Monday, December 31, 2007

THIS Man Has Kept You Safe:

No Terror Attacks Are No Accident
By Ronald Kessler

As we finish another year without a terrorist attack, it’s a good time to think about why. The media and liberal politicians will tell you it’s an accident or a matter of luck. They are dead wrong.

The reason we have not been attacked in the more than six years after 9/11 is the hard work of the FBI, the CIA, and our military, and the sweeping changes that have taken place in the intelligence community under George W. Bush.

Bush’s proclamation that any country harboring a terrorist will be considered a terrorist country has meant that Arab countries began cooperating in the war on terror, turning over thousands of terrorists and leads.

Bush made the FBI become more prevention-oriented. While the FBI always wanted to stop terrorist plots and did so in many cases, when it got the bad guys, as it did in the first World Trade Center bombing, it usually closed the case. Now every case becomes the basis for developing new sources who may be run out for years to infiltrate terrorist groups.

As Art Cummings, who heads the FBI’s international counterterrorism operations, told me for my book
”The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack,” “Pre-9/11, the first consideration was, I got an indictment in my pocket ... Slap it down on the table, pick the guy up, you throw him on an airplane. You bring him home, you put him in jail, and you go, ‘Okay, I’ve done a great job today.’”

If that were to happen today, Cummings says, “I would have told my agents they basically just put Americans more in jeopardy rather than less in jeopardy. It’s a completely different approach and bears little resemblance to the previous one.”

Now when an agent wants to make an arrest, Cummings tells the agent, “Your objective is not to make the arrest. Your objective is to make that suspect our collection platform. That guy now is going to tell us just how big and broad the threat might be. He now becomes a means to collection, instead of the target of collection. I want you to understand his entire universe.”

According to the media, the FBI and CIA still don’t talk to each other. But in 2005, Bush established the National Counterterrorism Center in McLean, Va., where 200 analysts from the CIA and FBI sit side-by-side analyzing threats 24 hours a day. A secure video conference takes place three times a day with all members of the intelligence community and the White House to analyze threats and parcel out leads.

The USA Patriot Act has torn down the so-called wall imposed by Attorney General Janet Reno, a wall that prevented FBI agents from sharing information with each other and with the CIA. The much-maligned Patriot Act has allowed the FBI to wiretap a terrorist regardless of what phone he uses, an authority the FBI already had in organized crime cases. The National Security Agency (NSA) intercepts ordered by Bush opened for the FBI a window on terrorist activity within the U.S.

Since 9/11, the FBI, CIA, and the military have rolled up some 5,000 terrorists worldwide — a headline you will never see in the Washington Post or New York Times. Thus, many plots are never hatched, because terrorists have been killed, arrested, or sent back to their own countries and imprisoned.

Instead of hailing the efforts to connect the dots, the media demonize those who are trying to protect us and portray the tools that uncover clues to plots as “spying on innocent Americans.” When a plot is successfully rolled up, the media minimize it.

When the FBI foiled a plot to blow up John F. Kennedy International Airport in June 2007, the New York Times buried the story on page A37 of its final edition. In the dream world of the editors of the New York Times, such threats to America are far less important than the fact that 75-year-old Andrea Mosconi has a job of playing violins in a museum in Italy to keep them in shape, a feature which the Times played on page one the same day.

The media have even managed to portray Saddam Hussein as relatively benign. But as revealed in “The Terrorist Watch,” in seven months of secret debriefings, Saddam admitted to FBI agent George Piro that he planned to resume his weapons of mass destruction program — including developing nuclear weapons — within a year.

Many in the media could not bear to hear that Bush might have been at least partially right about Saddam, and few newspapers reported the story.

When the media and politicians run out of ways to deny credit to Bush for making us safer, they will claim that al-Qaida has chosen to space out its attacks. But al-Qaida’s attempt to blow up nine American airliners crossing the Atlantic in 2006 and the alleged role of an al-Qaida affiliate in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto are reminders that al-Qaida is constantly on the attack.

While the media underplay the threats, distort descriptions of the measures needed to uncover the next plot, and mischaracterize the progress in the war on terror, they also undermine it by revealing secrets of how the FBI and CIA are trying to stop the next attack. If the media revealed real abuses, they would be justified in exposing them, but that has not been the case. Since 9/11, the courts and Congress have allowed all of the Bush programs for uncovering terrorists to continue.

Calling the media disclosures “devastating,” Fran Townsend, who leaves this week as chief of the White House counterterrorism efforts, told me, “It’s not just a question of you’re putting individuals at risk. The real risk is to the lives of Americans who may suffer an attack because we couldn’t stop it, because the source was taken out.”

Without a reliable way to get information about this secret war, Americans are at the mercy of the media’s slanted portrayal.

Referring to President Bush, Chris Matthews said to Rudy Giuliani recently on MSNBC, “When he was in New York at Ground Zero in his most memorable statement ever, he said we`re going to get the people who knock down these buildings ... How many years do you think the American people should wait for our president to make good on his promise to get the guys who killed 3,000 Americans? This guy [Osama bin Laden] is apparently in Pakistan, and we haven’t done it. Are you satisfied with this?”

In fact, with the exception of bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahri, who are isolated, nearly all the al-Qaida operatives responsible for the 9/11 attack have been killed or captured.
Contrary to Matthews’ insinuation and to the New York Times’ Dec. 31 editorial assertion that Bush’s policies “have not made any of us safer,” the war on terror has been an astounding success. But that success has led many Americans to become complacent.

As a result, in the 2008 presidential election, we face a critical choice: Given that al-Qaida is intent on wiping out the U.S. with nuclear weapons, as FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III has told me, do we continue on the offensive, dealing with threats before they materialize, or do we return to the pre-9/11 approach?

Back then, because of politically correct rules imposed by the Clinton administration, FBI agents were not allowed to follow suspects into mosques that are open to the public. CIA officers had to get special permission to recruit sources with so-called human rights violations. FBI agents could not look at public online chat rooms to develop leads on people who might be recruiting terrorists or distributing information on making explosives.

If NSA intercepted a call from bin Laden to an operative in New York about detonating a nuclear device the next day, the FBI was not allowed to see a transcript of the call because no warrant had been obtained in advance.

Already, politicians are trying to roll back the clock and take away tools necessary not only to connect the dots, but to find them in the first place. In fact, presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama last August voted against revising the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to allow NSA to continue to monitor calls by foreign terrorists without a warrant even if all parties are situated overseas.

In an example of that same short-sightedness, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards claimed that the war on terror is not a strategy to make America safer. Rather, it’s a political slogan or “bumper sticker” used by the Bush administration to cover up its mistakes.
“Remember that old Edmund Burke quote,” Republican candidate Mitt Romney responded. “‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ And that, I am afraid, is the boiled-down version of what John Edwards said—that good men should do nothing. Put their head in the sand and hope it all goes away.”

“When you go so far as to suggest that the global war on terror is a bumper sticker or slogan, it kind of makes the point that I’ve been making over and over again that the Democrats or at least some of them are in denial…” Giuliani said.

Contrary to John Edwards’ take, the lesson of the 1990s when terrorists first attacked the World Trade Center and attacked American embassies in Africa and the USS Cole is, “We just didn’t take it seriously enough,” Senator Joe Lieberman, also a Democrat, has told me.

Asked how he feels about attacks by Democrats on measures like the Patriot Act and programs like the NSA intercepts to help track and apprehend terrorists, Lieberman says he is “disappointed” because “my colleagues for various reasons — some ideological, some political — are missing this threat to us.”

Those on the front lines of the war on terror know exactly what is at stake. “You make a mistake, there are dead people,” Art Cummings says. When I interviewed Bush with other journalists in September, the president made it clear that he will never back down. As we enter a new year, the question for all of us is: Will we?,_No_Acc/2007/12/31/60741.html

Democrat Destruction: Why They Want Us To Lose


Do Democrats Really Want Us to Fail in Iraq?
By Adam G. Mersereau

Any time our government takes us to war, there is bound to be strong disagreement, but Iraq has been particularly divisive. At times it seems as if some Americans -- certain liberal Democrats in particular -- are eager to declare or even hasten our defeat.

Our missteps in Iraq have been numerous enough to discourage any patriot. Yet leading Democrats are beyond the point of discouragement. They are pessimistic; even hopeless. They have been this way for a long time.

At the first sign of difficulty, they deemed the war a mistake and victory impossible. They quickly adopted the language of defeat and surrender. Some declared the surge a failure before it began and General Petraus a liar before he uttered a public word about its effects. Others are quick to believe reports of alleged atrocities by our own troops, as if seeking an American disgrace. Now, leading Democrats seem to believe that recovery from past mistakes is impossible, and that any hint of success can be only illusory.

Why do so many Democrats cling so tenaciously to hopelessness, failure and despair in Iraq, even in the face of important recent successes?

The reason for this defeatism among Democrats lies beneath mere power politics, electioneering or disdain for President Bush. The real source of defeatism is rooted deep within the liberal mind.


Sunday, December 30, 2007

Iconoclast vs. The Patriot


Iconoclast63 Responds to The Stupidest Post Of the Day:


Calling this the Stupidest Post of the Day illustrates very clearly the type of sentiment that will, if left unchecked, assure this country remains perpetually at war.

The list of atrocities you mentioned are a SYMPTOM of an illness, not the illness itself. Why the US? Why not China, or Sweden, or Costa Rica for that matter? Why have the "enemies" focused their hatred on us? There has to be a reason, right?

Just like WWII. I find it astonishing that most American's never even consider what would have motivated the Japanese to attack us. They attacked, and that is the end of it. Does that even make sense that Japan would attack us for no apparent reason?

Let's see, we were building bases across the Pacific and trying to cut off their oil supplies from Burma. Hmmm. We relocated the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, cutting the distance almost in half from our fleet and theirs. They obviously, correctly or incorrectly, believed they had no choice but attack.

Perhaps we should stop being so blindly patriotic that we can't be honest about why we are "The Great Satan". Maybe if we make an accurate diagnosis we can cure the disease and stop bringing our kids home in plastic bags.


My Answer To Him As The Patriot:

Icon63--YOU and YOURS are The Great Satan; the brave men who created this country, defend this country, and run this country today are NOT. I know of no such designation that is deserved by this nation--no matter which President and administration (Dem/GOP/or Whig) that was/is ascendant.

I have no need to create a faux-enemy inside this country (or outside of it; it is the Islamist who say they are OUR enemy, not US saying we are THEIRS) in order to expiate my guilt for having been born into the greatest, most properous, freest nation on earth.

I look at the tremendous gift the United States is to the world and I don't need to dwell endlessly over the faults of the men who run it. I don't uselessly expect my Presidents--GOP or Dem--to be perfect and act flawlessly--and I don't try to ruin them if they don't. America is a good place, a good country--and fears about our power, and jealousy over our wealth and freedom--is more than enough to explain any derision from overseas.

What is harder to explain is the Leftist, traitorous derision America's own citizens dish out on a daily basis--(and mostly because a GOP President is in the White House.)

I don't need government to continually rescue me; I am here to serve America--I do not expect social programs, welfare nanny statism and America to serve ME.

You flipdip hippy wannabe's (or retreads, if you're old enough) have a silly notion that war against the USA is only in the minds' of the Republicans--you listen not to the words out of the mouths of the Islamists THEMSELVES.

You can't stand the idea of having a for-real enemy, because you don't have any idea what you'd DO with an enemy; strong self-defense is NOT your forte. Thus, you use the well-known defense mechanisms (the only 'defenses' you're likely to use) and you either hide your heads in the sand and deny, or you project the locus of control of any war (cause-and-effects-and-aftermath) upon America alone. It's the only way you can maintain an illusion of control.

You think that, in order to have no war on earth, WE simply need to stop doing things that 'cause' it. You think it won't exist if WE only 'act right'. You're so scared of war, you think we HAVE to be in total control over it, have caused it all, so WE control whether it is a threat or not. Your overly-stroked inner child simply won't believe that we truly do not have that in our control.

You ignore eons of history where other people and nations have had unfathomable reasons for wanting to conquer us--and they always will. For all your supposed multi-culti knowledge, you have a woefully slim idea of what goes on in the human psyche; you are so egocentric, you think everyone is just like you.

If you want to know what kind of country America truly is, take a boat and row it around our great continent. See which way the rafts are coming, which way the planes full of immigrants are flying, which fences they are trying to cross under in the dark of night, and at risk of their lives.

When something happens in the world, see whose phone rings first, see which way the frightened, hurt, or crying eyes turn--it is not away from the United States, but towards us (and NOT China, Sweden or Costa Rica, for that matter). It's not blind patriotism that knows these things and loves this country for them--but every single person on the face of the earth, when push comes to shove (except in the minds of you spoiled Lefties who already have the advantages--and a country to defend you--of which others can only dream.)

A strong national defense ensures we keep these things--for ourselves AND others. You can't say, in the same breath that President Bush 'should have done something in advance to stop 9/11' and then work to help him lose the war in Iraq, and decry his every attempt to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons NOW. Just what do you think 'in advance' means? What do you think it looks like?

From all the whining you Lefties are doing about our actions overseas, I can't help but think that any moves he would've made to stop 9/11, had that been possible, would have been met with the same hateful, cowardly rhetoric, Congressional opposition, and moves to impeach him. You simply have NO conception of what it takes to adequately defend ourselves in a nuclear age.

The only 'disease' America has is whatever crawled out of a bong in the 1960's and still continues to infest popular culture. When that thinking, and those who think it, die out, America will be a lot better off. The next generation that takes your place won't so stupidly call our men and women who choose to fight for us, because they have the guts to do so and they believe in us, 'kids'--and they'll give them, and this country, the honor and respect it has earned.


USA Today Deliberately LIES About Fred Thompson

USAT Reporter Caught in Distortion, Portrays Thompson as Unambitious
By Tom Blumer

Erick at Red State reports that USA Today reporter Jill Lawrence distorted what she reported Saturday on a statement made by Fred Thompson to a Burlington, Iowa audience.

Here, per Erick, is how Thompson actually responded to the question, "Do you want to be President?" --

The first place, I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t. I wouldn’t be doing this. I grew up in very modest circumstances. I left government and I and my family have made sacrifices to be sitting here today. I haven’t had any income for a long time because I figured to be clean, you’ve got to cut everything off. I was doing speaking engagements and I had a contract to do a tv show. I had a contract with ABC radio…and so forth. A man would have to be a total fool to do all those things and to be leaving his family which is not a joyful thing if he didn’t want to do it.

I am not consumed by personal ambition. I will not be devastated if I don’t do it. I want the people to have the best president they can have.

But here is what Lawrence posted:

Bill Theobald of Gannett News Service has been following Republican Fred Thompson around Iowa. In a dispatch today from Burlington, Bill quotes the former Tennessee senator as saying he doesn't like modern campaigning, isn't that interested in running for president and "will not be devastated" if he doesn't win.

This makes it appear as if Thompson is just going through the motions, doesn't it?


Hillary Frags Pakistan Over Bhutto's Death

Hillary Frags Pakistan
James Lewis

While the world holds its breath to see if Pakistan will explode, Senator Hillary Clinton tossed a fragmentation grenade into the fireworks factory
yesterday. It may be the most irresponsible and selfish act by a presidential candidate in history.

"I don't think the Pakistani government at this time under President Musharraf has any credibility at all. They have disbanded an independent judiciary. They have oppressed a free press," she said. (Italics added)

Naturally, she also said, "I don't think politics should be playing a role in how our country responds ... to the tragedy." (italics added)

Well, she just did exactly that by denouncing President Musharraf, who has been targeted by four assassination attempts himself, and is desperately trying to keep Pakistan from falling apart. He's the one who controls those nukes that we don't want Al Qaida to get. You don't have to like him to realize that weakening his position right now is wildly irresponsible. It plays right into the hands of those who want civil war.

Suppose you're Al Qaida, and you just congratulated itself on the killing of Benazir Bhutto --- the second suicide bombing of her motorcade in a month. You now know that a likely President of the United States is on your side.

Suppose you're a Pakistani Army commander. You now know that a major candidate in the United States hates your boss. But the Pak Army is the only thing holding the country together.

Every world leader is walking on tippy-toes for fear Pak will explode. But Senator Hillary Clinton just exploited the tragedy of Bhutto's death in the most cynical and self-serving way, by tossing a smoking bomb at President Musharraf and cheerfully yelling "Catch!"

Yes, Obama and McCain are also scrambling to point out how qualified they are. But only Senator Clinton is falling back to her bomb-throwing radical days and trying to make things worse. Just for a headline, to show how smart she is. It is cynical, reckless, and stupid.

Well, Clinton has just disqualified herself from leading the United States at the most delicate and dangerous time since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Leftist McVeigh Had No Remorse For Oklahoma City Bombing

Papers At UT Show McVeigh Had Little Remorse

Timothy McVeigh appeared to show little remorse as he described for his attorneys how he bombed the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995, according to defense documents donated to the University of Texas at Austin. The documents, donated by lead attorney Stephen Jones of Enid to the university's Center for American History, indicate that McVeigh sometimes laughed and even joked around with his attorneys.

McVeigh said he hoped he would be acquitted for the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, which killed 168 people and injured hundreds more, and that his trial would embarrass the federal government. His attorney noted in one document that he expressed no remorse for the bombing, the worst act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.

"He stated that his conscious mind knew that the people killed in the Oklahoma City bombing had families, that the children killed had mothers, and he fully realizes the consequences of his actions, but he was able to 'turn it off' in order to perform his mission," his attorneys wrote. "He stated that the normal emotions and feelings were there inside him, but he was able to cover them up in order to carry out the bombing." But he is quoted in another defense document as saying: "I know it's terrible to lose a child, especially (for) a mother....I empathize with pain. It's not that I'm callous. Everyone has feelings."

A federal jury in Denver found McVeigh guilty of the bombing, the bomb plot and the deaths of eight federal law enforcement agents in 1997. McVeigh was executed in 2001. The documents show that McVeigh considered pleading guilty if it would "save" his coconspirator, Terry Nichols. He was told it would not. Nichols is serving multiple life prison sentences following bombing-related convictions at separate federal and state trials.

The documents indicate McVeigh considered an insanity defense that would claim "McVeigh did not believe it was wrong because he believed he was at war, a war initiated by the government." He told his attorneys he did not know his target had a day-care center but that probably would not have deterred them. Nineteen children were killed in the bombing, mostly in the day-care center.

McVeigh said he told friends, Michael and Lori Fortier, that he was aware children may be among the victims. "I told them, you know, 'Children may die. There may be a pregnant woman working there or there may be someone walking down the street or someone may have taken their child to work with them. Do you understand that?'" he said, according to the September 1995 transcript.

McVeigh justified the bombing, saying the federal government "drew first blood" when more than 70 Branch Davidians, including children, died April 19, 1993 — exactly two years before the bombing. McVeigh said he hoped to "wake Americans up to the tyranny of government," according to a defense memo. The Davidians died when the FBI raided their religious compound near Waco, Texas, and a fire broke out. McVeigh believed the FBI set the fire. An investigation concluded the Davidians set the fire themselves.

McVeigh insisted he acted mostly alone in the bomb plot, with some help from Nichols. Jones doubted him, telling McVeigh that McVeigh was keeping secret other conspirators. Jones had McVeigh take a polygraph test that asked if others were involved. McVeigh failed it and the polygrapher concluded McVeigh lied when he said only Nichols helped him. "Tim now regrets submitting to the examination. Tim said that he had "an emotional reaction to some questions'," one attorney wrote.

McVeigh also told his attorneys he was disappointed in the reaction to the attack, that he had not woken up Americans.

It's quite popular for those at DU--and other Leftists everywhere--to assume that Timothy McVeigh was a 'rightwinger', one of 'our' radicals. However, anyone who 'is at war against our own government', thinks our government is a 'tyranny', and chooses domestic terrorism to 'wake Americans up' is playing all his cards right from the nihilist manuals of old.

I don't care if it happened on Clinton's watch--it was the power of the state to which McVeigh was reacting. He was not a 'rightwinger' acting out against a Leftist President; McVeigh was an anarchist striking a blow against 'the establishment'--and where have we heard THAT before?

Saturday, December 29, 2007


By Robert Sargent

Disastrous foreign policy predates President Bush, but he has refined and elevated the art, taking it to new and even unimaginable levels.

We need to stop everything. We need to stop supporting both Musharraf AND Bhutto (okay, I know that one’s been taken care of, but we need to stop the PRACTICE!). We need to stop supporting the Kurds AND Turkey. We need to stop supporting the Sunnis AND the Shiites.

We need to stop supporting the enemy of our enemy of the moment, because when we support them simply because they are the enemy of our enemy, they inevitably, and invariably, and without exception, become OUR enemy. It’s just a matter of time.

We need to stop having enemies. I’m serious. Iraq didn’t need to be our enemy. Iran doesn’t need to be our enemy. Venezuela doesn’t need to be our enemy.

Why don’t we try this: Why don’t we decide the friend of our friend is our friend. Can’t we just be friends? Can’t we all just get along? What could it hurt?

Everything our President touches turns into a bloody clusterfuckofamess.

Just Stop. Stop everything. Stop supporting the “goodguys”, stop antagonizing the “badguys”. Maybe Rob Kall was right. Maybe we should support Ron Paul.

Yeah, it's all our fault. Ahmadinejad and Osama and Chavez would be our best friends--if only we'd stop being so darn mean. All we need to do is share our ball on the playground and let little Mo' have a turn first on the slide and everything would be peaceful and nice--and maybe we wouldn't even have to take naps and clean our rooms!

We can compleeeeeetely ignore their statements about bringing down the United States, destroying western civilization, wiping Israel off the map and 'only wanting to kill us'--they were just fooling.

We shouldn't ever believe the things people come right out and state in explicit terms--not even after our WTC is gone, Madrid and London are bombed, Sderot is shelled, the USS Cole is rammed, Khobar Towers is bombed, Leo Klinghoffer is murdered, Bhutto/Sadat/Rabin are assassinated--and the entire record of modern-day history is similarly expanded; why, everyone knows they had their fingers crossed in a double King's X!

If the United States just learns how to be 'nicer'--if we remember that 'attitude determines altitude!'--we'll get invited to birthday parties, too!

Vermont Town Considers Measure to Arrest Bush, Cheney

Vermont Town Considers Measure to Arrest Bush, Cheney

President Bush may soon have a new reason to avoid left-leaning Vermont: In one town, activists want him subject to arrest for war crimes. A group in Brattleboro is petitioning to put an item on a town meeting agenda in March that would make Bush and Vice President Cheney subject to arrest and indictment if they visit the southeastern Vermont community.

"This petition is as radical as the Declaration of Independence, and it draws on that tradition in claiming a universal jurisdiction when governments fail to do what they're supposed to do," said Kurt Daims, 54, a retired machinist leading the drive. The town meeting, an annual exercise in which residents gather to vote on everything from fire department budgets to municipal policy, requires about 1,000 signatures to place a binding item on the agenda.

The measure asks: "Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictment for consideration by other municipalities?"

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. The press office did not immediately respond to an e-mail.

Support for the measure is far from universal, even in Vermont, where the state Senate voted earlier this year to support impeaching the president. Anti-war rallies are regular occurrences here, and "Impeach Bush" bumper stickers are common. "I would not be supportive of it," said Stephen Steidle, a member of the town's selectboard, which oversees its government. "It's well outside of our ability. From my perspective, the Brattleboro Selectboard needs to focus on the town and the things that need to be done here."

As president, Bush has visited every state except Vermont.

Martyr Of the Church: Today Is His Day

Thomas Becket 1170

Global Warmists' Want Conservatives Dead

Climate Optimism: Global Warming Will Wipe Out Conservatives
By Noel Sheppard

Do liberals hate conservatives with such a passion that they actually want us all to die?

Before you answer, consider a December 22 op-ed published by the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel authored by Dave Lindorff, "a 34-year veteran, an award-winning journalist, a former New York Times contributor, a graduate of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, [and] a two-time Journalism Fulbright Scholar."

In the piece entitled "Global Warming Will Save America from the Right...Eventually," Lindorff seriously made the case that the liberal bogeyman known as climate change has a huge potential political upside - conservatives in red states will be wiped out.


Abortion Supporter Knocks 69 Yr. Old Pro-Lifer Unconscious, MSM Silent

Abortion Supporter Knocks 69 Yr. Old Pro-Lifer Unconscious, MSM Silent
By Warner Todd Huston

On December 22nd a 69 year-old pro-life activist who was standing atop his automobile and protesting in front of the Hillcrest Abortion Clinic in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania was physically attacked by an abortion supporter and thrown to the ground with enough force to knock him unconscious. Doctors even worried for a time that the elderly man might perish from the attack.

And here, nearly 7 days out from this attack, there aren't any accounts of the attack in the MSM. As I searched for the story myself, I found two and only two Internet hits for it. Why the silence from the MSM? Can you imagine the MSM swarm that would have occurred if it had been a pro-lifer that attacked an abortion supporter? The cacophony would have been deafening if a pro-lifer had been the one to get violent.

The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property issued the
first story to hit the net a few days ago. Also, a Catholic PRWire and media advisory from Catholic Online was released on the 28th. But the MSM has remained silent on the matter.
Here is the account from the TFP:

When Mr. Snell tried to counsel the woman, his words were cut short when the man became furious, jumped the fence and, in the words of Mr. McTernan, “leaped on the vehicle with Ed and catapulted him off of the vehicle and onto the ground.” Mr. Snell hit his back and head on the pavement and was knocked unconscious.

His medical report outlines the extent of his injuries: “multiple trauma, right subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding in the area between the brain and the tissues that cover the brain), compression fractures of four vertebrae (T3, T4, T5 and T10), right scapula fracture and fracture of the fourth and fifth ribs.” Before doctors were able to stop the bleeding in his head, they even feared Mr. Snell would die.

An elderly man almost dies from an attack by an abortion supporter and the MSM is mum.
But, the receptionist at the clinic sure wasn't mum!

When asked on the phone about the vicious attack, the receptionist at Hillcrest Abortion Clinic refused to give a recorded statement and angrily shouted: “He got what he deserved! He earned what he got!” She then hung up the phone. Again, can you imagine the high dudgeon with which the MSM would have reported this story if it was the pro-lifer saying that an abortion supporter "got what he deserved" should one had been attacked like this?

And, on top of this indignity, the Harrisburg police didn't seem to want to do their duty and arrest the attacker at first, letting the man go home after witnesses pointed him out as the assailant. Ed was taken away in an ambulance and three police officers arrived to investigate. They went into the clinic, where the assailant was waiting. After a few moments, the assailant and his companion left the clinic freely, got into their car and drove away.

Shocked, Mr. McTernan shouted to the police: “What are you doing? That’s him! That’s the assailant!” One cop replied: “It is none of your business!”

To "protect and serve," eh? Apparently not to serve the victim of a vicious attack in this case. So, why the widespread disinterest by the MSM over this story? It can only be because the wrong guy got attacked.

Friday, December 28, 2007

The CRAZY Side Of the Leftist Lunatic Asylum


The Worst 'Notable Quotables' of 2007
By Rich Noyes

Before we ring in 2008, it's worth taking a look back at some of the liberal media's goofiest or most outrageous moments, courtesy of the Media Research Center's
Best Notable Quotables of 2007: The Twentieth Annual Awards for the Year's Worst Reporting. The awards were determined by a panel of 53 distinguished media observers, including radio talk show hosts, magazine editors, editorial writers and informed media observers.

MSNBC's Chris Matthews was a big "winner" this year, taking the top slot in three categories -- the "
Blue State Brigade Award for Campaign Reporting," the “Channeling the Nut Roots Award,” and the "Dynamic Duo Award for Idolizing Bill and Hillary," for (in order) gushing over Barack Obama, suggesting Bush and Cheney be tried for Nuremberg-style war crimes, and equating Bill Clinton with Jesus Christ. Oh, what a busy year he had.

With such a record, it may seem odd that Matthews was not even a runner-up for the “
Tin Foil Hat Award for Crazy Conspiracy Theories” which was instead snatched by ABC daytime host Joy Behar for wondering on-air if the stroke that sickened Democratic Senator Tim Johnson was a Republican dirty trick: “I know what this party is capable of,” Behar informed her colleagues on The View. Behar edged out her former colleague, Rosie O’Donnell, who revealed the news that Rudy Giuliani had shipped “all of the steel” from the fallen World Trade Center twin towers to China “so there was no, like, metal to test.”

Barbara Walters -- she really knows how to hire them, doesn’t she?

Speaking of Walters, she won top honors in our “Media Hero Award” for a puffball interview she conducted with Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez back in March. Walters made sure to inform the American public that Chavez “was warm, friendly…He talked about how hard his life was, how he wished he could be in love but you can’t be when you are heading a country.”

William Arkin, military columnist for the, won the “America Makes Us Sick Award” for his January 30 screed against U.S. soldiers in Iraq wishing for more public support for their mission. “Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform,” Arkin railed. “[It] is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary -- oops sorry, volunteer -- force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.” Arkin later apologized, but just for using the word “mercenary.”

Perhaps trying to compete with Arkin’s idiocy, an ex-Washington Post writer won the “Madness of King George Award” for Bush bashing. Peter Mehlman, in a June 20 posting to the HuffingtonPost, explained how Bush was worse than “even the world’s worst fascist dictators, [who] at least meant well. They honestly thought they were doing good things for their countries by suppressing blacks/eliminating Jews/eradicating free enterprise/repressing individual thought/killing off rivals/invading neighbors, etc….Bush set a new precedent. He came into office with the attitude of ‘I’m so tired of the public good. What about my good? What about my friends’ good?”

CBS’s Harry Smith won the “O Great Goracle Award” for slobbering at the toes of Al Gore. In a May 30 Early Show interview, a smitten Smith tried to stick a “Gore 2008” button on the great crusader against global warming. “Here, let’s see what it looks like,” Smith beamed. Runner-up Margaret Carlson fawningly raised Gore to Biblical heights: “He rose above a great injustice….[and] became a prophet on an issue that is crucially important to the world.”

On the issue of global warming, NBC’s Meredith Vieira won our “Good Morning Morons Award” for her panicky response to a warm day in January: “So I’m running in a park on Saturday, in shorts, thinking this is great, but are we all gonna die? I can’t figure this out?”

There are many more such quotes, most posted with Flash video as well as downloadable audio and video clips, at our awards section at Be sure to check them out before next year’s foolishness makes 2007 seem a distant memory.

Ice Queen Salt-and-Pepper Shakers


The Lesson Of Bhutto: A Time For Adults

The Lesson Of Bhutto: A Time For Adults
By James Lewis

OK, playtime's over! Time for the adults to take charge.

The Clinton Nineties were a decade of playing pretend. The Soviet Union was gone, and conservatives heaved a sigh of relief. We didn't notice that the Boomer Left had infiltrated American and European culture, which went straight to the bottom.

Bill Clinton was our first Boomer Left President. If you believe some of the lurid tales, they had pot parties in the White House and gay sex in the Lincoln Bedroom; Monica's Blue Dress in the Oval Office is a confirmed fact. The media were completely in the bag for Bill. They loved him, and covered up all his sins as long as they could. They still do today.

William J. Clinton had a dozen chances to get Osama Bin Laden, who was a known threat to the United States. But Clinton skipped those openings because he didn't want to risk his popularity, and the lawyers thought the 1993 Twin Towers truck bombing didn't justify a serious response. The US was castrated by liberal lawyers.

We weren't serious about jihadi terrorism, but they sure were serious about us.

Then 9/11 happened, and the Dem Left and the media have been evading the obvious conclusions ever since. Half the American people still don't get it, because the media are playing deaf, dumb and blind. But mostly Dumb.


How the Democrat Underground Shows It's Love

America Is Dead; We Are Now Accepting Nominations and Votes For Our New Name

I Nominate Dysfunctionalia as the new name. (Dawggie)

DU Chimes In:

--The United States of Amnesia
--United States of Confusion
--Stoned on the Grassy Knoll
--Lemming Land
--The Untied States of America
--Funeralopolis: Wonderful World of Colonized Minds
--Province 21 of the Republic of China

--If you are ever in this hemisphere, stop in and will show you around our former democracy. Maybe you can even spend some time informing US about the rest of the world.

--Imperial Amerika (Nazi Amerika doesn't work because there are still several clear differences between us and Nazi Germany. Several. Why, I can count them on both hands, and that's ALOT of differences.)

Democrats Say There's No Threat

Memo to Reid, Pelosi & Co.
By Michael Reagan

What happened in Pakistan today is just more proof that when it comes to the war on terrorism, the Democrats are so terribly wrong-headed that they constitute a serious threat to the security of the American people -- that's you and me.

The assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is just another message -- if any more are needed -- that we are involved in a global war with an enemy that has no morals, no scruples and no respect for human life.

We can expect that the message will go undelivered to the national leadership of the Democratic party, which has shown a reckless disregard to any hints that hard-headed U.S. policy vis-à-vis Islamic terrorism is right and is justified.

In stubborn resistance to reality, Congressional Democrats have steadfastly clung to the notion that the Bush administration is wrong in its determination to face the war being forced on us by worldwide Islamo-fascism and expend its energies in fighting it wherever is with all that is required.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have turned a blind eye to the true nature of the war, especially in their insistence that the war in Iraq is not part of the total war and wants us out, pronto, leaving Iraq to deal with a threat it is not yet able to deal with.

Their myopia over Iraq and the need to pursue an aggressive strategy to root out and destroy the enemy wherever he is, as we are now doing with the surge in Iraq, is not limited to that struggle. It seems that whenever tough measures are called for, they rise up in strident opposition.

Such is the case in Pakistan, where Nancy Pelosi not long ago expressed her disapproval of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's hard-line stance towards the huge radical element in his country, where polls show that fully 48 percent of the population favors al Qaeda and the Taliban.

When Musharraf imposed emergency rule and suspended his nation's constitution in the face of massive unrest in Pakistan, Pelosi -- who seems to labor under the misapprehension that among her roles is secretary of state for Capitol Hill -- let loose with this broadside, pinning the blame on the Bush Administration, which she neglected to note shared her unhappiness with Musharraf's actions, but not her stridency:

"For too long, President Musharraf failed to confront effectively his growing unpopularity" Madame Pelosi said. "The Bush Administration enabled Musharraf's delusion by ignoring his undemocratic acts and lack of internal support in exchange for his assistance in efforts against terrorism. Pakistan will only be a reliable and capable ally against terrorism when its government is not seen as an enemy by its own people," Pelosi added.

This in the face of that near-majority of the population that sees its government as the real enemy and supports al Qaeda, which wants to kill us all and has tried nine times to kill Pervez Musharraf, who just happens to be our sole hope of keeping order in a nuclear-armed Pakistan and preventing the horrendous Taliban from re-conquering Afghanistan.

War, as the Kennedys used to say about politics, "ain't beanbag." Victory does not go to the fainthearted. And like it or not, what we face in Pakistan and Afghanistan and Iraq, and in a lot of other troubled areas of the world, is all-out war. Musharraf understands that.

Wherever we are engaged in that war the Democratic party, now thoroughly in the hands of the greatest conglomeration of fanatic far-out left-wingers in all creation, prefers to treat the struggle as if it were beanbag, where one plays by gentlemanly rules even as the enemy kills people in suicide bombings or chopping off heads.

Pakistan is not an isolated case. We are as much at war there, by proxy, as we are in Afghanistan where our troops battle the Taliban. If we lose Pakistan, al Qaeda could be the world's ninth nuclear power, and playing the Democrats' game of beanbag could threaten us with mushroom clouds over Manhattan.

As the Nixon folks used to say, when the going gets tough, the tough get going -- if they want to survive, that is. For today's Democrats, when the going gets tough, it's time to wring your hands and tsk-tsk while the tough get going.,_

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Benazir Bhutto


We're Having A White Christmas!



Wednesday, December 26, 2007

DU Tries To Ruin the Season


So, How'd the War On Christmas Go This Year?

Did we make any inroads? (PlanetBev)

--No tree this year for us. I did send holiday cards, and as a substitute for a tree, I put up our lighted, moving, holiday pink flamingo.

--My friend in Pasadena has the lighted, moving pink flamingo wearing a Santa cap sitting on her front porch this year.

--As a foot soldier on that blowhard O'Really's "War On Xmas" I must say things went beautifully this year. My family started the day off by eating at a vegan restaurant, "Bamboo Garden", run by people who do not even acknowledge Xmas. After that, we went to see "Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street". We ended the day by spending no more than $15 on each family member on a 15-minute shopping spree at Walgreen's. My daughter even did the "Fight Club" speech before we went.

--I said "Bah Humbug!" a lot, and acted grouchy on several occasions.

--Comrades, we must TRIPLE our efforts next year!!! No rest until there is a FULL BAN on Christmas!!!!!!

X-mas Seems Gone In My Neighborhood

I have not seen one tree, one window decor anywhere where I live nor heard one X-mas song in even the grocery store. I haven't seen one person drive up anywhere with plates of food and presents. In the 80's there was not one without this and after new years there were trees lining the curbs. (blues90)

--Everyone is Depressed... No $$$$, Jobs, Health Care, etc.

--Nearly every single person I know was either not in the "mood" for Christmas this year, or wound up having a totally shitty holiday. It was both for me...I just kind of went through the motions with a sense of blandness.

--Same Here... Too Much to worry about, couldn't enjoy the holidays. I live in a heavily Hispanic neighborhood and up to about five years ago, the houses tried to outdo each other. Now, nobody's got outdoor lights and few have trees on display.

--I didn't even see many even go to church and there are three within easy walking distance from here , I always saw the families all dressed up to go . I know we are broke and did nothing but the diner since it will last the two of us two weeks but we decided we would not even listen to the music, we have enough mental pain already, I used to love the X-mas music and the spirit of it all even though we are not religious the music does have a thing about it. I had the tapes of it ready but just couldn't bare opening the cases.

--When you lose your job or accept a new job with shittier wages, you're in no mood for carols. That's my best guess as to why things are going down the shitter.

--The songs are all hackneyed, the displays cheap and tacky, the traffic abominitable, and the emotions strained past the point of saneness. This is a happy season? One can't avoid it though. You're a "grinch" if you try, or you risk alieninating your spouse or your family. (guilty as charged)But hooray! The best day of the year is upon us: December 26!

--We haven't done X-mas in at least 15 years or more. I think more and more people see it every year that's good.

Can We Take A Break From the Politics and Send the Bush Family Our Best Wishes?

Nah... I don't think so...Hey chimp clan!....choke on your fucking turkey, you scumbags! (Webster Green)

--In the spirit of the season I say fuck you, GWB. The best wish I can do. (from trashcanistanista)

--As Daffy Duck once said, "You're despicable."

--Bush, I hope you choke long enough to know what it feels like. then i want to see you and cheney drawn and quartered for treason!!! you fucking treasonus douchebags! I heard you got a new coat you shit for brains. why don't you give it to one of the millions you put out in the snow. Fuckface.

--They Said They Wanted To Travel. They Should Do So. Let them visit the beautiful Palace of Peace in the Hague. I am sure the International Criminal Court will be very happy to see them. They will simply insist that they extend their stay.

--NO NO NO! To hell with'em

--I sent Chimpy some tasty soft banana flavored pretzels!

--How about sending his daughters forms to enlist in the Army? They can go to Iraq and tell everyone "it's my daddy's oil underneath this sand".

--Yes. My wish for them: I wish their genetic line would die out. We've had quite enough of the Bush family, thank you.

--I wish them all a happy sterility and a short life. That line needs to die out.

These poor babies. They can't be thankful for, or positive about, anything! And what did they think? Naturally Christmas seems 'gone' in their neighborhoods. First of all, they don't call it Christmas--they call it 'XMAS'--what is that? Second, by the time they get the ACLU to sue over every smidgen of a Christmas display on a lawn, refuse the very colors red and green in even generic decorations, and allow the muslims to loudspeaker their prayers all over the neighborhood several times a day, where is the place for Christmas???

Up here in Seattle, we have Santas garishly nailed upon crosses in protest, childrens' toy drives stolen, Nativity yard displays torn up and trashed, lawsuits threatened everytime EVERY religion isn't displayed in public (whether it's an occasion to do so or not), Christmas trees knocked over, and protests against stores that are open longer, have sales, put up holiday displays, or feature Salvation Army bell ringers.

The increased crowds, shopping, and enthusiasm of the rest of us enjoy is called 'chaos', 'ruckus', 'hullabaloo', or a 'mad dash'--and we're a 'herd' or a 'throng'. Shopper's behavior is characterized as 'frantic', 'hysterical', 'frenzied', 'greedy', 'furious', or 'crazed'--and words like 'joy', 'fun', celebration', tradition are used in no good way, if at all.

The idea, among these Leftists, of reverence, holiness, sanctity, redemption, love, giving, or spirit are as far away as the summer sun. And they spare no second, have no moment of grace, in which to suspend their nastiest thoughts about President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and anybody vaguely connected with the War On Terror or our government.

Christmas? Gone for them? I'm not a bit surprised!

OUR Man Of the Year 2007!

General David Howell Petraeus


Good Morning--Christmas Was Beautiful!


Tuesday, December 25, 2007

DU's 'Progressively' Blue Christmas

Man, This Christmas Is Depressing

It's bad enough that I don't have a job and live off SS now and am broke also my wife is disabled. But that's not the entire problem; we don't have anyone to buy presents for and don't need any ourselves. We are early boomers or should I say the doomed generation.

My mother passed a year ago in august 2006 and this is the second christmas without her which is still something that has not quite set in until these holidays arrive. I really don't know the source of the depression. I can't put my finger on it. I do know part is age and no job and no purpose and to find purpose in this day and age leaves me cold because, even if I could find a job, I have no interest in what's out there these days, most jobs seem well, just jobs.

Even with this said this year the holidays seem unbearable to me, not that I'm in a rush for the summer heat to rush in or the summer sun to shine, I'm not. There is just something missing, perhaps there is a male menopause, perhaps there is a death of spirit in me or brought on by this insane war on christmas and I'm not even religious. Perhaps it's 7 years of Bush and these coming too-soon debates and the 2008 elections when we just went through 2006 with high hopes crushed like a bug under the carpet. Perhaps it's all of the above and then some that I am not even aware of.

All I do know is this is the worst year of all. I went out to pickup all the stuff needed so my wife and I can put together her great cooking of christmas dinner. I was in a mood when I did this last thursday, I got gas, 5 gallons and saw the $17 and began yelling obscenities about Bush and this occupation and did not care who heard me. The store we use and called lied saying they had turkeys, they had a few for $2.59 per pound so I left that and only got the other stuff, as I walked to the register I yelled again, what a shitty store and did not care what anyone thought of me. I finally found a cheap bird and went home.

So here I sit in front of this computer which has now become my only contact to the outside world, pathetic I know. I never wanted a computer and never thought this is what I would come to. I never thought this country could become such a macabre of a joke.

So I am depressed as can be this year. (blues90)

I Used To Be A Teacher, So I Give Short Tests. Here's One For Xmas... Enjoy !

This test only has one question, but it's a very important one in giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally. No one else will know, so you won't be fooling anyone but yourself if you give anything but a truthful answer.

The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in whichyou will have to make a decision. Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please read slowly and thoughtfully, giving due consideration to each line:

You are in Florida; Miami to be specific. There is chaos all around you, caused by a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.

Suddenly you see a man floundering in the water. He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer... somehow the man looks familiar. You suddenly realize who it is. It's George W. Bush, President of the United States! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under... forever. You have two options-you can save the life of G.W. Bush, or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the world's most powerful men.

So here's the question, and please give an honest answer:

Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white? (Stuart G)

Caroling For Social Justice

Toys For the World

Toys for the world are made by kids
And not by elves at all!
We work them night and day
For very little pay.
And tiny little hands
Make all our fav'rite brands
That fill up the shelves in every shopping mall.

Toys for the world that Santa brings
So our own kids can play
What's underneath your tree
Is our economy.
The little girls and boys
Who make our children's toys
Are not getting squat from us on Christmas Day!
They're not getting squat from us on Christmas Day!

Rest Easy Wealthy Gentlemen

Rest easy, wealthy gentlemen,
Let nothing make us sigh.
We give our workers tiny crumbs
So we can keep the pie.
We pay off politicians
So they bear our needs in mind
As they line up to kiss our fat behinds.
If they're inclined,
Oh, they line up to kiss our fat behinds!

Don't worry, wealthy gentlemen,
Let nothing make us twitch.
This new global economy's
Designed to keep us rich.
We ply our trade in many lands
Let all their leaders come
To bend down and kiss us on the bum.
There's a good chum.
Just bend down and kiss us on the bum!

Deck the Halls With Sweatshop Labor

Deck the halls with sweatshop labor
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Wal-Mart is our local slaver
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Workers there don't share the profits
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
The power to change is in your pockets
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Tags will tell you where your bucks go
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Rollbacks come from import cash flow
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
China sweats out clothes at high cost
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
US workers' jobs and pride lost
Fa la la la la, la la la la. (eridani)


This is the most miserable, ungrateful, spiritually bankrupt group of people I have ever seen. (The comments under these posts are worse than the posts themselves...) DUers have no concept of gratitude or thanks--they don't even know what blessings are. Instead of feeling a duty to uplift America and inspire with decent hopes, wishes, and prayers, they post only ugliness, negative thoughts--and they trash America.

It wouldn't occur to them that Christmas is something enjoyable and a true celebration. They'd never think that the shopping and gift-giving they think is so 'greedy' and 'exploitative' is actually, for most of us, an expression of love--a commemoration of the gifts brought to the Christ child--and an acknowledgement of His tremendous gift and sacrifice to and for us. The fact that it also supports our economy, keeps millions employed, provides needed overtime for thousands of people--in addition to being a cultural reinforcement and tradition--is an added plus, something positive.

Pity that those at DU have such shallow, empty hearts--and have such a dim view of this great country. If I didn't have the mental and emotional wherewithal to boost myself out of their perpetual pity-party, I'd be terminally depressed and sniveling, too.





Luke 2:8

"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, 'Fear not: for behold, I bring unto you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the City of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.' And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God, and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.'"

myspace layouts, myspace codes, glitter graphics

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Bill Clinton's Third Term?

Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket

It's About Hillary, Stupid (IS It???)
By Michael Goodwin

Something was bugging me, but I couldn't figure out what it was. Then it hit me. While I was reading about the campaign, the realization came like a thunderbolt: I'm tired of Bill Clinton.

Tired of his half-truths and full lies about where he stood on Iraq. Tired of his bull, as when he says he'd campaign for Hillary "if we weren't married" and calls her a "world-class genius." Tired of his whining, as when he says the media has been too tough on her and too soft on Barack Obama.

All of this is as real as the lovey-dovey, hug-and-smile photo ops of them in Iowa. It's theater, staged for maximum political impact. We're being played again on the two-for-the-price-of-one angle.

But, as always, the game for him is about him. A vote for her is a vote for him. Vanity is a big part of it, with her victory the succession legacy he was denied when Al Gore lost. All true, but I fear there is more to it now. He wants to be The Man, again. He wants it so much that it's not clear which President Clinton would be the President. The way he hogs the spotlight, the way he's trotted out to rescue her when she's in trouble and the way he sets the talking points mark him as the lead dog in the Clinton pack. Would he also make the decisions in the White House? All of them? Some of them?

One day he uses the phrase "roll of the dice" to warn against Obama, and soon she's using "roll of the dice" to warn about Obama. The echo chamber happens often enough that if she wins, Hillary could end up being No. 2 in her own administration. Maybe that's the plan. That makes me really tired. I suspect I'm not alone.

There's a good reason we have term limits on Presidents. That the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution came after FDR won four terms captures the spirit and the letter of the law: Enough!, it shouts. Good or bad, we want fresh blood. Bill Clinton had his chance. He got the honor that goes with the office, even if he disgraced it. He set the nation's agenda, for better and worse. We cared about everything he said and did, even if sometimes we would have been better off not knowing. But it's over. Now it's her turn, on her terms, to win or lose. Either way, she has to stop mixing the message about who really would be in charge of a new Clinton presidency.

The muddle is unique, even against the Bush father-son dynamic. Dick Cheney was going to be George Bush's adult supervisor, replacing Dubya's father, the former President. While there are lots of jokes and speculation about Cheney's influence, it is not seriously argued that Cheney is the real President. Not so with the Clintons. Even allowing for the historic nature of a first female commander in chief and a male First Spouse, there is much confusion about the nature of Bubba's role. It can't be a fifty-fifty deal. There can be only one President, for our friends and our enemies.

Yet the frequency of two campaign messages from them suggests that's not how they see it. Her "likability tour" features him more than her. He pops off, and news reports the next day are filled with anonymous quotes about how upset the campaign officials are that he's off message. Is he off message, or is the double message the message? What if he pops off about Russia or China? Would that be the policy, or would we have to wait for her to speak?

Of course, it's not fair to blame only him. She's the one on the ballot. But what if that's a Clinton trick? Just asking the question makes me exhausted.

Frontlines On the War On Christmas

Christmas Clashes 2007
Kristen Fyfe

There’s good news and bad news this Christmas. First, the good. Americans are pushing back more than ever against the generic “holiday” tide (see Santa’s Helpers list below). As part of that effort, CMI is unveiling the Grinch-o-Meter, which rates those who are Christmas-challenged.

But here’s the bad: Some of the Grinches seem to be scaling new heights of peevishness and absurdity. And although the national news media are largely ignoring the cultural battle underway, local news sources have been rich with detail.

Here is a roundup of some of the more interesting people, institutions and media stories in this season’s Christmas culture clash, with their Grinch-o-Meter ratings. The Grinch-o-Meter is CMI’s new tool for measuring the Grinchiness of those seeking to secularize, diminish or tarnish the celebration of Christmas in America. People who actively seek to wreck Christmas for others (for example, ACLU lawsuits regarding nativity scenes), or do something profoundly petty, get a 10. Others who start off Grinchy and then correct themselves receive a middling score. People who embrace and promote Christmas without having their arms twisted get a zero on the Grinch-o-Meter.
Grinch-o-Meter Ratings 2007

*TOP Grinch-o-Meter Award: The 17 congressmen who supported a resolution recognizing Islam and Ramadan but voted “no” or “present” (that is, there but wouldn’t vote) on a similar resolution introduced by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) recognizing Christianity and Christmas.

Lawmakers who voted “no” for Christianity and “yes” for Islam are: Reps. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Diana DeGette (D-CO), Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Bobby Scott (D-VA), Fortney Stark (D-CA) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). Those who voted “present” on Christianity and “yes” on Islam include: Reps. John Conyers (D-MI), Barney Frank (D-MA), Rush Holt (D-NJ), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Janice Schakowsky (D-IL), Allyson Schwartz (D-PA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Peter Welch (D-VT) and John Yarmuth (D-KY). [Grinch-o-Meter: 10-Plus]

*Ft. Collins, Colorado – The city created a Holiday Display Task Force, which recommended banning red and green lights and using only white ones and only secular symbols. A local ACLU representative was on the task force. Fox’s Bill O’Reilly reported on November 27 that the task force’s recommendations were “rebuffed.” The Council voted 6-1 to keep their Christmas decorations. [Task Force gets a Grinch-o-Meter 10; the council gets a 2]

*Ridgeland Schools – The Oak Lawn, Illinois district was going to do away with Christmas parties. But parents raised a fuss, so the school board decided that rather than take Christmas parties off the agenda, they would include celebrations of Ramadan and other Muslim holidays. [Grinch-o-Meter initially registered a 10, but dialed back to a 5]

*Companies that operate government-assisted housing for senior citizens – In Plant City, Florida and Troy, Pennsylvania, residents were told they cannot decorate common areas in their buildings with religious symbols at Christmas. After being contacted by Liberty Counsel these companies reversed their decisions. [Grinch-o-Meter initially registered a 10, but dialed back to a 2]

*Spokane, Washington – The Associated Press reported that the Spokane Public Schools sent home a calendar for elementary school students with “important dates” for December. Hanukkah, Human Rights Day, winter break, first day of winter, Kwanzaa and the Islamic holy day of Eid-al-Adha were on the list, but one rather significant holiday beginning with a “C” didn’t make the cut. A school spokesperson said, “In our efforts to be inclusive we missed the obvious.” The school corrected the omission in the online calendar. [Grinch-o-Meter registered 10 initially but dialed back to 2]

*Barbara Walters – During the December 13 episode of ABC’s The View, Walters whined about the White House Christmas card because it quotes the Bible’s book of Nehemiah. “Don’t you think it’s a little interesting that the president of all the people is sending out a religious Christmas card?” she asked her co-hosts. [Grinch-o-Meter: 9]

*New York City officials – gave the Christian Defense Coalition a Scrooge-like two-hour window to display a small nativity scene in midtown Manhattan. The display is part of “The Nativity Project,” a nationwide campaign to set up nativity scenes in well-traveled public areas. [Grinch-o-Meter: 9]

*Seattle-Tacoma International Airport – The airport made major headlines last Christmas when it removed all of the Christmas trees on display throughout the airport after being threatened with a lawsuit if a menorah was not also included in the display. This year, the airport convened a “holiday decorations advisory committee” which determined that the airport would not use any decorations with religious connotations. The Seattle Post Intelligencer reports this year’s décor is a “grove of luminous birches up to 30 feet high and hung with crystals and mirrors to reflect colored, low-energy lights.” Above the trees will be a “spiraling flock of migrating birds cut out of foam.” Wind chimes will occasionally ring as well. [Grinch-o-Meter: 9]

*Chattanooga, Tennessee officials - For years the city has included a live nativity scene in its public festivities. This year, after receiving a complaint, the city decided to do away with the nativity scene. A public backlash resulted in the nativity scene being moved to a local church. [Grinch-o-Meter: 9]

*Hollywood, California – For 75 years the city has sponsored a Hollywood Christmas Parade, but it refused to sponsor the parade this year. The Los Angeles City Council has taken over, and is changing the name to the Hollywood Santa Parade. [Grinch-o-Meter: 8]

*The Texas Gas Transmission Company – The company ended a four-decade-long tradition in Owensburg, Kentucky of displaying a large, lighted cross. The company’s president, H. Dean Jones II, said the cross was a religious symbol and the company didn’t want to alienate people of other faiths. [Grinch-o-Meter: 8]

*Missouri State University – The college took down a Christmas tree from an atrium in a campus building after a Jewish faculty member said it “showed a lack of sensitivity” to people of other religions. After the local press reported the story, the administration reconsidered and put the tree back up. [Grinch-o-Meter registered 8 initially but dialed back to 2]

*Oberlin, Ohio artist Keith McGuckin – Last year it was gingerbread Nazis with Swastika-labeled candles. This year, McGuckin has created a murderous snow woman and a drug smuggling elf. His art is on display at the Oberlin Public Library and a local crafts store, according to WEWS in Cleveland. [Grinch-o-Meter: 7]

*The Ohio Department of Natural Resources – Bureaucrats initially ordered all state parks to remove Nativity scenes because of one complaint. After being contacted by Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal defense organization, the ODNR changed its stance and decided to continue “prior holiday traditions.” [Grinch-o-Meter: 6]

*New Hyde Park, New York school officials – The district drew the ire of more than 250 residents when it considered changing the name of school Christmas Concerts to Holiday or Winter Concerts. The New York Times reported the large crowd came out in August to demand to keep “Christmas” in the Christmas concerts. The district reportedly was considering the change based on a single complaint. [Grinch-o-Meter: 5]

Overall, the Grinches seem to be losing ground to common sense and tradition.

During the Nov. 27 broadcast of The O’Reilly Factor, conservative talk radio host Mike Gallagher said he believed that the rise of conservative voices in the media, especially on talk radio and on Fox News Channel, has helped shift the tide in the War on Christmas.

No doubt the clashes will continue. The ACLU [Grinch-o-Meter: 10-plus] typically only has to threaten a lawsuit against a town or school, and administrators will buckle. On top of that, advertisers and retailers continue to hype the generic “Holiday” at the expense of Christmas. The “Duh, Duh, Duh, Duh” ads by carmaker Hyundai come to mind. [Grinch-o-Meter: 8] Retailers like Banana Republic, The Gap (also owns Old Navy), Eddie Bauer and Petco [collective Grinch-o-Meter: 8] spend massive amounts of advertising dollars and use only the word “Holiday.” Some companies go to ridiculous lengths not to mention Christmas. Circuit City and CVS [Grinch-o-Meter: 8] have ads for “Free Shipping” or a “Holiday Shipping Schedule” for delivery by December 24. That would be Christmas Eve.

Other retailers have been more responsive. Lowe’s, the home improvement chain, came under fire in November when one of its circulars carried the banner “Family Trees” over pictures of Christmas trees. Lowe’s issued a public apology and said it would be advertising them as Christmas trees this year. [Grinch-o-Meter: 3] Home Depot still calls the conifers (both fake and live) “Holiday Trees.” [Grinch-o-Meter: 9]

For current lists of retailers who are Christmas friendly, check Focus on the Family and Liberty Counsel, which regularly update their information.

And then there are television networks. Again, the push/pull of the Christmas clash is evident. Every year, different networks air classic Christmas movies or TV shows like Charlie Brown’s Christmas, in which Linus recites the Biblical account of Jesus’ birth. It is always the top-rated show across multiple demographics when it airs. [ABC aired the program this year. Grinch-o-Meter: 0] In contrast, more than two-thirds of the publicly owned PBS stations refused to air the program “The Birth of Christ,” the CD of which is currently No. 4 on the Billboard charts. [For those 200+ stations, Grinch-o-Meter: 10].

There is little doubt that the culture clash surrounding Christmas will not end any time soon. In a Chicago Tribune article about the Oak Lawn schools’ Christmas-Ramadan brouhaha, Bernard Beck, a sociology professor emeritus at Northwestern University, said demographic shifts often create such conflicts. He added that religious tolerance in America is constantly being renegotiated.

Despite the continuing liberal efforts to sanitize the religious aspects of Christmas and make it just another holiday, renegotiation is, in fact, happening. The Christmas Spirit is spreading, as attested by the activities of people like those who made our Santa’s Helper List: