Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Teddy's Timing About as Bad as His Ramblings

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy took a certain amount of glee in "celebrating" an anniversary that most Americans would rather forget or at least move on from. (Wonder if the media will speculate on how he's trying to capitalize on this the way they slammed conservatives for trying to leverage the Terri Schiavo situation?)

STATEMENT BY SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY ON ANNIVERSARY OF ABU GHRAIB SCANDAL

http://www.drudgereport.com/matttd.htm

The senior senator from Massachusetts took the occasion of one of the more regrettable -- and embarrassing -- episodes in US military history to try to score some political points against his hated president. (You know, the one who naively named an education bill in honor of Mr. Kennedy in his first term).

In my opinion, either he's back on the bottle or he should consider hitting it again. Because if his writing is an example of a sober, lucid teatoller he should stick to the fundraising circuit.


Anyway, his timing couldn't come at a worse time to basically disprove the major blatherings of his missive today. Somewhere between his whining about how "nobody likes us anymore" and how hopeless and inadequate the Administration's policies have been in the Middle East, come these headlines:

Cleric convicted of promoting war against U.S.
D.C.-area
Muslim urged followers to help Taliban

Ali al-Timimi, 41, was convicted on all 10 counts of an indictment brought in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/26/cleric.trial/index.html


Sources: U.S. nearly catches al-Zarqawi
Vehicle chase nets bin Laden
lieutenant instead

The sourceWASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. troops nearly captured wanted terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi earlier this year in Iraq -- and instead netted a trusted lieutenant of Osama bin Laden, sources said Monday.

The sources said it's a significant find -- a clear indication that al-Zarqawi and bin Laden are in two-way communications and that bin Laden couriers are able to get into Iraq. Al-Zarqawi is a Jordanian-born terrorist whose group has claimed responsibility for numerous car bombings, kidnappings and beheadings in Iraq.


http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/04/26/iraq.zarqawi/index.html

Last Syrian troops leave Lebanon

BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) -- The last Syrian soldiers have left Lebanon, surrendering to international and Lebanese popular demands and ending its 29-year military presence in its smaller neighbor.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/04/26/lebanon/index.html


Abbas Names Tough New Palestinian Security Chief

GAZA (Reuters) - President Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday named a tough new
commander for Palestinian internal security who helped lead a 1990s crackdown on
Islamic militants, officials said.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=721&e=1&u=/nm/20050426/wl_nm/mideast_palestinians_dc&sid=84439559

U.S. Likely to Clear GIs in Iraq Shooting

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=542&ncid=718&e=5&u=/ap/20050426/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_italy_iraq

Friday, April 22, 2005

Wash Post "outs" Bill Moyers as a liberal commentator? Who Knew?!

So, after all this time arguing that PBS wasn't "slanted" and certainly not "biased" toward the Liberal side of the fence, comes today's Washington Post (of all places):

"PBS Scrutiny Raises Political Antennas" (By Paul Farhi, WP Staff Writer Friday, April 22, 2005; Page C01)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8067-2005Apr21.html

Poor Bill Moyers (for years host of the right-down-the-middle news magazine, NOW) outed as a Lib right there on Page C-1. "Liberal commentator Bill Moyers is out on PBS stations."

It was in the Wash Post, so it MUST be true.

Then comes the sequence showing how -- can you believe it -- those pesky "conservative" influences seem to be takin' over the place. The Corp. for Public Broadcasting has now a "majority" of members on the 8-person board appointed by -- guess who: W, the latest two-term president who got to appoint members to the 6-year posts.

I guess it was OK that another two-term president was able to make his appointments unnoticed, but nobody in the media checked their party affiliation cards. Until now. (Why should they, they were Democrats and they're OK. They would never think to bring an "agenda" with them, would they?)

And do you know what those mean, rabid, power-gorged rascals did? Well hold onto your hats:
"In negotiations with PBS earlier this year, the corporation also
insisted, for the first time, on tying new funding to an agreement that would
commit the network to strict "objectivity and balance" in each of its programs
-- an idea that PBS's general counsel described in an internal memo as amounting
to "government encroachment on and supervision of program content, potentially
in violation of the First Amendment." "

And then there's this choice little passage:

Late last week, CPB's board declined to renew the contract of its chief
executive, Kathleen Cox, a veteran administrator at the agency. She was replaced
by Ken Ferree, a Republican who had been a top adviser to Michael Powell, the
former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. The Ferree appointment
followed the dismissals or departures in recent months of at least three other
senior CPB officials, all of whom had Democratic
(emphasis
added)
affiliations.

"We don't want to be alarmist, but I would be less than honest if I said
there wasn't concern here," said one senior executive at PBS, who insisted on
anonymity because CPB provides about 10 percent of its annual budget. "When you
put it all together, a pattern starts to emerge."
(italics
added)


Well. I suppose anything going against that tidy grain of Liberalism apparently in place over at CPB and PBS WOULD appear as a "pattern" developing.

And it begs the question: are these unnamed sources --and the reporter by extension -- assuming that the changes being introduced by a "conservative"/Republican administration would automatically be problematic, less-reputable, or otherwise "sinister" just because they are from such an administration?

And if such changes are to be open to such loaded assumptions, where was the Wash Post asking questions when previous administrations were making similar appointments?

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Holy Smokes!

Well, it didn't take long. This new pope has been christened a "homophobe" before he's even christened pope.

The over-the-top lefties are already screaming from the rafters before the (white) smoke has cleared.

Thought this article was interesting on the take of the AIDS and alternative lifestyle advocates.

"AIDS groups, gay activists dismayed over new pope"
--Yahoo! Health news/AFP/April 20, 2005


First, that Pope Benedict is a "homophobe" already, "more strict than Pope John Paul."


"The former positions taken by the Catholic Church had already prevented
the use of condoms and helped the spread of AIDS," said Franco Grillini, a gay
left-wing Italian lawmaker who is the honorary president of the gay rights group
Arcigay.





Note that phrase: The Church's positions "... helped the spread of AIDS ..." How does the Church's position (prohibiting condom use by the faithful) was actually HELPING the spread of this (mainly) sexually transmitted disease? If two people are married (which, in the eyes of the Church, are the only people supposed to be engaging in sex) and are not breaking other commandments (i.e. sixth commandment) and are being FAITHFUL to each other, the FAITHFUL are really not in a lot of danger. The odd (and dramatically ever-decreasing) infected blood transfusion or organ donation notwithstanding, irresponsible (prohibited) sex is the ONLY way to contract the disease.

The Church has been advocating abstinence and fidelity to the FAITHFUL for over 2,000 years (and Old Testament traditions well before that). What's so NEW about what this pope is advocating?

How can one help SPREAD a sexually transmitted disease if your position is NOT TO CONDONE the SEX and to active advocate the opposite?

The position is perfectly understandable -- IF -- one see the Church's perspective and steps away from the alternative (that everyone is doing it/going to do it anyway). Why must the onus for change be on the Church and NOT on the part of the un-churched (a.k.a. "Unfaithful"). Why is it so easy to advocate that the CHURCH must change, and not even consider changing the ways of permissive SOCIETY and mortal FASHION?

Continuing:

"This (new) pope has been violently homophobic," he (Grillini) told AFP by
telephone from Bologna following the election of the arch-conservative
German cardinal Joseph Ratzinger..."

Since when do we have only two options: Agree with me or be labeled "a -phobe" (that you fear me). What ever happened to Agree or Disagree, minus the "fear". Can't you have agreement without association or disagreement without animosity? Why should I accept only the "Agree" or "Fear" options? "Jews" and "Christians" don't always agree, but does each -- as a general rule -- "fear" the other?

This line made me laugh:

"He (Grillini) said the Church's opposition to condom use was practically
set in stone, ..."

Yeah, as a matter of fact, it IS set in stone. You wonder if they realize what they're saying.

Finally, there's this (below) which takes the cake because it comes from a "man of the cloth":

In South Africa, where some 25 million Africans are living with HIV and AIDS,
Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressed hope that "the whole question of
disease, HIV/AIDS particularly," would be addressed by the new pontiff, who
should also "look again at the prohibition that the Church has placed on
condoms."

If people didn't respect their faith, the instructions of their Church leaders and live by the teachings of the Church regarding extramarital sex (and by extension, drug use), what makes them so likely to suddenly and whole-heartedly embrace condom use so as not to spread infected?

After all, the best educated, most affluent, most savvy, and most health-accessable "at-risk" population in the world (Western homosexuals, IV drug users) haven't learned that lesson after 25 years.

It appears that few in the Human Race have learned all that much in the thousands of years we've been walking around here.

Monday, April 18, 2005

Thank you Mr. President (Clinton)

Ah, yes. The lasting legacy of this WJC. Following in the footsteps of FDR, JFK, Jimmie ("lust in my heart") in this rich tradition. Even these guys had time & guts to stand up to Nazis, The Commies, and well, I guess we'll stop there.

If we ever need to consider the significant impact of this 1990s-era president, you need look no farther than below.

Or to look at it another way, Bubba had the morals of a teenager.

Oral sex safe and not really sex, say U.S. teens
CHICAGO (Reuters) - One in five U.S. teenagers say they have engaged in oral
sex, an activity that some adolescents view as not sex at all and certainly less
risky than intercourse, according to a report.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050404/80/fflsd.html

Why can't America be more like Europe?

Ah, yes. Why doesn’t America be more like Europe?
Man, you know it’s bad when the BBC even reports this type of news.

(Sounds like they need a couple more weeks of mandatory, employer-funded vacation.) I guess they are starting to figure out that SOMEBODY has to PAY for all this stuff. And when people aren't working, they don't collect taxes. W/o taxes, you either borrow more against yourself (like we do in the good ol USA) or the BBC writes a story like these.


Germany's new 'great depression'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4456087.stm

"Record numbers of Germans are suffering from depression and other mental
illnesses, a new report says."




What!!!!!???? Cut HEALTHCARE? And PENSIONS!!!???
My, those evil Republicans are everywhere!!! How did W and Carl Rove get this passed?


Germany's jobless face tough choices
Analysis By Ben Richardson BBC News business reporter


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4228849.stm

“A key factor in this growing sense of unease has been attempts by Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder's government to reform Germany's inflexible labour market, and
cut state spending on healthcare and pensions.”