objective aesthetic standards, Kramer is no Philistine. After half a century, he retains a qualified but genuine love for the achievements of modernism in art. For all of its contradictions and dead ends, modernism was a movement that cared about beauty, meaning, and the prophetic calling of the artist.

Kramer brings these commitments to bear on Susan Sontag in one of the best essays in the collection. In an unsparing dissection of Sontag’s famous 1964 essay "On Camp," Kramer sees this "pasionaria of style" to be the herald of our postmodern malaise. Sontag’s celebration of camp, with its fundamentally amoral vision ("the victory of ‘style’ over ‘content,’ ‘aesthetics’ over ‘morality,’ ‘irony’ over ‘tragedy’"), has gone hand–in–hand with the triumph of pop culture, the decay of standards, and the sort of blithe nihilism that dominates much of academia today.

Irving Kristol's wife, Gertrude Himmelfarb, loved by us hated by them, also received an award. She has written about the virtues of Victorian Values; can't you just imagine the red faced liberals!

Finally, John R. Searle made the triple play. Notable now for his Philosophy of Mind, but worthy of special attention for his deconstruction of Deconstruction, his fight with the center of all literay evil, the now dead Derrida. From the New Criterion:
In 1977, for example, the philosopher John Searle wrote “Reiterating the Differences: A Reply to Derrida,” an attack on deconstruction that was devastating—we would have said “unanswerable,” except that Derrida instantly swung into print with a tenebrous piece of sophistry that would have been funny if it had not been in earnest. (“When I say that I do not know John R. Searle, that is not ‘literally’ ‘true.’ For that would seem to mean that I have never met him ‘in person,’ ‘physically,’ and yet I am not sure of that,” etc., etc.)

Among other things, Derrida’s response to Searle illustrated the Janus-faced character of deconstruction. For Derrida’s followers, deconstruction was a weapon, an instrument of subversion.
We are winning the war on terror. We are winning the political war. These victories, however, will be fleeting if we do not win the war of ideas. As Professor Liulevicius says. "Ideas have Consequences."

Sunday, November 21, 2004

I AM A CONSERVATIVE . . .Really, I am

I am a conservative . . .Yes, really, I am. I've been told I'm not, but not by one who is an authority on the subject. There are people who matter to me who still don't know why and how I am indeed a conservative.

This will be a series of posts because it's just too much info for only one. Becoming conservative has been a slow, organic process. I'm always questioning what I believe and why I believe it. I was a Democrat longer than I've been a conservative. For a while, I claimed to be a Libertarian, and I was at the time. Now I'm a registered Republican voter.

I vote Republican because I am a conservative; what do I wish to conserve? -- The Constitution and the freedoms it seeks to protect. Our democratic republic. A just and reasoned approach to government.

People who know me know that I am no bigot. I'm not a religious person. Absolutely I am not a country music fan. I'm not stupid or prudish. Among my peers (I'm a registered nurse) I'm considered well informed.

How, you may ask, can I be a conservative (and indeed, vote for Dubya) if the characteristics above do not apply to me?

Stay tuned for future posts . . .

Saturday, November 20, 2004

Superiores Rantores

I'm sure you've seen the Fuck the South site. It is funny, that is true, and we all love a good rant. I am happy to give credit where it is due, but nothing beats a righteous rant.

Here are two. First from Dean's World, and second from Cold Fury, thanks to RepulicanWitch.

Just glorious...and true too.

Friday, November 19, 2004

Elitism, Marxism and Moonbats

I have been saying that the Democrats need to purge Leftism from their party. Because I like to hear myself say the same things over and over in slightly different ways, I offer this:
Paul Conkin (The New Deal, 1967), a reasonably typical representative of younger radical scholars, emphasized capitalism’s ugliness and spiritual poverty ... The problem lay not so much in the inadequacies of the New Deal as in the inadequacies of the American system. Conventional democratic politics, he said, is "a perennial interim accommodation with ignorance." The final blame for the New Deal’s failure lay with the "appalling economic ignorance and philosophic immaturity of the American electorate." FT October 2004: Articles

Sound familiar? The Left has made very little real progress in their thinking since the sixties, other than calling themselves Progressive. As evidence, I introduce the charming modern Marxist Tom Frank who wrote What's the Matter with Kansas. You may have seen him recently on Harball or O'Reilly (he also op-eds for the NYT). Now, I rather like this guy, but he is deeply wrong. He professes moderation, but still talks in terms of workers and management. It is my belief that the rest of us, the not-Leftists, have made intellectual progress since the good ole days. We have come to realize that classifying people in terms like workers is anachronistic. People are individuals. The Founders set the stage with their still revolutionary notion that each individual has inalienable rights. The rest of the Law flows from this. It is wrong, and possibly immoral, to treat people only as members of a class. This is what Conservatives mean when they cry Class Warfare!

It is true enough that in the early part of the 20th century America needed to be corrected, and that the Left did the correcting -- the free market is also subject to the moral code. People should be free to enter into whatever working arrangement they want, but their individual rights should also be protected. One problem is that the Left has an immoral code. Specifically, they do not believe in personal freedom and individual inalienable rights. If they could, they would institute social justice policies that violate these rights. One simple example, of which my wife, here Ben and Clover, is fond: charity by means of the state is impossible and in fact evil. (Walter Williams is the most famous proponent of this idea).

Laurin has recently complained about the barking moonbat Jeneane Garofalo. For some reason most of these idiots accept the basic assumptions of the Left. This is weird since they make all their money from capitalism. I would love to see their tax returns. If they are like Kerry's it would be revealing. I mean if you are going to preach about giving money to the less fortunate, you had better give more than you pay in taxes or you are a hypocrite. Of course, red states actually are more generous than blue states; and that is after subsidizing liberal programs and with the market burdens of stupid liberal restrictions.

America dominates the world in freedom and goodness despite the appalling economic ignorance and philosophic immaturity of the American Leftists. Imagine a world without them.

Thursday, November 18, 2004

"Stick to making funny movies, Jeneane."

I loved Jeneane Garofalo's comedy in one of my favorite movies "Romy and Michelle's High School Reunion". But now she has a new brand of "comedy" that is gross and anti-American. In addition to her stint as a liberal radio talk show host on Air America, she performs a stand-up routine which mostly is a forum for her political views. In one sketch, she sits on a chair pretending to be Laura Bush reading a storybook to a group of dead Iraqi children. For those who believe in this war and for the loved ones of men and women who have died in order for Iraqi children to be free, to say this is disgusting, unfair, and wrong is a gross understatement. I find it interesting, though, that her compassion for children does not extend to the millions of children in this country who are not even born because their mothers exercised their right to kill them.

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

Autism from Wizbang


It seems this interesting Wizbang fellow is from New Hampshire -- God, I love it up here! Although my NH peeps did vote 50-49 for Kerry. I blame the lefty MA types who outsource their housing.

Anyway, inflammation and immune responses both are moderated in some people by a paleo diet (even for moderate carbohydrate intake, if I remember). I can think of two very clear examples of this.

Further, the Paleolithic model would also predict that children need exposure to germs and so forth.

Laurin was supposed to post about her experience with vitamin and fish oil supplementation, but I guess she too wants to be removed from the team.

Also, go back to Wizbang and check this out. Holy Moly!

Sunday, November 14, 2004

Matthew Shepard, The Bull Moose and History.

WorldNetDaily: Was Matthew Shepard just a robbery victim?

Why, this is interesting. The killers have nothing to gain here, except, I guess, publicity, whatever that is worth to one serving a double life sentence.

Remember those fake Muslim hate crimes? And need I mention the littany of other false "crimes" in our history books.

How about this discussion of The Bull Moose over at Ex Parte.

Now that Derrida is dead (fun had here and here etc.) perhaps we can actually correct all the crazy history his ilk has bequeathed us.

How old is Noam Chomsky?

Saturday, November 13, 2004

Race, Drugs and Conservative Wisdom


Some things are simple. Some things are complex. Most things are both. I have written on this before, but I guess every one in the world did not read my post. Let me sum it up.

Conservatives are so because we know that the past offers us a vast treasure of simple wisdom to deal with things which are complex. The Left calls itself the progressive movement precisely because they desire to leave that wisdom behind. When confronted by a complex problem, they lack the simple wisdom developed by humans over the last million years or so.

One example of this is the gay marriage problem. There are two important simple truths that conservatives know. First, human life is organized around the family with its clear gender roles. Second, social change is best when deliberate. We took many decades to affect the end of slavery and rightly so. Only with this process could we have succeeded. Today, the Progressives try to affect social change through he courts, subverting the deliberative process. Expectedly, they are failing in a dramatic way which will probably set them back 10-20 years.

Race is another example. The glorious Michelle discusses the recent news about a heart drug that is more effective for blacks than whites. Of course, this is very troubling for the Left because it is a complex issue. The simple truth is that people are not equal. We are very different in a extremely complex manner. Race is a shorthand -- an often sloppy, but sometimes useful way of describing some of these differences. Clinal adaptation, of course, accounts for much of the observed racial difference. [Gene Expression, see blogroll, is an interesting blog we found recently and here is a post that discusses this issue] You ignore that at your peril. Just because you do not like the "sound" of it, are you willing to hinder medical progress?

Another simple truth is that all people are created morally equal. There you go; two simple ideas that guide us through a maze of complex issues. Despite the history of racial problems, do not blacks have the right to receive the best medical care? Why would anyone want to challenge that?

Bush Voters also Vote for Legal Prostitution

The Volokh Conspiracy -

This puts the "Bush won because of the Evangelicals" hysteria in perspective. GK is right: Bush/Kerry voters were and are and will not be monolithic. Many Bush votes came from Dems and some Kerry votes came from conservatives.

See also this entry.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Daniel Pipes commenst on Arafats death: just as it should be

Arafat's Bedroom Farce - article by Daniel Pipes

This guy is one of the best Mideast guys I know -- right up there with Krauthammer. His article is a nice wrap-up of all the events and gossip surrounding the blessed death of That Bastard.

WorldNetDaily: U.S. pressures Israel to release Palestinians

WorldNetDaily: U.S. pressures Israel to release Palestinians

OK, so here again I will argue that everyone gets a chance. Arafat is dead. There is a chance, however small, to make real progress with Palestine. So, as always, the good guys prove themselves by offering an olive branch. I am not necessarily supporting release of terrorist, but we and Israel should make some substantive move.

On the other hand, if this move is rejected or ignored or gains us nothing, we will be justified in calling them an enemy and acting accordingly. Like the Soviets and Iraq, it is foolish and irresponsible to continue to try and negotiate with someone who refuses to engage in honest relations.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004


I just saw a couple of interviews on CNN regarding the potential nomination of Arlen Specter for senate judiciary committee chairman. A representative from Christian Science Monitor said that he'd be a good nominee because Specter would be an effective bridge between Republicans and the fillibustering Democrats. She thinks he'd get more court nominees confirmed.

I disagree. First, I'm tired of Republicans being held hostage by the notion that they have to "reach out" to their opposition, or nothing can be done. The attitude seems to be growing that the Right has to compromise to the Left. I hear no appeals to the Left to do the same.

Second, I say it's our job to do our job. The job here is to place judges who strictly interpret the Constitution. That and only that is the task at hand.

In other words, the judicial committee chairmanship does not exist for the purpose of harmony between Dems and Reps.

Arlen Specter has said that he believes the Costitution is a living, breathing thing. That is not conservative. I don't want a non-conservative representing me in a sort of liasonship with those who oppose conservatism.

What say you all?

Reagan, Bush and Arafat

The Ronald Reagan Ranch

D'souza discusses Reagan's efforts to end Communism:
During his first term Reagan pursued tough anti-Soviet policies aimed at curtailing the Soviet nuclear threat and stopping Soviet advances around the world. Calling the Soviets an “evil empire,” Reagan initiated a massive defense buildup. These measures were fiercely resisted by liberal Democrats, who decried Reagan’s policies as confrontational and likely to make nuclear war more likely.

OK that one is easy but check out this one:
Reagan immediately recognized Gorbachev as a new breed of Soviet leader. He supported Gorbachev’s reforms and arms control initiatives during his second term, when many conservatives criticized him for being na├»ve and credulous. William F. Buckley, Jr. warned that Reagan’s new stance was “on the order of changing our entire position toward Adolf Hitler.” Columnist George Will mourned that Reagan had “accelerated the moral disarmament of the West by elevating wishful thinking to the status of political philosophy.”

These criticisms missed the larger current of events that Reagan alone appears to have understood. In attempting to reform communism, Gorbachev was destroying the system. Reagan encouraged him every step of the way; as Gorbachev himself joked, Reagan induce him to take the Soviet Union to the edge of the abyss and then take “one step forward.”

Even Will and Buckley missed what Reagan saw. He understood the true nature of Soviet Communism and so a changing circumstance did not confuse him. He merely adjusted his attack to respond to this new situation. Both methods were successfull because both struck at the core problems "over there" as it were.

Bush, I think, knows this lesson too. That is why we invade an Iraq, but not, yet at least, a Syria. Differnt circumstances demand different responses. As long as we understand the nature of our enemy -- we must be willing, for example, to identify an "axis of evil" -- we can devise strategies that will work.

Arafat will die soon. This may change the circumstance, but not the nature, of our Palestinian enemy. Perhaps we will work with the new leader to enact transformational reforms. Maybe we will encourage Israel to fortify its wall.

Reagan knew that to win he had to destroy his enemy, not feed it. We must be willing to destroy ours too.

HA! Arafat had too little oxygen!

AM - Palestinian officials confirm Arafat in critical condition: "NABIL SHAATH: The last three and a half years incarcerated in a very small office which has very little oxygen"

That is the funniest thing I've heard all day -- and I watch [adult swim]

Tuesday, November 09, 2004

Top 5 things the Dems need to do?

1. Stop imposing a religious test to Supreme Court nominations OR stop filibustering.

2. Repudiate in clear and strong words certain personalities like Michael Moore Maureen Dawd, Al Franken, Noam Chomsky, Cornell West and other insane, too-far-left, ideologically blind assholes.

3. Adopt a strong and clear opposition to Communism, Socialism and totaitarianism and adopt a strong and clear pro-American Nationalism. These probably should apply domestically, but must apply to foreign policy.

4. Repudiate and reject false leftists histories: McCarthy, Vietnam and so on. At least admit that there is a debate.

5. Purge bigotry and hatred and absolutism from their politics. No more "republicans are evil and stupid."

I hope that this list will start a discussion here. Please, please post your own list or post your comments. Let's work on this together.

Also, I don't like the comments feature here. I'm working on it, but post your comments as a new post.

Election maps by population

Election result maps
This is a very interesting set of maps that give a better representation of the country's votes. Red, Blue and purple.

Roman skin cream found.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Roman cosmetic secrets revealed

As Victor Davis Hanson likes to say, the Greeks and romans were much more like us than not.

Although fun, this story should also remind us that other aspects of ancient and paleolithic life are still with us. Our modern culture of progress has not displaced the ancient culture which prized tradition above all. We ignore the latter at the peril of the former.

Smart girls know how to deal with Liberals

Michelle Malkin puts it all together for us: Ann Coulter, Arlen Specter, The Vile One and Karl Rove. She's right proud of her work and rightly so.

Now, I will add that Bush compromised with Democrats like Ted Kennedy on the No Child Left Behind Act, giving up vouchers for private (i.e., more effective ) schools and letting them add a host of stupid programs. What did it get us? Kennedy et alia have been screeching at the president ever since. Need I remind you that after screwing the bill up and nearly removing all the reform efforts from it, the President could have used the Veto to force his hand.

Frank Salvato says:
President Bush, and ironically Ted Kennedy, lobbied Congress and added $26 billion to the federal education budget for the implementation of NCLB. A Harvard study contends that NCLB is one of the most unintrusive educational initiatives ever created and that it is completely funded. But Kennedy refuses to acknowledge the study from one of our most liberal and prestigious institutions of higher education. Rather, Kennedy contends that the program is a failure because he isn’t allowed to hold the purse strings.

As I said before, Republicans should stop being so nice. Helping Arlen Specter in the belief that he will help us is stupid. Liberals and Leftists, even when they have a "R" beside their name, do not respond honorably to such bipartisanship.

If Bush had supported Toomey and both men had spoken honestly about gay marriage and partial birth abortion, we might have won PA and banished a Specter.

Have we learned? Don't go soft on Fallujah.

Dispatches from Fallujah [Brain Shavings]

Here is a marine who tells us that many Fallujah residents are asking the coalition to destroy their city and even their homes in order to defeat the terrorists therein. Thier only conern is that we will be too soft.

Damn, that is admirable. I hope that our leaders are as admirable and tough minded as those they hope to free.

Monday, November 08, 2004

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

As far as I can tell it is manual for now and I don't even know if the rest of you can do it. I suppose you would need your own account at Haloscan. I will keep working on this.

If you DO want to add a trackback just tell me and I can do it for you.

Funny pic on some dude's blogs

The Intricate Workings of this Life

Sunday, November 07, 2004

Fallujah plans stolen while soldiers at play

WorldNetDaily: Kurd officer deserts with Fallujah plans

Well, this certainly supports Laurin's claim that we are going to storm Fallujah pretty soon. I thought we would take several more weeks in hopes that we could use more Iraqis. I guess that was dumb. I don't really see any way to prevent this sort of thing. It is the price we have to pay for managing the war the way we do. The alternative would probably be more dangerous.

Of course, this whole thing could be dis-information. Also, do you really think we would give mission critical info, info that could jeopardize our men, to a newly trained Iraqi, Kurd or otherwise?

With the tension building our noble soldiers goof around for relief

Happily Britain supports the Fallujah strike and the steely, rock hard, scotsmen of the Black Watch are on the march!

Thanks to Michelle Malkin and Brian Shavings where you can read letters from a soldier in Iraq to his dear old dad.

IQ vote hoax, leadership and Moral Values

Table of Bush/Kerry voters by IQ
Make sure to check out the "here" at the bottom which links to a much more rigorous examination.

The originator of the State IQ:Vote hoax inadvertently shows us the problem with Liberals.

The moron "computed" avergae state IQ simply by looking at average state incomes. [another dumbass used SAT/ACT as well, which, at best, is an indictment of public schools] Equating IQ with income is vapid. Americans not indoctrinated by university idiots know damn well that there is more to success and leadership than IQ. Indeed, the higher IQ types make the worst Presidents. Jimmy Carter was smart and a disaster as a leader. My uncle would have been considered a stupid hick from Arkansas, but he died a millionaire farmer, well loved by all.

Leadership requires not smarts so much as wisdom. This is what Bush has, but somehow the Left can't even see it. When people say that "moral values" was important to them, this is, in part, what they meant. It is wrong to think that "moral values" voters just voted against gays. Many voters chose the man who had strong and good moral values because those values would lead him to lead us in the right direction.

Nobody can know the consequences of national policy. This is why conservatives know that one must govern according to principles and that those principles must be good ones. That is why Bush won: he has strong and good principles and Kerry has weak and bad ones.

Friday, November 05, 2004

Election does force some Dems to think again

Here is an interesting post from Diplomad which explains the problem in the State Department.(Thanks Instapundit) The state department is the subject of a book too.

But, regular Dems seem to be asking the right questions

Democratic Underground Forums - Arguing centrist v. leftist is missing the point, in my opinion.


I say, yes, Dems should embrace what conservatives have known for some time; small government is better. Yes, they should accept that Democratic economics are absurd and their socialist ideas are vile.

The Dems should offer Americans a candidate who
can run against Bush's NCLB, Prescription Drugs, and so on. The party has never had any better ideas, but maybe they will for 2006/8.

Probably not since Krugman provides his usual screeching, and the E. J. Dionne at the Post is no better.

Chirac is a Weasal

Chirac wrote Bush congratulating him on his win:

I hope that your second term will provide an opportunity to reinforce the Franco-American friendship… It's in the spirit of dialogue, of mutual esteem and respect that our cooperation, our common fight against terrorism and the actions we are leading together to promote liberty and democracy must continue to develop.

But his first actions after the election prove he is lying. It was not enough to put Arafat, one of the world’s great villains, in French military hospital, today he visited Arafat. But, wait don’t answer yet. He also struck a blow against Bush when he rebuffed Allawi.

Still, Liberals do not get it at all. The Boston Globe wrote in an editorial today:

IF IN his second term President Bush wants to revive alliances that he allowed to deteriorate, he would be wise to adopt the approach of his predecessors. America badly needs to return to the spirit of internationalism embraced by both Bush's father and Bill Clinton.

Internationalism, as the Liberals conceive it, is deeply flawed. France is not our ally. They are, for now, an enemy of the United States. Yes, we should try and get other nations to help us, but not in the "spirit of internationalism." American nationalism must be our guiding principle.

It's finally happening...

The trend started slowly at first but has rapidly picked up speed of late. There was docile Fidel Castro...then supermodel Yasser Arafat...then the two 12 year olds that watch MTV that the executives were spending trillions of dollars trying to motivate to get to the polls...and about 4 million other pot-heads from the Serpent Party who very much hate Bush for his aggressive buzz-killing and drastic not-being-cool...and just Wednesday we found out about Poopie-Pants-Edwards' wife...

You guessed it. Global warming is poisoning the Serpent Party and it's supporters. Who next? The loveable Jack Sherack of Francie? Heartwarming Terry McAuliffe? Philanthopist Kim Jong-Il? President Bush is obviously more clever than anyone had realized. I suspect that it has been his plan since the beginning to prey on the weaker people of the Serpent Party. Realizing long ago that their carefree lifestyles of over-eating, lascivious meetings between supermodels, HIV, homosexuality, use of unnatural chemicals and binge-drinking made them weaker than the manlier remainer of the United States, Bush began promoting "oil" to pollute the air and "weed-out" the effeminate Serpent Party. His plan seems to be working beautifully. Also it doesn't hurt that he stopped the Kyoto Treaty that, by now, would have completely reversed the completely non-fictional encroachment of the gum disease known as GLOBAL WARMING.

In conclusion, I'd like to mention that this is a satire incase a liberal is reading it and that Global Warming doesn't exist incase a completely blind, retarded person is reading it. I'd also like to mention that it was hard to find a good picture of Chris Matthews. Go Bush!

Thursday, November 04, 2004

Liberals are incapable of compassion


This picture and the discussion of it is revealing of the chasm between the Left and the Right.

My comment: How do you, Lefties, think the newly free men, women and children of Afghanistan and Iraq would interpret this image?

It is interesting that the only real debate occurs among conservatives.

County by County Popular Vote Map

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

Team America F@$&k Yeah!

The title of this blog has been edited in deference to my dad who possibly may read this post, and who does not suffer the F-bomb lightly.

Team America is hilarious! There is no need to say anything else about it except this:

Puppeteers are quite capable of creating very explicit (and hilarious) sex scenes with marionettes.


I stumbled upon a blog site that features political opinion a la ORSON SCOTT CARD! Turns out, he agrees with us! I'll try to add it to the "Points of Light".

I explored the comments to his articles and found the forum members to be articulate and mostly tolerant. However, they spend a lot of time congratulating themselves for being articulate and tolerant rather than exploring OSC's points.

I think he's right on target.