Amnesty International Enters Realm of Ridiculous

In its latest turn of blatant anti-Americanism, Amnesty International released a report that criticizes the treatment of prisoners at the Guantanamo facility in Cuba, claiming that prisoners are being abused and that the facility should be shut down. This, following the misreported allegations by NewsWeek of interrogators flushing the Holy Koran (Quran) down a toilet as part of an intimidation tactic. These latest accusations have been met by strong denials from such figures as Vice President Cheney, General Richard Myers (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff) and, as of today during his press conference, President Bush.

Once again a liberal organization is battering the American GI, while disregarding the abuses that many of these so-called "victims" had perpetrated on others leading up to their capture. Small cells and strenuous standing likened to Soviet gulags? Have these people even read early 20th-century history? This organization seems all-too-happy to board the Abu Gharib express, which in my view renders them worthless, albeit worthy of scorn and ridicule.

Where do they get this stuff? Is the AI now taking notes from the ACLU (another worthless organization, long bereft of its original calling)?

Has anyone ever asked: Just WHERE did these prisoners get their copies of the Koran? The answer: The same place they get their three religion-specific square meals every day, and all other accoutrements necessary to practice their religion. Would these same men, or their leaders, do the same for any of our soldiers or civilians they might have captured? We give them prayer mats, they take our heads...and WE are the bad guys???

Back in Business (Unlike the Senate)

Well, the new template is up and we are back to keeping democracy honest! Thanks for your patience while I completely destroyed and rebuilt my humble site.

Apparently, the SENATE does not share this operational mode with my Blog -- turns out that the Democrats had a little surprise up their sleeves after all the hugging and kissing that went on with the "Gang of 14." No, this is NOT A FILIBUSTER (according to Angry-man Reid)...it is simply "an extended debate on Mr. Bolton." Give me a break!

"Nuclear Option" On Filibusters Avoided - For Now

Well, the news is not surprising, but there may still be consequences. 14 senators (seven from each party) stepped out of their respective partisan camps and sought (and ultimately achieved) a compromise. Depending on your perspective, this move may have averted an institutional disaster and subsequent virtual freeze on President Bush's high-profile intitiatives (e.g. Social Security reform) , or it represented a minority of weak-minded politicians afraid of sticking to their partisan (and perhaps personal) convictions.

The result of the emergency pow-wow held in Senator John McCain's office was this: Seven Republicans agreed to vote against a Constitutional (aka "Nuclear) option that would change the rules requiring 60 votes for judicial filibusters to a simple majority (51 votes); Seven Democrats agreed to allow the first three nominees (Owen, Brown and Pryor) to go through to the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote (simple majority), and would consider filibusters on judicial nominees in the future under "extraordinary circumstances" only. Lots of wiggle room there, as any Democratic Senator (especially the mentally unstable and extremely liberal variety, like Kennedy or Reid) can find a way to claim this for any nominee with such a relative term.

John McCain, the primary Republican culprit in this "compromise," claims to trust the seven Democrats who joined this rag-tag club of "moderates" and calls the outcome "An agreement based on trust and reverence..."

What will be the political price that each of these 14 will have to pay? Might some suffer at the polls next time they run?

The Majority Leader, Senator Frist, has handled this development with honesty and grace, conceding that he is grateful for the advancement of the three nominees to a vote. "It has some good news and it has some disappointing news and it will require careful monitoring," he said."

On the other hand, Senate Minority Leader Reid, continues his ridiculous and hateful spin against the President and Conservative Republicans. "We have sent President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the radical right of the Republican party an undeniable message ... the abuse of power will not be tolerated." What an ass.

Me personally, I would have preferred to see the showdown at high noon on Tuesday or Wednesday (if for no other reason, it would have made for GREAT reality T.V.) -- I respect big balls in a politician, and my take is that Senator Frist showed remarkable cajones, patience and will, while McCain is sadly lacking in the former. Honestly, I hope he proves me wrong.

The question on everyone's mind is this: What will the Democrats do when it is time to replace the Supreme Court Chief Justice, ailing William Rehnquist? My money is on another threat of filibuster from Reid and his cronies - any takers? This will be the moment of truth for John McCain and his trusting nature.

Liberal Kid with a GREAT Girly Site

I have recently had some exchanges with a young liberal in Southern California - the latest you might find interesting, as he kindly dedicated an entire entry to yours truly (and how could I do otherwise?). At the end, I will give you the link to his "Hotty of the Day" which is anything but PC, and very little like my image of "liberal." If Jaba (aka "Elephant Hunter") makes you angry with his comments, go easy on him...he is only young and ill-informed!


From JABA - 18 May 2005

"You are too angry and ill-informed - you need a time out" - Kinda like the pot calling the kettle black. If I recall your post that I commented on, you were basically calling anyone not a right wing nazi a bunch of pussies. You suggested that us pussies join the military. By the tone of your post, I'm pretty sure you're a bit angry too. Am I angry? Of course I am. I'm pissed that this country is being led down the shithole by a bunch of right wing fanatics.

About the ill-informed part. I noticed on your blog profile that you work as a consultant for a large defense contractor. Well this "ill-informed" Democrat happens to also work at a large defense contractors (one of the largest in the country). Unlike you, I'm not a consultant working on some project but a full-time employee that works in the CEO suite and interacts on a daily basis with senior executives that have served as 1 and 2 star generals, senior military personnel (when I say senior, I mean, for example the former #2 guy at one of our 3 letter intelligence agencies is in my electronic rolodex and calls me back when I leave him a voicemail) from every branch of the DOD and the intelligence community. While I've never fired a bullet for my country (neither has GW), I'm involved in "stuff" that is of importance to our country. To do what I do, and at the executive level that I do it at, and at the age of 28, I'm going to guess that I'm not as ill informed as you think. Your post is quite presumptuous and condescending, which isn't unusual for a right wing nut.

Since you mentioned my all-you-can-eat buffet post, I'm assuming you read quite a bit of my blog. Perhaps YOU are too angry to realize that I try to wrap a lot of my blogs in sarcasm and humor. Do I really think that all Republicans are fascists? No. But I, along with many others, think that many Republicans have swung too far to the right. What also ticks me off, and is the reason I commented on your post in the first plae, are right wingers who portray anyone that isn't fanatical as somehow un-American. That's utter bullshit.

Oh, before I forget...your swipe at Clinton. As a consultant at a defense contractor and with your years in the military, I'm pretty sure you know that the decrease in military spending during the Clinton years reduced the amount of missiles, tanks, aircraft, etc. stuff that were necessary to fight the Cold War but weren't necesarily helpful in stopping those planes on 9/11. While Clinton did make a mistake by reducing intelligence spending, there was apparently enough money and enough intelligence for the Clinton administration to warn the newly elected GW in 2000 that they should view Al Queda as the country's number 1 threat. A warning that GW and his administration didn't exactly listen to until 9/11. There is shared blame across party lines for 9/11. And don't make me remind you of the weapons placed in the hands of our current enemies by the Republican administration in the late 80's and early 90's.

On a lighter note, I'm glad you like the girly site. Please make sure to stop by as I post new girls daily. Feel free to send me a suggestions as well. And at least we agree on one thing: my buddies who won't go to Vegas with me are a bunch of wussies.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Timmer - May 19 2005

Jeez Killer - I hardly know where to begin! First, I guess I should thank you for the plug - I would like to have many visits from your readers on my site! Really.

I responded to your comment (which was a response to my comment on OKDemocrat's site) mostly because you missed my obvious sarcasm and reacted emotionally - "loud mouth pissy military people" is how you put it. Having served for 20 years in the Navy, did you imagine I wouldn't react to this kind of disrespect?

Judging you solely on your comments that day, you did need a time out. And yes, I'll say it again, you still sound like you could use a gig in the military. Your liberalism notwithstanding, I think you need to rethink blanket statements against the people in uniform who willingly die for you and yours on foreign soil...perhaps even those folks in your "rolodex" would agree with me?

I have lots of friends who never served, and I don't hold that against them. However, these folks (one and all) are glad that there are people like me and so many others that have and do serve on their behalf.

Now, about this CONTRACTOR stuff:
---If you are in fact working at the level you suggest, you should already know these factoids - which you obviously don't, so I can only conclude that you are at best a young suit who runs around doing the bidding of these "senior executives" (and at worst full of shit ;-) If the former, I get coffee from folks like you every morning...which is still not a bad gig for your age.
---If you are located in Southern California, you are basically at a minor outpost of the "3-letter agencies"...two of which I work for in the D.C. area (where it all happens, as you know?). In fact, I have worked for one of these (both in and out of the Navy) since you were in the first grade.
---"Senior Consultant" is what we say in this business when we can't say exactly what it is we do...this you should know, given your "lofty" position. I am a full-time employee as well, but have signed lots of documents that prevent me from revealing further details...apparently you are not so encumbered (hmmm?).
---Your implied "insider knowledge" that the Clinton reductions in defense spending were geared only toward cold war-related armaments, and somehow might not be applicable to modern defense and war, are naive at best...blind (due to total immersion into liberal new-speak) at worst.

Now, we can carry on like this and probably enjoy it (I know I would), or you can ask me why it is I feel the way I do about certain issues. I enjoy both types of dialogue immensely -- your choice!

And yes, even though my team of colleagues and I (all former military and all current "Senior Consultants") enjoyed some laughs at your expense today, we all agreed that you must certainly be salvageable due to your well-managed girly site, which we have all bookmarked for further off-time scrutiny. I can also guarantee you that MY FRIENDS would have gone to Las Vegas.

I think I will honor you on my website as well (quid pro quo ;-), and will make sure to promote your better site as well.

Cheers for now, Timmer

Oh! And Jaba's GOOD website is http://hottieoftheday.blogspot.com/

Harry Reid is an Angry Little Man

So it's just not enough for this whiny politician to B.S. his constituents and the rest of the American public by claiming that the judicial filibuster is crucial to the "checks and balances of power," ad nauseum...he must now label our President with a word like "loser." What is going on with this guy and his other angry little friends (e.g. Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy - who isn't little at all, but apparently VERY angry!)? I'm surprised he (Reid) didn't hold his hand in the shape of an "L" to his forehead as he spewed this invective blather.

When asked a question about the President, Reid responded "The man’s father is a wonderful human being...(but) I think this guy is a loser." And THIS is the senate minority leader? Hmmmm, he DOES seem to be in good company with yet another Democrat leader...sound anything like Screamin' Dean?

The Patriot Act - A "Slippery Slope?"

While conducting another epic battle with crazed Maryland drivers during my usual 42-mile commute this morning, I surrendered myself to the snail-like flow of traffic and tuned off of local radio (traffic reports) and dialed up C-SPAN to take my mind off of the drive. I found myself intrigued by today's guest and her subject: The Patriot Act.

Ms. Heather MacDonald, who is a John M. Olin fellow at the Manhattan Institute ("a think tank") and contributing editor to City Journal, was addressing caller questions concerning the Patriot Act and the need to reauthorize it. I found that I was VERY impressed with Ms. MacDonald's logic, clarity and broad knowledge on this subject.

Virtually every caller was armed with questions and concerns that either fell well out of the realm of the Patriot Act (drug busts and childhood pranks), or were completely misinformed about the program's procedures and oversight. Like Social Security Reform, the Patriot Act has been bludgeoned and propagandized by Liberal and Libertarian smeer campaigns into an unrecognizable, sinister entity engineered to harm and take things from us - in this case, our privacy and civil liberties. The threat of terrorism REQUIRES a federal mechanism to protect our citizens in a post-9-11 world. As stated by Ms. MacDonald, "Protecting ourselves doesn't lead to tyranny."

I encourage you to read her article, The Patriot Act is No Slippery Slope.

Social Security Reform - Personal Accounts To Be "O P T I O N A L !"

As I listened to the raging debate on C-SPAN Friday, I was reminded once again that the Democrats are truly the party of "NO" - I didn't hear a positive peep from any democrat present.

I visited the "AARP" blog on Saturday, and was amused to see the blatant hatred and distrust most responders displayed toward anything proposed by President Bush - especially Social Security which will not affect these seniors! One woman (Gail) wrote an article saying that she really wants her kids and grand kids to have a CHOICE vis-a-vis personal accounts, and she was just hammered by over 300 angry respondents, calling her names (like "Neo-con Bushite" and "Rich B*tch"), threatening her and making outlandish claims as to the nature of Bush's plan.

At 43, I will probably not realize much by this plan, but I want MY kid to have this choice - and yet the Democrats simply can't stop the finger-pointing, number-jumbling shell-game long enough to take an honest look.

From an Associated Press article in USATODAY.com:

"A White House fact sheet issued during Bush's news conference Thursday night referred to an approach authored by Robert C. Pozen, a private economist. In testimony before Congress earlier this week, Pozen said a plan along the lines that he advocates could erase roughly 70% of Social Security's long-term deficit."

"While avoiding all talk of details, Bush renewed his support for that approach in an appearance in suburban Falls Church, Va., during the day."

""I know that we ought to be able to say in a new system, as we fix the safety net for future generations, that you must receive benefits equal to or greater than the benefits enjoyed by today's seniors," he said."

"At the same time, he added that one way to assure the long-term solvency of the program was to "have the benefits for low-income workers in a future system grow faster than benefits for those who are better off.""