Tuesday, January 31, 2006
It is time to cheer: the American Left has lost what is left of their pea brains.
As Samuel Alito gets confirmed, the left is throwing hissy fit after hissy fit, calling Bush every name in the book, and decrying the death of any chances liberals have of continuing to fuck up America.
Reading their comments makes one laugh - and cry. And check out the spelling mistakes!
A round-up of the funnier comments of the delusional Left:
From "Daily Kos"
NOT A PENNY FOR THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY UNTIL...
We expel every traitor to the Democratic Party.
I have my answer and my numbers are - 19 traitor Democrats who voted for A_Lie_To.
This is the text of the e-mail I just sento to The Democratic Party
Dear Governor Dean, (It is up to you how long I can call you dear) This is my answer to your e-mails
I keep receiving e-mails from you and other Democrats asking me to participate and support the Democratic Party, with actions and monetary contributions.
I really wanted to buy Democracy Bonds because I think it is a great idea, I haven't enrolled because deliberatelly I've been supporting individual Democratic candidates or other liberal causes only, this was done so I could both help and be involved and, at the same time, wait to see how the Democratic Party would stand for our ideals - Sorry, but St. Thomas motto "See to believe" Is a perfect fit in for my life's SOPs.
NOT A PENNY FOR THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY, AND FURTHERMORE, I'LL NOT SACRIFICE ONE SECOND OF MY LIFE TO HELP THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY UNTIL THE TRAITORS ARE EXPELLED FROM OUR MIST.
[That's MIDST, you moron. - Ed.]
Why? You ask.
Because they have committed an extremely egregious injury against this country's constitution and the people that it protects. I've lived my life under the belief that "An injury to one is an injury to all" When somebody harms my sisters and brothers, I take it VERY PERSONAL.
[Wait - his sisters and brothers were harmed? That's some charge from a nut! - Ed.]
EXPEL THE TRAITORS FROM OUR PARTY, OR YOU GUYS ARE ON YOUR OWN!.
This is one of the tamer excretions. Love that paranoia!
But, on we go...
From the Downies' Own Blog:
Tuesday morning open thread
IMPEACH THEM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IMPEACH THEM ALL AND THE ONES WHO CAN'T BE SHUT OUT THAT WAY???? NEED TO STEP DOWN VOLUNTARILY OR GO TO JAIL!!!
[Jail? For voting for cloture to end the debate on Alito's nomination? WOW! - Ed.]
Well, folks, sad day for American rights and liberties. (58 to 42) The working man, minorities and Women will be the aims of this Administration now, using the court to do the dirty work!
Well, as Schumer said this morning, WE WILL REMEMBER THIS DAY, WHEN THEY START THEIR CHIPPING AWAY, WE WILL REMIND THE BLIND MASSES WHO DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REPUBLICANS DID , EXACTLY WHAT THEIR LACK OF ACTION RESULTED IN!!!
I am angry with the Senate Democrats for not filibustering Alito's nomination. If this was not the time to enact the filibuster, when will it be? With today's confirmation, the congressional Democrats have officially become the patsies of the President. They can bluster and stew and proclaim all they want, but the truth is -- with the Supreme Court loaded the way it is, anything the President wants to do will be deemed constitutional. THe ramifications of this will be felt long after W has opened his presidential library.
Wait: the nuttery and psychobabble from the left gets funnier, and funnier...
Whoa! Ted Kennedy made an ass of himself, as usual...
"The march towards knocking down the walls of discrimination that permitted us to pass a 1964 civil right act in public accommodations so people whose skin was not white could go into restaurants and go into hotels. Public accommodation. The 1965 act for voting rights. 1968 Act for public accommodations. The 1973 act to say that women are going to be treated equally. The americans with disabilities act that said the disabled are going to be part of the american family. All of that is the march to progress. And my friends, the one organization, the one institution that protects it is the supreme court of the united states."
"Finally, i just say, mr. President, if you are concerned and you want a justice that is going to stand for the working men and women in this country, it’s not going to be judge alito. If you are concerned about women’s privacy rights, about the opportunity for women to gain fair employment in america, it’s not judge alito. If you care about the disabled, the rehabilitation act that we passed, the “idea” act to include children in our schools that we passed, that’s been on the books for 25 years, the disability act that we have passed to bring all of the disabled into our society, if you are looking for someone that is going to be a friend of the disabled, it’s not going to be judge alito. And finally, if you are looking for someone that is going to be willing to stand up to the executive branch of government at a time that he is going to exceed his power and authority and the law of this country, it is not going to be judge alito."
Remember that Der Chappaquiddick was screaming while he made these ridiculous comments.
However, one of our more favorite leftwing looniepies is Kate Michelman, head of the National We Kill Children in the Womb Coalition.
Today, she made the following statement:
Statement of Kate Michelman on Alito Vote
Sixteen years after Roe, its author alerted supporters of this right that its position was tenuous, that a "chill wind" could be felt in the Supreme Court. Today, that chill wind has reached hurricane status.
Miss Child Killer, prepare for Hurricane Alito.
And so it goes.
Monday, January 30, 2006
The "Piece of Shit Mom," Cindy Sheehan, fresh from her "Fuck America" Tour in Venezuela, says that if Dianne Feinstein does not filibister Samuel Alito, Sheehan will run against Feinstein for the US Senate.
We could not ask for a better enemy than this.
Sheehan to Feinstein: Filibuster Alito, Or I'll Run Against You
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has threatened to run for Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) seat unless Feinstein filibusters Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.
Sheehan, who was in Caracas, Venezuela Friday attending the World Social Forum, heard that several Democrats planned to filibuster Alito but that Feinstein, who is up for re-election in November, announced that she will vote against Alito but would not filibuster the nomination.
"I'm appalled that Diane Feinstein wouldn't recognize how dangerous Alito's nomination is to upholding the values of our constitution and restricting the usurpation of presidential powers, for which I've already paid the ultimate price," Sheehan said in a statement.
We are wishing that Ms. Nutjob, er, Sheehan, runs. Because this could also mean that the far-left loonies will not vote for Feinstein, and perhaps one good Republican can win that seat.
It may be a far-reaching hope, but with fools like this on the Left we can only wish for more.
The staff of Rep. Marty Meehan, Downie of Massachusetts, was ordered to change and delete information from Meehan's bio on Wikipedia. We here at Joobo have had run-ins with Wikipedia, a far-left anti-Semitic website which caters to nuts and fruits.
But this is just plain wrong. Plain wrong.
Rewriting history under the dome
WASHINGTON -- The staff of U.S. Rep Marty Meehan wiped out references to his broken term-limits pledge as well as information about his huge campaign war chest in an independent biography of the Lowell Democrat on a Web site that bills itself as the "world's largest encyclopedia," The Sun has learned.
The Meehan alterations on Wikipedia.com represent just two of more than 1,000 changes made by congressional staffers at the U.S. House of Representatives in the past six month. Wikipedia is a global reference that relies on its Internet users to add credible information to entries on millions of topics.
Matt Vogel, Meehan's chief of staff, said he authorized an intern in July to replace existing Wikipedia content with a staff-written biography of the lawmaker.
The change deleted a reference to Meehan's campaign promise to surrender his seat after serving eight years, a pledge Meehan later eschewed. It also deleted a reference to the size of Meehan's campaign account, the largest of any House member at $4.8 million, according to the latest data available from the Federal Election Commission.
"Meehan first ran for Congress in 1992 on a platform of reform," the pre-edited entry said. "As part of that platform Meehan made a pledge to not serve more than four terms, a central part of his campaign. This breaking of the pledge has been a controversial issue in the 5th Congressional District of Massachusetts."
The new entry reads in part: "Meehan was elected to Congress in 1992 on a plan to eliminate the deficit. His fiscally responsible voting record since then has earned him praise from citizen watchdog groups. He was re-elected by a large margin in 2004."
How long before the Left edits the entry on Bill Clinton, making it look like he was a victim instead a lying, perjuring rapist?
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Last week, in one of his oft-released audio tapes from whatever shithole cave he is currently hiding in, Usama bin Laden offered a "truce" to America if we would just surrender and leave "Muslim lands."
Of course, everyone but the whackiest loony leftist dismissed this out of hand.
Here is one of those loonies, direct from The San Francisco Chronicle opinion page.
And people wonder why this city is out of touch with reality. Here's why.
Why we should take Osama's olive branch
It's the first step in winning the peace
Osama bin Laden's offer of a truce has sunk from sight without leaving a ripple, but it should have made waves.
When the audiotaped proposal was made 10 days ago, the White House dismissed it out of hand. That was a politically logical move, given the need to appear tough on terror at all times. An image of strength and determination may be particularly important in the months ahead because Republican Party leaders have put security issues at the heart of their 2006 congressional election campaign strategy.
But there are reasons why bin Laden's overture should be carefully weighed and thoughtfully debated.
Yes, there are reasons we should consider this proposal:
1. If we want to surrender to al Qaeda, as the left would have us do.
2. If we want bin Laden to win in Afghanistan, Iraq, and every other corner of the globe.
3. If we want to left to claim a win against President Bush, then blame him when al-Qaeda attacks us again because we let down our guard.
Yes, there are reasons to consider this proposal...the same reasons that existed if we wanted a truce with Hitler, or another dictator sicko.
Saturday, January 28, 2006
ABC News says that a group with non-Kosher ties has won an election among the sub-humans known as the Palestinians.
Bush Confident Warrantless Wiretaps Legal
It was the president's first full-scale news conference of the new year, and the 10th since he was re-elected in 2004. He previewed his upcoming State of the Union address and fielded questions on former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the stunning victory of the radical group Hams in Palestinian elections and the administration's cooperation with Congress on its investigation of Hurricane Katrina.
Hams? Were they honey-basted hams?
Friday, January 27, 2006
Thursday, January 26, 2006
John Kerry, fruitpie US Senator and failed candidate to steal the presidency, has e-mailed us here on his idiotic campaign to derail the Alito nomination.
This is too hilarious. Unfortunately, we have no link.
I've studied Judge Alito's legal record. I met with him one-on-one. After all this, I am left with one simple conclusion: if Judge Alito becomes Supreme Court Justice Alito, he will move the Court backwards.
[But, as Kerry wanted to say, "If Samuel Alito had offered to suck my dick, I would have thought twice about supporting him. But since he brushed me off, I have no choice but to vote for this pro-heterosexual." - Ed.]
I will vote against Judge Alito's confirmation, and I hope a majority of Senators choose to join us on the Senate floor, voting and speaking out against him. I know we face tough odds, but this is an important fight.
[Sorry, dickhead - Alito has the necessary votes for confirmaion. That happens when a majority of Americans vote for Republicans, and not Downies, to sit in the US Senate - Ed.]
The bottom line is Judge Alito cannot be trusted on the Supreme Court. We can't trust him to stand up to government abuse of power. We can't trust him to ensure all citizens enjoy equal protection under the law. We can't trust him to protect our right to privacy. We can't trust him to defend mainstream American values.
[Maybe we can't trust him to make a good hamburger! Maybe we cannot trust him to wash his underwear! Maybe we can't trust him to pick up the newspaper on his driveway every morning! - Ed.]
To muster enough Senators to defeat Judge Alito, the American people have to make it clear that they are against his nomination. That's where you come in. By speaking out, you will help us convince other Senators to join our fight.
[And after watching the Downies on the Senate Judiciary Committee show themselves to be meanspirited pieces of shit who made Alito's wife cry, his support among the American people went UP, not down -- Ed.]
If you want to understand why Americans don't want Judge Alito on the Supreme Court, just take a look at his record. It paints a disturbing picture.
[Wait...not "troubling"? Hasn't every Downie said on more than one occasion that Alito's record is "troubling"? - Ed.]
When it comes to standing up to the abuse of executive power and protecting our right to privacy, he barely has a record. Judge Alito refused to hold the government accountable for excessive force when an unarmed boy was shot and killed, or when an innocent 10 year old girl was strip-searched.
[Unfortunately for his detractors, Alito's record has been gone over with a fine-tooth comb, and what did they find? Alito belonged to a group Ted Kennedy does not like (unless it was "Fatslob Drunks who Murder Women in Lakes"), and he did not say abortion is settled law. Boo fucking hoo. - Ed.]
In a speech in 2000, Judge Alito even endorsed a theory suggesting that independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which holds companies responsible for making products safe for kids, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which stands up to corporate abusers like Enron, are unconstitutional infringements on the President's power.
With this record, how can we expect Alito to stand up to the President when he breaks the law to eavesdrop on American citizens or authorizes the torture of detainees?
[The old leftist canard: "Bush broke the law." If that is so, where is the indictment? The move to impeach? Why are Downies so silent unless - pray tell - the American people do not support their silly party in their opposition to monitoring potential al-Qaeda suspects? - Ed.]
Judge Alito's record on civil rights is no better. He saw no legitimate question of discrimination in allowing an all-white jury to sentence a black man to death for killing a white man. His own colleagues have criticized him for ignoring employees' rights to be free from job discrimination. Judge Alito's clear bias is to keep victims of discrimination out of the court system - and to rule in favor of corporate interests.
[Yup - Alito wants to bring back slavery. And segregation. Aw, let's just say it: Alito hates minorities. Is that better? - Ed.]
Judge Alito's record on privacy rights is worst of all. In 1985, Judge Alito actually wrote a memo outlining a strategy to undermine Roe v. Wade by slowly chipping away at its protections. That same year, Judge Alito wrote in a job application that he did not believe in the constitutionality of the right to privacy. Judge Alito's views on privacy rights are not ambiguous; they are openly hostile.
[There it is! Downies are beholden to their pro-abortion backers! They can see no other way to support anyone unless they see abortion their way! - Ed.]
Your voice is essential in this fight.
We have no reason to be hesitant in fighting to keep Samuel Alito off the Supreme Court. None of our fears are based on inference, speculation or assumption. His record speaks for itself -- and it speaks on behalf of extreme ideology and powerful corporations -- not the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.
To join this fight, please sign our letter. When I go down to the Senate floor to speak out against Judge Alito, I'll enter your name in opposition to Alito into the Congressional Record as well. And I'll show my Senate colleagues that as far as the American people are concerned, this is not some inside the beltway conversation; this is a landmark struggle for the future of our nation.
Please join us in this fight for our most cherished rights and freedoms.
P.S. Please pass this letter on to your friends. We need as many voices as possible joining us and speaking out against Alito.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
Kerry is such an imbecile, he cannot understand why his party has gone from 56 seats in 1994 to 44 today. How do you lose 12 seats and control of all three branches of the US government? You do as the Downtrodden Party does, and move further and further left - until you become wholly irrelevant to the lives of Americans.
The Downies are nearly there.
A man named John Gilmore, a millionaire liberal from San Francisco, tried to get on two planes without showing identification, claiming that showing it was an "illegal search" and "violated his rights to travel freely."
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the most liberal court in the US, rejected this nutjob's case.
Appeals court upholds airport ID policy
SAN FRANCISCO - An appeals court Thursday dismissed a Libertarian Party activist's legal challenge to federal airport regulations requiring passengers to show identification before they can board planes.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected claims by millionaire John Gilmore, an early employee of Sun Microsystems Inc., that the policy constituted an illegal search and violated his right to travel freely.
After privately reviewing the government's identification policy that was not disclosed in court for security reasons, an unanimous three-judge panel said the policy was not overly intrusive or illegal. Gilmore, the court ruled, could leave the airport if he didn't want to show his ID and had other ways to get around besides air travel.
"We reject Gilmore's right to travel argument because the Constitution does not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation," Judge Richard Paez wrote.
The court also rejected assertions that the act of showing identification was an illegal search.
All we can say is: Loony, loony, loony...
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Hillary Clinton is apparently less popular among the American people than the clap.
She gets 16% who say they will "definitely" vote for her.
51% against - whew! She has a chance of duplicating the dismal performance of George McGovern!
Hillary/Condi Polarize Electorate
PRINCETON, NJ -- A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll finds the two women who are most frequently mentioned as potential presidential candidates of their respective parties are each opposed by about half the electorate. Among registered voters, 48% would consider voting for New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for president in 2008, including 16% who say they would "definitely" vote for her. Fifty-one percent say they would "definitely" not vote for Clinton.
Slightly more positive feelings are found for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Fifty-two percent would consider voting for her for president, including 14% who would "definitely" commit. Forty-six percent say they would "definitely" not vote for Rice.
We believe Gallup stuck Condi Rice in because she is another woman. She is not running for President. Hillary Clinton, while not a confirmed candidate, is as sure to run as Osama bin Laden is to hide in a cave.
Well, what is the problem with Dame Shrillery? Why don't even a majority of Downies want her?
Let's turn to Molly Ivins, far left nutjob and plagiarist, who says she will NOT support Hillary Clinton.
Molly Ivins: Not. backing. Hillary.
AUSTIN, Texas (Creators Syndicate) -- I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.
Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.
Sheesh - if a leftist fruit like Molly Ivins won't back Mrs. Clinton, she is in deep, deep doo-doo.
When Socialists won in Venezuela, and Bolivia, and Germany, the MSM in America spoke about how these were "blows" to President Bush.
So, when a country throws out a leftwing government and installs a right-wing one, what is the reaction?
First Canada this week, and now Portugal.
Center-Right Candidate Elected in Portugal
LISBON, Jan. 22 (Reuters) - Aníbal Cavaco Silva, a center-right candidate, won the election for president in Portugal on Sunday. His victory was a blow to the governing Socialist Party, which had been under pressure because of a stagnant economy.
Mr. Cavaco Silva, a former prime minister, had 50.78 percent of the vote with 98 percent of the polling places reporting, the election commission reported.
A leftist maverick, Manuel Alegre, had 20.7 percent of the vote and Mário Soares, the Socialists' official candidate, had 14.21 percent.
Portugal has been a friend of America, even when the leftists ran the country. They did not use an anti-American platform to win. So we have to credit them that.
But the election of a right-wing government is cause for celebration. When leftists lose, the people - in any country - win.
We here at Joobo, angered over the BBC's coverage of the Roger Keith Coleman story a few weeks back, were spurred on to complain to the BBC after reading on one of our favorite sites, The American Expatriate, that the site owner regularly complains to the BBC and gets responses.
So, we submitted the following complaint to the BBC this evening:
My name is Simon Lazarus. I wish to complain about your coverage of the case of Roger Keith Coleman, the rapist and murderer executed in the US state of Virginia in 1992. Recently, the BBC's website covered the testing of DNA in the case by Governor Mark Warner.
Your story, featured as US governor orders DNA guilt test, talked about the DNA testing, but unlike other sites which covered the case, you left out any quotes from the prosecutor, and also other evidence which pinpointed Coleman, and not any other suspect, as the rapist and murderer.
For instance, CNN's story, featured as DNA to decide if innocent man was executed, noted:
"Tom Scott, who helped prosecute the case, said he has no objection to retesting the DNA and is confident doing so would confirm Coleman's guilt -- provided the sample has been properly preserved and not tampered with.
"If the integrity of the sample has been violated in some way, we're going to have an inconclusive result, which isn't going to settle anything," he said.
Scott said a mountain of evidence points to Coleman as the killer:
There was no sign of forced entry at McCoy's house, leading investigators to believe she knew her attacker.
Coleman was previously convicted of the attempted rape of a teacher and was charged with exposing himself to a librarian two months before the murder.
A pubic hair found on McCoy's body was consistent with Coleman's hair.
The original DNA tests placed him within a tiny fraction of the population who could have left semen at the scene.
Coleman also failed a lie detector test hours before his execution."
Your site failed to mention any of this, leading any reasonable reader to consider that an innocent man was, indeed, put to death.
However, just days later, the DNA testing showed that Coleman was the true killer, and that he had been convicted and put to death quite properly.
The BBC waited more than a day after the evidence came back to report on the story - and again you only reported on half the story.
Your story, featured as Tests reveal executed man's guilt, noted:
"DNA tests have confirmed the guilt of a man who was executed in the US in 1992 whilst proclaiming his innocence.
Virginia state's outgoing governor, Mark Warner, had ordered the tests on Roger Coleman, who was put to death for raping and murdering his sister-in-law.
Anti-death penalty advocates had hoped this would be the first case of DNA testing exonerating an executed man.
The test results are a blow to those who supported Coleman and to the anti-death penalty movement in general.
A forensic laboratory in Toronto concluded there was virtually no doubt that the DNA recovered from the body of the victim, Wanda McCoy, belonged to Coleman."
How "anti-death penalty advocates" MAY HAVE reacted is irrelevant. How the evidence that nailed this man outside the DNA was again excluded from your report.
The BBC needs to put aside its obvious bias against capital punishment - and, by extension, its hatred of President George W. Bush because, as Governor of Texas he oversaw numerous executions (as did Bill Clinton when he was the Governor of Arkansas, a point many anti-Bush stories miss).
I am submitting this complaint because your stories need to include ALL of the evidence behind the story, not the half which fits the BBC bias.
As soon as we get a response (or if we get one), we will post it here.
Cindy Sheehan, the rat-infested shithole of a human being, is making more shit of America, as she now says that the "Star Spangled Banner" is "a war hymn."
Hey, Cindy: How about going to Iran or Cuba for now on? America can do without you and your Marxist rants.
Matriotism...a call to action by Cindy Sheehan
This sort of patriotism begins when we enter kindergarten and learn the nationalist "Pledge of Allegiance." It transcends all sense when we are taught the "Star Spangled Banner," a hymn to war. In our history classes the genocide of the Native American peoples is glossed over as we learn about the spread of American Imperialism over our continent, though it wasn't named until the 1840's, when the doctrine of Manifest Destiny was expounded to justify the USA's conquest of and "civilizing" of Mexican territories and Native American populations. Manifest Destiny sought to spread the "the boundaries of freedom" to the American Continent, with the notion that we have a special mission from God.
Blah blah blah blah blah. This woman talks so she can hear herself.
I would love to ask if anyone can send her down to Cuba as some sort of gift, and then ship her ass to Guantanamo Bay.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
If someone said that they had no proof of something, yet believed that it was true, what do you call that person?
Nuts? Insane? Delusional?
In Euro-peon language, you call him "investigator." And despite his being nuts, insane, and delusional, he continues in his job.
Only in Europe!
Inquiry Finds No Proof of C.I.A. Jails But Stays Skeptical
STRASBOURG, France, Jan. 24 - The Council of Europe's inquiry into allegations that the C.I.A. has operated secret detention centers in Eastern Europe has turned up no evidence that such centers ever existed, though the inquiry's leader, Dick Marty, said there are enough "indications" to justify a continuing investigation.
The report added, however, that it was "highly unlikely" that European governments were unaware of the American program of renditions, in which terrorism suspects were either seized in Europe or transferred through the Continent to third countries where they may have been tortured. Drawing from news reports, Mr. Marty contended that "more than a hundred" detainees have been moved anonymously and illegally through Europe under the program.
So, according to this loon, he "has turned up no evidence that such centers ever existed," yet believes they did. In short, since he knows they were there but there is no proof, his believe is proof enough.
Like we said: this man is nuts, insane, and delusional.
Here's hoping the White House dismisses him as just another Euro-peon fool.
On the "Stupidity Room," CNN's newest and lowest rated show with Wolf Blintzes, the insane nut Jack Cafferty uses his wasted time to ask bizarre questions of the pyscho leftist audience - and then reads the shit they send in.
But, Cafferty also adds his liberal sickness to the fray...as he did just the other day:
CNN's Jack Cafferty, Nutter
"The last time we got a tape from Osama bin Laden was right before the 2004 presidential election. Now here we are four days away from hearings starting in Washington into the wire tapping of America's telephones without bothering to get a court order or a warrant, and up pops another tape from Osama bin Laden. Coincidence? Who knows."
This is why liberals cannot be allowed to control anything of substance in this country. Because we can imagine having Jack Cafferty as the White House press secretary.
But, wait! Just who is Jack Cafferty? He is a criminal, that's who he is.
CNN anchor who ran over cyclist dodges jail
NEW YORK -- Like most journalists, CNN morning anchor Jack Cafferty would prefer to cover news than make it.
Especially when it's bad news.
But Tuesday, Cafferty was the story, being met by photographers as he entered a midtown court to plead guilty in a May 14 hit-and-run accident. According to the criminal complaint, Cafferty was made an abrupt turn and hit bicyclist Billy Maldonado.
About five people tried to stop Cafferty by running after the car, according to the complaint, but the newsman continued through at least two red lights, while dragging the bicycle underneath the vehicle. Maldonado, 48, who was knocked to the ground, suffered bruises and some bone damage.
Cafferty was charged with leaving the scene of an accident, reckless driving, assault and harassment. He was allowed to plead guilty to a traffic violation: Operating a motor vehicle knowing or having cause to know property damage had been caused. He was sentenced to 70 hours of community service, with six months to complete it, and a $250 fine. He also made restitution.
Cafferty had no comment Tuesday but the criminal complaint said Cafferty told police he saw the bicyclist get off the ground but didn't realize he had hit him. "I am unaware I was in an accident," he said.
Attorney Suzanne Holzberg, who represents Maldonado, expressed disappointment over the proceedings. "I think he got off pretty easy," she said. Maldonado, she said, still needs an operation on his right elbow.
CNN should be reminded daily that they have a criminal defendant - probably a drunk - who spews their anti-American and anti-Bush paranoia to such proportions that he makes himself and their low-rated network into a laughingstock each passing day.
Dateline, Sweden: a man murdered and then ate his two step-sisters.
Cannibalism in Europe? Strange, but we are not surprised. Euro-peons have been eating their own for a very long time.
Swedish 'cannibal' ate sisters
A Swedish man is facing charges of murdering his two foster sisters amid claims that he drank their blood and ate parts of their bodies.
Lennart Persson, 29, confessed to the killings and cannibalism, claiming "he did the sickest things that you couldn't even dream of", say reports.
His alleged victims, aged 19 and 34, were stabbed in their homes within seven months of each other last year.
The story has shocked Swedes, who can recall few more gruesome cases.
How nice it is to hear that this is not a common occurrence.
Still, it shows how advanced those Euro-peons are. Not.
Why should Americans hate the Left? Because they hate America, because they do nothing but bring down America, and because Ted Kennedy is one of them.
Oh - and so is this piece of crap.
Warriors and wusses
I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.
I'm sure I'd like the troops. They seem gutsy, young and up for anything. If you're wandering into a recruiter's office and signing up for eight years of unknown danger, I want to hang with you in Vegas.
And I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away. Load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of.
But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.
Blindly lending support to our soldiers, I fear, will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there — and who might one day want to send them somewhere else. Trust me, a guy who thought 50.7% was a mandate isn't going to pick up on the subtleties of a parade for just service in an unjust war. He's going to be looking for funnel cake.
What is truly amazing is that these people come to the public every 2 or 4 years and ask to be put in charge of this country. That not only means Social Security and Medicare but abortion and foreign policy.
And, with those issues in mind, and this nutjob in mind, it should mandated that the left NEVER be allowed to be in charge. And that means NEVER.
The Downies were warned when they named Supreme Fruitpie Howard Dean as the chairman of their silly party that fundraising would fall way off. The party still named him.
A year later, things have gone from bad to worse for the Downies.
It couldn't be happening to nicer people.
The Wallet-to-Wallet Chasm
Despite a lackluster showing in 2005 elections for the GOP, the Republican National Committee raked in better than $100 million last year and enjoys its largest cash-on-hand lead over its Democratic counterpart in more than a decade.
For the year just passed, the RNC brought in nearly $102 million -- give or take a few hundred thousand -- and had $34 million in the bank. The Democratic National Committee raised $51 million in 2005 but showed $5.5 million on hand at the end of the year.
That cash disparity, which has led to grumbling and fretting by some people in the Democratic establishment, will be a major asset come November, RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman argued.
"There's no question it's an advantage," he said. "We are in a position to be able to maintain majorities in the House and Senate by providing campaigns with the resources they need to be successful." Under campaign finance laws, the RNC can make unlimited transfers of campaign cash to other Republican national committees.
The Democrats -- led by DNC Chairman Howard Dean -- spent considerable resources in 2005 on resuscitating state parties and now have operatives on the ground in all 50 states. The party also made a successful investment in helping fund efforts to elect Democrat Timothy M. Kaine governor of Virginia.
Mehlman sought to cast the fundraising as the result of the RNC's "balanced approach" of courting large-dollar donors and working to encourage the small-dollar, grass-roots donor base, which grew by 250,000 new voters in 2005, he said.
He pitches in, too, spending seven or eight hours a week on the telephone thanking donors and soliciting contributions. "I'm a big believer [that] if you call and say thank you as well as asking for something, it's a good deal," he said.
In addition to dialing for dollars, Mehlman has crisscrossed the country in search of campaign cash. In 2005, he appeared at nearly 100 fundraising events.
The story here is that the RNC is beating the shit out of the DNC. And that means more money for candidates to shield them from the DNC inspired "culture of corruption" canard that the left intends to run on in November.
Profits at the Marxist New York Times - a far better name for a rag of a paper which uses more Communist Party USA talking points than any sheet in America - continue to slide, slide, slide, slide.
This is just one more piece of evidence that the Left in America continue to become more irrelevant with each passing day.
N.Y. Times Earnings Plunge on Charges
NEW YORK - The New York Times Co. said Tuesday its fourth-quarter earnings fell 41 percent from the same period a year ago, weighed down by charges for staff reductions and an accounting change.
The Times, which also publishes The Boston Globe and the International Herald Tribune, earned $64.8 million or 45 cents per share in the three months ending in December, compared to $110.2 million or 75 cents per share a year ago.
The earnings included a charge of 19 cents per share for staff reductions and an accounting charge of 4 cents per share. The earnings came in above guidance the Times gave in December, which the company attributed to stronger-than-expected growth of 8 percent in advertising at its flagship newspaper for the quarter.
However, advertising revenues fell 3.8 percent at the Globe and other New England products in the quarter, which the company attributed to sluggish demand for auto, home furnishing and other ad categories as well as consolidation of key advertisers.
Why would advertisers not want to advertise in a leading newspaper - unless, pray tell, that those advertisers see the paper as a worthless pile of camel dung? Then, obviously, they would take their advertising dollars elsewhere.
Here's hoping that they continue to do so.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Finally, after 7 seasons of leftist hysteria, paranoia, and the fantasy of actually having a liberal as President, "The West Wing" is being canceled.
Boo fucking hoo.
NBC Cancels 'West Wing' After 7 Seasons
The new president on "The West Wing" will be a real short-timer: NBC announced Sunday it was pulling the plug on the Emmy-winning political drama after seven seasons in May.
NBC, struggling to regain its footing after the worst season in its history, also outlined several midseason schedule changes _ including the moves of popular dramas "Law & Order" and "Las Vegas."
"The West Wing" announcement wasn't much of a surprise. Although this season's story line with a presidential campaign involving a Democrat played by Jimmy Smits and Republican portrayed by Alan Alda has been strong critically, ratings have sunk with its move to Sunday nights.
The decision to cancel it was made before actor John Spencer, who played former presidential chief of staff Leo McGarry, died of a heart attack Dec. 16, said Kevin Reilly, NBC entertainment president.
"There's a point when you look at the ratings and say, it feels like it's time," Reilly said.
This crap show should have been canceled years ago. However, it did serve one purpose - it showed the rest of the country what a liberal in the White House would do: fuck up America.
Nancy Pelosi (D-Nutjob) likes to tell everyone that Republicans are crooks and thieves.
Surely Nancy can have that lobotomy reversed, can she?
Testimony Unveiled in Siegelman Case
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- Former Gov. Don Siegelman's executive secretary told a grand jury that his boss wanted $500,000 from former HealthSouth Chairman Richard Scrushy, who wanted a position on a state health panel in return.
A federal judge on Friday unsealed several documents in the criminal case against Siegelman, Scrushy and two former members of the Democrat's Cabinet. Defense attorneys did not object.
One document is a transcript of Nick Bailey's grand jury testimony in 2004. Bailey pleaded guilty in 2003 to taking bribes while working for Siegelman and is now cooperating with prosecutors.
He testified that Scrushy had supported Siegelman's opponent, Republican incumbent Fob James, in the 1998 race for governor, and that to smooth over their differences, Siegelman wanted $500,000 in contributions to his campaign to legalize a state lottery. Bailey said Siegelman arrived at the figure by calculating that Scrushy had raised $350,000 for James and then added interest to it.
Bailey recalled speaking to Siegelman after he and Scrushy met privately at the Capitol after Siegelman won the election.
"I recall him saying, `He's halfway there,' and showed me a check that he had made as a contribution to our lottery campaign," Bailey said.
Bailey said he asked Siegelman, "What in the world is he going to want for that? I think the governor's response was, `The CON Board.'"
Now, let's get this straight: we had a Downie sitting as a Governor of a state, demanding bribes?
Isn't that illegal, Ms. Pelosi? How come your party doesn't mention Mr. Siegelman anymore?
4 of 5 Downie campaign workers who helped John Kerry in Wisconsin have pled guilty to felony property destruction in the slashing of tires of vans used to carry Republicans to the polls in the 2004 presidential election.
The question is: who was the big name who told them to do this? Surely 5 little thugs didn't just do this on their own - they took the orders of bigger thugs in their rotten party.
4 Wis. Democratic Campaigners Enter Pleas
MILWAUKEE (AP) -- Four Democratic presidential campaign workers pleaded no contest Friday to charges that they punctured the tires of 25 vehicles Republicans had intended to use to get out the vote on Election Day 2004. A fifth defendant was acquitted.
Jurors were deliberating for a second day in the felony property damage case when the four agreed to enter the pleas on misdemeanor charges of criminal damage to property.
Those agreeing to the plea were Sowande A. Omokunde, the son of Democratic U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore; Michael Pratt, the son of former acting Milwaukee Mayor Marvin Pratt; and Lewis Caldwell and Lavelle Mohammad, both from Milwaukee.
The fifth defendant, Justin Howell, was acquitted soon after the others entered the pleas.
The four pleaded no contest to charges that carry a maximum nine-month jail term. The original counts carry a maximum 3 1/2-year prison sentence.
The state Republican Party had rented more than 100 vehicles that were parked in a lot next to a Bush-Cheney campaign office to give rides to voters and poll monitors on Nov. 2, 2004. The vandalism caused some delays in the GOP's Election Day work as party workers rounded up different vehicles.
Democrat John Kerry won Wisconsin's 10 electoral votes in a close race.
Of course, the asshole lawyer defending these pukes was telling the jury something quite different just a few days ago:
Campaign strategist: Five activists celebrated after tires were slashed
MILWAUKEE — A Democratic political consultant for the 2004 John Kerry presidential bid told jurors Tuesday that the five campaign workers accused of slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans on Election Day boasted about the stunt.
"They were boisterous, slapping high-fives, laughing and so forth," said Opel Simmons III, a campaign strategist, referring to the five defendants after they returned to campaign headquarters at about 3:30 a.m. on Nov. 2, 2004.
Simmons, who said he saw the men leave the office about 30 minutes earlier, testified that he only learned of what they did after Michael Pratt, the son of then acting Milwaukee Mayor Marvin Pratt, and others, spoke.
"[Pratt] says, 'We got them. They're not going anywhere today," Simmons testified.
Pratt's father was in court for much of the day Tuesday, as was U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (DWis.), whose son Sowande A. Omokunde is also a defendant in the trial.
Simmons said the defendants' behavior led him to only one conclusion.
"I believe that they were telling me that they had gone from our office to the Bush-Cheney office and had punctured tires of vehicles in the staging area," he said.
Defense attorneys attempted to discredit Simmons on cross-examination by pointing out inconsistencies in his statements to police, which, the attorneys hope, will leave jurors wondering if the state's key witness was in fact one of the vandals.
Pratt, Omokunde, Justin Howell, Lewis Caldwell and Lavelle Mohammad are all charged with criminal damage to property — a felony that carries a maximum sentence of 3 1/2 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
The GOP rented more than 100 vehicles for a get-out-the-vote campaign on Nov. 2, 2004. The vehicles were parked in a lot adjacent to a Bush campaign office, and party workers planned to drive poll watchers to polling places by 7 a.m. and deliver any voters who didn't have a ride.
Defense lawyers attempted to have much of Simmons' testimony ruled as hearsay and therefore inadmissible, but Judge Michael Brennan denied the motions.
Simmons said that despite plans for an election eve stunt dubbed "Operation Elephant Takeover" — a plan to placard the same Republican office where the tires were slashed — the operation was dropped after he overslept and several people were spotted still in the GOP office late at night.
So, where is the MSM on this story? Imagine if 5 Republicans had slashed the tires of Downies going to the polls...we would see the likes of leftist media dickwads like Keith Dimbulbermann covering the trial in person. Imagine for one second if the people involved were the sons of national and local Republican politicians...the liberals would be demanding a Department of Justice investigation!
And the leftwing blogs would be humming with "this is a Republican conspiracy." Can we also hear the allegation that "Karl Rove must be behind this"?
So, seeing this scandal for what it is, we like to ask: what Downie was behind this? Kerry? Howard Dean? Why won't anyone ask them about it? Instead Chrissie Matthews the anti-Semite asks these liberal idiots softball questions.
If you want to see some of the most paranoid, schizophrenic crappola ever posted on the Internet, head on over to DummiesUnderground, the posting site for deluded and psychotic liberals whose peabrains surely have rotted to nothingness. According to these nuts, Bush is Hitler, Bush is an idiot, Bush is a killer, Bush caused Hurricane Katrina, and, in a real dose of humanity, some said they would go and piss on the grave of deceased Chief Justice William Rehnquist. We have linked here to all of the fun and games of these sicko liberals.
But, just when you think they would find some intelligence and say, "Hey! That Iran is a threat! We should back Bush even if we hate him, because Iran with a nuke is a horrible thought to contemplate!" they come right out and show their true colors: they think President Bush, and not Iran, is a bigger threat.
Click on the link to be a witness to completely vile crap, and be prepared to vomit your guts up. But don't say we didn't warn you.
Iran threatens oil crisis in nuclear standoff
$100 oil, here we come...Upside, every 50 cent increase in gas prices = 5% drop in Bush poll numbers.
And Several Billion More in Repub Coffers, Which More Than Makes Up For...any loss in actual public support. They'll just buy more TV stations and more voting machinez.
the US could try DIPLOMACY for a change instead of a preemptive war leading to WWIII. But chimpy doesn't do stinkin diplomacy. He prefers the neocon plan of eternal war and imperial ameriKKKa in the ME sitting on the OIL. It has been the PNAC Plan from the start....
What exactly is the threat? Iran has no nukes. Bush has no brains--that's the bigger threat.
the single biggest threat to world peace today is George W. Bush...I wonder how long the world will wait before dealing with him? Frankly I think he should be impeached for treason against the United States and then taken to the Hague on war crimes.
Simple observations, simplistic comments...Your hero is a much bigger threat to the world than Iran.
Do you mean like the unstable leader of the USA?...can not get anymore unstable than the chimperor.
And that is some of the sickening crap posted by these nuts.
And Downies wonder why the country just will not trust them with our nation's security. After listening to these people, who make up 90% of the modern Downtrodden Party, WOULD YOU trust anything but a rotten turd to them?
We sure as hell wouldn't.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Analysts believe that Iran is anywhere from 6 months to 2 years away from having a nuclear weapon. Imagine if the analysts are wrong - and Iran is closer to that goal.
To that end, historian Niall Ferguson wrote a sad editorial in The Telegraph of London on 2007 - and, looking back from then to now, what "could have been done" to avert the tragedies which may befall humanity next year.
Read this - and weep for the future of mankind...because if something is not done about Iran now, then these won't be predictions - they will be the news of tomorrow.
The origins of the Great War of 2007 - and how it could have been prevented
With every passing year after the turn of the century, the instability of the Gulf region grew. By the beginning of 2006, nearly all the combustible ingredients for a conflict - far bigger in its scale and scope than the wars of 1991 or 2003 - were in place.
The first underlying cause of the war was the increase in the region's relative importance as a source of petroleum. On the one hand, the rest of the world's oil reserves were being rapidly exhausted. On the other, the breakneck growth of the Asian economies had caused a huge surge in global demand for energy. It is hard to believe today, but for most of the 1990s the price of oil had averaged less than $20 a barrel.
A second precondition of war was demographic. While European fertility had fallen below the natural replacement rate in the 1970s, the decline in the Islamic world had been much slower. By the late 1990s the fertility rate in the eight Muslim countries to the south and east of the European Union was two and half times higher than the European figure.
This tendency was especially pronounced in Iran, where the social conservatism of the 1979 Revolution - which had lowered the age of marriage and prohibited contraception - combined with the high mortality of the Iran-Iraq War and the subsequent baby boom to produce, by the first decade of the new century, a quite extraordinary surplus of young men. More than two fifths of the population of Iran in 1995 had been aged 14 or younger. This was the generation that was ready to fight in 2007.
This not only gave Islamic societies a youthful energy that contrasted markedly with the slothful senescence of Europe. It also signified a profound shift in the balance of world population. In 1950, there had three times as many people in Britain as in Iran. By 1995, the population of Iran had overtaken that of Britain and was forecast to be 50 per cent higher by 2050.
Yet people in the West struggled to grasp the implications of this shift. Subliminally, they still thought of the Middle East as a region they could lord it over, as they had in the mid-20th century.
The third and perhaps most important precondition for war was cultural. Since 1979, not just Iran but the greater part of the Muslim world had been swept by a wave of religious fervour, the very opposite of the process of secularisation that was emptying Europe's churches.
Although few countries followed Iran down the road to full-blown theocracy, there was a transformation in politics everywhere. From Morocco to Pakistan, the feudal dynasties or military strongmen who had dominated Islamic politics since the 1950s came under intense pressure from religious radicals.
The ideological cocktail that produced 'Islamism' was as potent as either of the extreme ideologies the West had produced in the previous century, communism and fascism. Islamism was anti-Western, anti-capitalist and anti-Semitic. A seminal moment was the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's intemperate attack on Israel in December 2005, when he called the Holocaust a 'myth'. The state of Israel was a 'disgraceful blot', he had previously declared, to be wiped 'off the map'.
Prior to 2007, the Islamists had seen no alternative but to wage war against their enemies by means of terrorism. From the Gaza to Manhattan, the hero of 2001 was the suicide bomber. Yet Ahmadinejad, a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War, craved a more serious weapon than strapped-on explosives. His decision to accelerate Iran's nuclear weapons programme was intended to give Iran the kind of power North Korea already wielded in East Asia: the power to defy the United States; the power to obliterate America's closest regional ally.
Under different circumstances, it would not have been difficult to thwart Ahmadinejad's ambitions. The Israelis had shown themselves capable of pre-emptive air strikes against Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981. Similar strikes against Iran's were urged on President Bush by neo-conservative commentators throughout 2006. The United States, they argued, was perfectly placed to carry out such strikes. It had the bases in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan. It had the intelligence proving Iran's contravention of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
But the President was advised by his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, to opt instead for diplomacy. Not just European opinion but American opinion was strongly opposed to an attack on Iran. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 had been discredited by the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction Saddam Hussein had supposedly possessed and by the failure of the US-led coalition to quell a bloody insurgency.
Do read the whole thing.
Ferguson shows us the dangers of allowing Iran to continue down the nuclear road, and the world paying scant attention to the growth of hatred in the Islamic world.
We at Joobo have been warning about this for a year now. How long before the world wakes up to this growing threat is anyone's guess. But each passing day, it grows and metastasizes until it will no longer be able to be managed, and a war unknown in human history will be at our doorstep.
Saturday, January 21, 2006
In liberalfantasyworld, good is bad, earth is sky, and Muslims are not dangerous.
If history reminds us, every time Osama bin Laden opens his mouth, it reminds Americans why we are at war, and why liberals cannot be trusted with America's security. For instance, just days before the 2004 election, as John Kerry began a small surge in the polls, bin Laden released one of his hilarious video tapes - and, as many Downies admit, the tape killed Kerry's momentum and sealed Bush's election chances.
Seeing this example, how hard can it be to fathom that bin Laden helps Bush, and does not hurt him?
For liberals, quite hard. The dolts at Newsday in New York (another leftist rag in the style of The New York Times) believe that the latest crap from bin Laden hurts President Bush...despite the fact that they can find not one fellow dolt to confirm their suspicions.
Liberals and intelligence: the two shall never meet.
Tape a 'big blow' to Bush
WASHINGTON -- The White House said a new audiotape shows Osama bin Laden is "on the run," but counterterrorism experts said it instead pointed up an embarrassing fact for President George W. Bush: It appears bin Laden is alive and well four years after Sept. 11.
More than that, some counterterror analysts pointed to parallels in a 2004 bin Laden tape where he offered a similar "truce" to European leaders, only to have the London subway bombings take place about a year later.
U.S. officials said yesterday that they had picked up no increased "chatter" signaling an imminent attack inside the United States, despite bin Laden's threat that a strike is in the works.
The Department of Homeland Security said it has no plans to raise the national terror alert level of yellow, the middle step of five.
The CIA confirmed the voice is bin Laden's and believes the audiotape was made recently, a senior administration official said. The al-Qaida leader refers to Bush's alleged desire to bomb Al-Jazeera television, first reported on Nov. 22.
So, where in the story does one intel analyst, historian, writer, politician, or something else say that this new tape "hurts" President Bush?
Wait - we have Rep. Peter King, a Republican, who does say, "Just because he's talking about there being an attack in and of itself means nothing," King said. He believes bin Laden released the tape to rally supporters after an air strike in Pakistan, which is believed to have taken out several al-Qaida leaders."
So, where in that did King say the tape "hurts" President Bush?
The story should be titled, "Tape Could Be a Blow to Bush," and even then it would a stretch. But to say the tape IS a "blow" to President Bush is liberal fantasy. Which is how most of them lead their lives.
Nancy Pelosi (D-Psycho) says that there is a "culture of corruption" amongst Republicans in the US Congress.
Unfortunately for Pansy Nancy, she missed some of that corruption amongst her fellow dimwitted Downies.
Ex-Jefferson aide pleads guilty, to testify in federal bribery case
WASHINGTON -- A former aide to Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, pleaded guilty Wednesday in federal court and has agreed to cooperate with an investigation into an alleged conspiracy to funnel money to the eight-term congressman and members of his family.
Brett Pfeffer, 37, told U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III that a congressman, identified in court only as "Representative A," lobbied high-ranking officials in Nigeria and Ghana to use technology developed by a small U.S.-based telecommunication company and pressed the Export-Import Bank of the United States to approve loan guarantees. In exchange, Pfeffer said, the congressman demanded a share of the new company created to facilitate the deal.
The MSM has had a field day reporting on the alleged ethical problems of Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas. When (not if) Jefferson is indicted, how many of them will do stories on a top Downie being nabbed? How will they play it? How about not at all?
Friday, January 20, 2006
Today, January 20, 2006, is the 25th anniversary of the first inauguration of Ronald Reagan as the 40th President of the United States. Hours after he was sworn in, the 52 Americans held hostage in Iran by the government and radicals there were released, and Reagan began his administration with this diplomatic nightmare off his plate.
In the eight years he spent as President, Reagan was labeled a moron, a dope, a dupe of others, a warmonger, and other foul epithets. Since he left office in 1989, evidence has shown that he was in fact the opposite of these things, from his breadth of knowledge in his letters before and after his presidency to his ending the Cold War and bringing the Soviet Union to its knees, despite the hatred and opposition from many, including liberals. In many ways, Ronald Reagan has been proven right, both by time and history but also by the actions of his enemies, political and otherwise.
For instance, in 1982 Reagan wanted to put MX missiles into western Europe to counter the Soviets. Millions marched against America in Europe, denouncing the US and Reagan as warmongers. Yet, today, there is no more USSR, and Reagan was proven right. The pro-Soviet states which were the frontlines of the Cold War are now more capitalist than the western European "allies" for whom we shed untold amounts of blood and capital to keep afloat.
Reagan also cut taxes - despite harangues from Downies who said he hated blacks, poor people, and loved the rich...in short, many of the same stale arguments they use against George W. Bush today. Yet under Reagan, tax receipts more than doubled from 1981 to 1989, despite the cuts in income taxes. When Reagan came to office, he found that years of regression from a Downie-led Congress and the wounded presidencies of Richard Nixon and Gerald R. Ford and the disastrous regime of Jimmy Carter had left the US military in such disrepair that without nuclear weaponry we were sliding into a 2nd world country military-wise. Reagan set out to rebuild the entire US armed forces top to bottom, and now it is the greatest army in the world, manpower and weaponry alike. And yet Reagan did this despite the hatred and opposition of the same people - John Kerry, for instance - who came to his funeral or who now admit in hushed whispers that Ronald Reagan was the perfect man for the presidency at the time - and perhaps one of the greatest Presidents in American history.
It is said that a President can either make his times, or be made by his times. Ronald Reagan was the former - in every field, he made the times, he dictated the policy, he changed the world. In many ways, the current President, George W. Bush, is the shining successor to Reagan. However, in his time in office, Bush will not only make his times, but be made by them.
Liberals and America-haters mock Bush, call him names, and deride his accomplishments. But as we see 25 years after he became President, the reaction to Ronald Reagan, once labeled as "that cowboy actor," history sees the truth in a legacy. Ronald Reagan's grows, but it remains secure. He was the perfect man for his time, and America and the world have him to thank for the world we do live in now.
Thursday, January 19, 2006
The left in America wants everyone to believe that disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff only gave money to Republicans, because that would allow them to continue on their "culture of corruption" rant inspired by nutjob Howard "Duckie" Dean.
However, when a reporter for The Washington Post deigned to utter the unutterable - that Abramoff actually gave money to Downies as well as Republicans - the leftists on her blog let loose with a stream of insults, personal attacks, and filthy language, all of which got so bad that the blog was shut down.
Free speech in America...leftists want it, unless someone says something they do not like.
Paper Shutters Blog After Ombudsman Post
The Washington Post shut down one of its blogs Thursday after the newspaper's ombudsman raised the ire of readers by writing that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to the Democrats as well as to Republicans.
At the center of a congressional bribery investigation, Abramoff gave money to Republicans while he had his clients donate to both parties, though mostly to Republicans.
In her Sunday column, ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote that Abramoff "had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties," prompting a wave of nasty reader postings on post.blog.
There were so many personal attacks that the newspaper's staff could not "keep the board clean, there was some pretty filthy stuff," and so the Post shut down comments on the blog, or Web log, said Jim Brady, executive editor of washingtonpost.com.
"We're not giving up on the concept of having a healthy public dialogue with our readers, but this experience shows that we need to think more carefully about how we do it," Brady wrote on the newspaper's Web site. "There are things that we said we would not allow, including personal attacks, the use of profanity and hate speech."
Imagine if Republicans used foul language against a reporter who said something the right did not like. Those people would be expelled from posting any comments, and leftists would decry how disgusting those people were. And the MSM would give the story full relish.
The gay father of "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh, who was captured in Afghanistan fighting for the Taliban against the United States, is begging President Bush to release the little terrorist scumbag.
Sorry, Mr. Lindh. Your son deserves life in prison, not a release.
'American Taliban' Father Urges Clemency
After years of silence, the father of American-born Taliban soldier John Walker Lindh said Thursday he has asked President Bush to grant his son clemency, adding that the then teenager never raised arms against the United States.
"In simple terms, this is the story of a decent and honorable young man embarked on a spiritual quest," said Frank Lindh, swallowing back tears at times during a speech at the Commonwealth Club, a nonprofit organization.
John Walker Lindh, now 24, was captured by American forces on Nov. 21, alongside the Taliban. Frank Lindh said his son thought he had been rescued by U.S. soldiers until he was taken into custody and tortured.
Charged with conspiring to kill Americans and supporting terrorists, the younger Lindh avoided a potential life sentence in 2002 by pleading guilty to lesser charges of supplying services to the Taliban in violation of U.S. economic sanctions and of carrying weapons against U.S. forces.
Last year John Walker Lindh asked President Bush for a reduction in his 20-year sentence, repeating a September 2004 request the government rejected.
Until now, his parents have mostly maintained a public silence about the case, hoping to avoid a media barrage that could be detrimental to their son. But on Thursday Frank Lindh shared baby pictures and other photos of his son during the presentation and said he is proud of his child.
Lindh said he decided to break his silence because he hoped the story of his boy's journey from bucolic Marin County to harsh Afghanistan battlefields will help gain him a reprieve.
Notice how this news outlet says that Lindh "was tortured" after he was captured. No proof of this, of course, but in liberalfantasyworld that sounds pretty good.
Just who is this scumbag who has a father who is "proud" of him?
Here's a note to the Lindh family: in 20 years, when your son's sentence is completed, here is hoping that he has lost his mind and is just a worthless shell. Sort of the same thing he is now.
The nuts who came up with "global warning" use every excuse to somehow explain why their phony idea of why the planet warms naturally - and then cools naturally - is really a threat we can actually do something about.
Now comes one of the most utterly hilarious stories to come out of that phony issue in a long, long time: blacks will be hurt by "global warming." Not people - blacks.
Global Warming Could Spell Disaster for Blacks
If you thought Hurricane Katrina was a once-in-a-lifetime fluke, think again. Concerned environmentalists say that unless the United States gets real about the threat of global warming, African Americans and other people of color can expect a repeat of disasters like Katrina.
“When you look at the trends and put them all together, it’s undisputable that the sea levels are rising,” says Ansje Miller, director of the Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative (EJCC)“Warmer seas mean more intense hurricanes...You’re going to have intense flooding like we have never seen before. Katrina is really the hurricane of the future.”
Now, let us assume for a moment that "global warming" is real, and that humanity can do something to stop it.
If it is real, how does it impact blacks any more than, say, whites, or Hispanics, or Orientals? Wouldn't it impact polar bears before it impacts blacks?
And who would care who it impacts, instead of just saying that it impacts people?
Is this how the black leadership in America thinks? How does an issue affect only blacks, and no one else?
Ted Kennedy, fat murderer that he is, has been exposed as belonging to a club which barred women.
Of course, Ted Kennedy backed off from any ties to the club.
That won't work, Teddy Boy.
Kennedy Severs Final Club Ties
Senator Edward M. Kennedy ’54-’56 announced yesterday that he would sever his ties to an all-male final club, the Owl, after his affiliation with the exclusive Harvard student social organization drew criticism from conservatives.
Kennedy spokeswoman Laura Capps wrote in an e-mail to The Crimson last night that Kennedy made “minor” financial contributions to the Owl “around the time of his 50th reunion and last year.” She added that the senator “hasn’t been active” in the club since his college days.
The Crimson reported in May 1965 that Kennedy had been an Owl member while an undergrad. That fact came to light again last week after Kennedy lambasted Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. for having once joined a conservative group called Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP).
When Samuel Alito belonged to a group which had someone write something that Alito did not agree with, Kennedy made sure to tag the judge as a racist despite his denouncing the group. So, according to Ted Kennedy, since he belonged to this group which had a bigoted program, Ted Kennedy must be a bigot.
There can be no other way to look at it.
So, the Kennedy motto is thus: "Do as I say, not as I do."
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Al Gore is mentally ill - whether or not he knows it is unimportant.
But in his speech the other day saying that, despite not knowing the details of the NSA surveillance program, with Gore saying that it was illegal and that he knew it was illegal, the former VP and campaign finance violator en masse had this breathtakingly shocking comment, one which the MSM missed completely in their race to lick Gore's anus:
Transcript: Al Gore On the Limits of Executive Power
A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government. Our Founding Fathers were adamant that they had established a government of laws and not men. Indeed, they recognized that the structure of government they had enshrined in our Constitution - our system of checks and balances - was designed with a central purpose of ensuring that it would govern through the rule of law. As John Adams said: "The executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them, to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men."
Got that? Gore says that we cannot have a president who breaks the law.
We guess that doesn't mean a president who lies under oath, suborns perjury, and obstructs justice. Just like Mr. Gore's boss, Bill Clinton, did.
Those crimes don't count in Gore's sphere of lunacy.
BTW, what's with "Al Gore 2008"? Is the liar and thief running for President again?
If you thought George Clooney was an untalented puke-making nutjob who acts as well as some homeless jerk, this oughta give you a laugh: Mr. Clooney now says that had he gotten off his ass and campaigned for John Kerry in 2004, Kerry would have been elected.
In short, Clooney's laziness cost Sir Dumper of Massachusetts the whole election.
You read right. It is hilarious, though.
KERRY'S CHANCES RUINED BY CLOONEY
Movie star GEORGE CLOONEY is convinced he ruined JOHN KERRY's chances in the race for US president in 2004 - by snubbing an invitation and hurting his feelings.
The OCEAN'S TWELVE actor was one of several screen stars invited to ride on Kerry's election train, but it all went downhill for the Democrat when Clooney stayed away.
He recalls, "Kerry asked me to ride on his train - he had a train going cross-country after he was nominated and some actors went on board.
"I called him and explained that I couldn't do it.
"I'd hurt him. I'd actually caused him harm at the polls."
So, according to Clooney, millions of people who voted for Bush would have voted for Kerry, had they listened to an actor who cannot act.
Now THAT is something to ponder. Not.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Former US Senator Tommy Daschle of South Dakota, who lost re-election (one of only 2 party leaders to lose a re-election race in the 20th century), says he is "considering" a run for the presidency in 2008.
This just gets better all the time.
Tom Daschle considers bid for president
Former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle is weighing the possibility of running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008.
"I have received a lot of encouragement," Daschle said in an email today to the Argus Leader.
Daschle didn't rule out the possibility of an official announcement in the near future. But for now, he said, he has no plans to run for national office.
In his email, Daschle said the primary factors in his decision "would be my family and our mutual decision to consider the rigors of a campaign and reentry into public life."
Daschle made similar comments over the weekend to another publication. In a Saturday story in the National Journal, Daschle said he was "taking a look at" entering the race.
Analysts see the 2008 race beginning to take shape, with candidates and possible candidates from both parties hinting more openly about their plans.
Larry Sabato, a political expert at the University of Virginia, said Daschle was not in his latest rankings of likely Democratic candidates because he wasn't convinced Daschle would run.
"I wouldn’t call him the favorite, or even second or third. But it’s early," Sabato said.
With all due respect to Mr. Sabato, Tommy Daschle has less chance of being elected President, either in 2008, 2012, 2016, or any other time, than Abraham Lincoln has of coming back to life and becoming a Ku Klux Klan member.
Remember: Tommy Daschle was a mean-spirited, egotistic loser who was defeated for re-election when he tried to block every piece of Republican legislation in the US Senate, at the same time he was running commercials telling his fellow South Dakotans (who voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004 by 60-40) that he was a firm supporter of President Bush and even (hilariously) showing him hugging the President in a warm embrace. The voters didn't buy his malarkey.
And let's also not forget the last (er, loser) who ran for President from South Dakota. Does the name George McGovern come to mind?
Monday, January 16, 2006
Sunday, January 15, 2006
The Iranian psychos who are racing to build a nuclear weapon so they can destroy Israel and threaten Europe is now threatening to raise the price of oil if they are referred to the UN Security Council.
Iran issues stark warning on oil price
Iran stepped up its defiance of international pressure over its nuclear programme yesterday by warning of soaring oil prices if it is subjected to economic sanctions. As diplomats from the US, Europe, Russia, and China prepared to meet today in London to discuss referring Tehran to the UN security council, Iran's economy minister, Davoud Danesh-Jafari, said the country's position as the world's fourth-largest oil producer meant such action would have grave consequences.
And, here is something even more hilarious from those Islamic nutjobs: they will hold a "conference" on the Holocaust.
We wonder: is David Duke invited?
In a provocative move, Iran also announced plans yesterday to convene a "scientific" conference to examine the evidence supporting the Holocaust. The news comes weeks after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provoked a global outcry by describing the slaughter of 6 million Jews by the Nazis in the second world war as a "myth".
Here is what the West should do: hold a conference showing that Islam is not a religion, but a cult, run by nuts for nuts. That should piss them off.
And, remember this, the next time we are blackmailed over oil: the Downies in the US Congress keep blocking oil exploration in Alaska.
Just a reminder when you fill up your tank.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
A man who helped to finance Hamas, one of the groups from those peaceful Palestinians*, is about to go on trial in Illinois. The case is no big deal - but it is the details behind the story which have to be read to be believed.
And, of course, the ACLU fights for terror suspects.
ACLU filing challenges Hamas-case evidence
Two civil liberties groups filed legal briefs this week in support of a Virginia man accused of helping to fund Mideast terrorists, arguing that federal agents had no right to search his home without a warrant in 1993.
The prosecution of Abdelhaleem Ashqar in federal court in Chicago is the first case to test whether national security concerns can justify searching a person's home without a warrant, the two groups said.
"We've always been opposed to warrantless physical searches," said Harvey Grossman, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. "You physically break into the home when people aren't there. It's like burglary."
The Center for National Security Studies, based in Washington, D.C., joined with the ACLU in the friend-of-the-court brief, which supports Ashqar's attempt to prevent evidence from the search from being used against him.
Federal prosecutors allege that Ashqar and two other men, Muhammed Salah of Bridgeview and Mousa Abu Marzook, participated in a 15-year conspiracy to finance the group Hamas, laundering millions of dollars, some of which went to buy weapons. Marzook is a fugitive believed to be living in Syria.
The ACLU files only two or three amicus briefs a year in the federal trial courts in Chicago and rarely gets involved in a motion to suppress evidence, Grossman said Tuesday. "But this is a very important case," he said. "There are no decisions in this area whatsoever."
However, we have that part of the story which always exposes the hilarity of the whole "Bush Spied on Americans" canard:
A spokesman for U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment Tuesday. But in a court filing in August, prosecutors argued that the search of Ashqar's home in Oxford, Miss., was unlike a normal search of a suspect's residence.
"The 4th Amendment does not require the government to obtain court approval for a foreign intelligence search of an agent of a foreign power," prosecutors wrote.
Ashqar was a graduate student at the University of Mississippi when federal agents conducted the search, photographing his papers and other personal property, Ashqar's attorney, Thomas A. Durkin, said in court filings.
The search was conducted under the administration of Bill Clinton and approved by his attorney general, Janet Reno, according to court records.
Wait a second here! Do you mean to tell us that Bill Clinton and Janet Reno, those paragons of virtue, clean living, and serious obstruction of justice, broke into someone's home and did surveillance, all without a warrant?
My God! Those are crimes! Those are crimes, you hear!
Impeachment! Impeachment for these lawbreakers! We demand it now!
The "earth is doomed because of global warming" crowd has been telling the rest of us for years that if man would just cut back on development, just halt some of that capitalist progression, then the earth might not heat up so fast, and we would all be saved. A socialist agrarian economy might be best, some of them must be thinking.
This story will definitely throw a kink into their plans. Actually, it blows them apart.
One of the culprits behind "global warming" (which we have demonstrated here time and time again, is natural to the planet and cannot be stopped or changed) is plants.
How they stop this one, should be enjoyable to watch.
New source of global warming gas found: plants
LONDON (Reuters) - German scientists have discovered a new source of methane, a greenhouse gas that is second only to carbon dioxide in its impact on climate change.
The culprits are plants.
They produce about 10 to 30 percent of the annual methane found in the atmosphere, according to researchers at the Max-Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany.
The scientists measured the amount of methane released by plants in controlled experiments. They found it increases with rising temperatures and exposure to sunlight.
"Significant methane emissions from both intact plants and detached leaves were observed ... in the laboratory and in the field," Dr Frank Keppler and his team said in a report in the journal Nature.
Methane, which is produced by city rubbish dumps, coal mining, flatulent animals, rice cultivation and peat bogs, is one of the most potent greenhouse gases in terms of its ability to trap heat.
Concentrations of the gas in the atmosphere have almost tripled in the last 150 years. About 600 million tonnes worldwide are produced annually.
Hmmm...since humans on the planet have gone from about 1 billion to 6 billion in that same 150 years, it is amazing that such gas concentrations have only tripled.
However, in fairness, we here at Joobo have concocted a small play for our friends to use when arguing how to stop this form of "global warming":
Scene: a dinner table, somewhere in America.
Father: Boy, am I hungry! Pass me some of that broccoli!
Son: I will even eat some even though I don't like it.
Mother: No broccoli tonight, folks. The plants they come from cause global warming.
Father: Oh, okay. How about some salad?
Mother: Sorry! The lettuce, tomatoes, grains used in the dressing can cause global warming.
Father: How silly of me! Pass me that steak!
Mother: Whoops - the grain used to feed the cattle comes from plants. It's a no-no.
Father: So, let me in on what we CAN eat.
This socialist play, "Father Gets a Lesson in Capitalist Global Warming Crimes" has been brought to you by the number 6, which is the number of leftists in America with IQs higher than 10, and by the letter "B," which is the capital letter of their whole program for humanity: BULLSHIT.
Friday, January 13, 2006
After stalling to report on the "bad news" (for liberals, that is) that rapist and murderer Roger Keith Coleman was put to death properly in 1992, and that he was truly guilty, the BBC finally did a story on the test.
Of course, they spent half the story blathering about Mark Warner, the Governor of Virginia who ordered the testing - and they made sure to add that support for capital punishment is down in America, although still a majority.
Tests reveal executed man's guilt
DNA tests have confirmed the guilt of a man who was executed in the US in 1992 whilst proclaiming his innocence.
Virginia state's outgoing governor, Mark Warner, had ordered the tests on Roger Coleman, who was put to death for raping and murdering his sister-in-law.
Anti-death penalty advocates had hoped this would be the first case of DNA testing exonerating an executed man.
The test results are a blow to those who supported Coleman and to the anti-death penalty movement in general.
A forensic laboratory in Toronto concluded there was virtually no doubt that the DNA recovered from the body of the victim, Wanda McCoy, belonged to Coleman.
We can all imagine how the BBC would have covered this story if the tests had revealed Coleman's innocence, but, despite this, we will take their reporting on it anyway.
Yup - that wacky country to our north, where you can smoke pot in luxury, where men marry men and women marry women, where abortion is made more accessible than soda pop, and where the military has three tanks and 2 airplanes, all of which do not work, is trying to legalize polygamy, the marriage of multiple partners.
And Canada wonders why they are a laughingstock in America.
Legalize polygamy, study urges
Ottawa — A new study for the federal Justice Department says Canada should get rid of its law banning polygamy, and change other legislation to help women and children living in such multiple-spouse relationships.
“Criminalization does not address the harms associated with valid foreign polygamous marriages and plural unions, in particular the harms to women,” says the report, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.
“The report therefore recommends that this provision be repealed.”
Let's get this straight: "valid foreign polygamous marriages."
Where did they find them? In Iran? Baluchistan? Islamofuckistan?
What three ignorant asshole law professors would waste their time on such utter crap? And what spurned the Canadian government to spend $150,000 on this?
Once again, we see why Canada is a national disaster. The one and single reason: the country is run by liberals.
That does it every time.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
This was too easy not to pass up:
Vampire Candidate 'Won't Hide Evil Side'
MINNEAPOLIS — One gubernatorial candidate in Minnesota is giving a whole new meaning to the "dark side" of politics. A man who calls himself a satanic priest plans to run for governor on a 13-point platform that includes the public impaling of terrorists at the state Capitol building.
Jonathon Sharkey, also known as "The Impaler", plans to launch his gubernatorial campaign on — when else? — Friday the 13th. He'll make the announcement in Princeton.
"I'm going to be totally open and honest," said the 41-year-old leader of the "Vampyres, Witches and Pagans Party."
However, we have that "money quote" again:
Including the impaling of terrorists, rapists, drug dealers and other criminals, Sharkey's platform includes emphasis on education, tax breaks for farmers and better benefits for veterans.
Wait...he wants to impale terrorists, rapists, drug dealers, and other criminals?
My God - HE WANTS TO GET RID OF THE MODERN DOWNTRODDEN PARTY WHOLESALE!
Holy cow, what a candidate!
A few years ago, Yassir "Yessir" Arafart was caught bringing an Iranian ship laden with arms into the Palestinian territories. Despite being caught dead to rights, the AIDS-infected child molestor Arafart denied it all, even though documents with his signature were seized by Israel showing he was behind the deal.
Now, even though Yassir has assumed room temperature, those peaceful Palestinians* are at is again: another ship has been seized, this time by Lebanon. And it was headed to Gaza, controlled by those peaceful Palestinians*. And it may have been sent by al Qaeda.
Lebanese nab terrorists headed for Gaza
The Lebanese army caught a boat on its way to Israel last week that was loaded with weapons, including long-range missiles, Channel 1 revealed Thursday night.
According to military sources who confirmed the report, the boat was on its way to Gaza from Lebanon and planned to drop off canisters filled with weapons, explosives and rockets off the coast where they were to be collected by Palestinian fishermen.
Government officials speculated that the boat was funded by Iran or Syria and that the weapons were meant to reach either the Hamas or the Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip.
In 2002, the Karine A ship was captured in the Red Sea by special IDF forces. The boat's cargo, intended for the Palestinian Authority, included 50 tons of advanced weaponry including Katyusha rockets, rifles, mortar shells, mines and a variety of anti-tank missiles.
The Palestinians...when will the world wake up that they are a worthless ruthless subhuman populace undeserving of any support?
* Yeah, right.