The Latest Fred Thompson Video

From John Hawkins @ Right Wing News. A little tongue-in-cheek....but not much.

The Only True Conservative Candidate Makes A Sprint For The Iowa Finish Line

Some pundits (like Dick Morris) have already decided that Fred Thompson is down for the count and will withdraw from the race after Iowa. I consider this wishful thinking on their part (especially Morris, who loves Giuliani), as well as a display of ignorance about political races Fred Thompson has previously entered. The truth is that Fred has never lost an election in his life, and has come from behind to victory in every one of them.

The Presidential Primary is a very long and drawn-out election that starts, but will not end, in Iowa. Its a shame that some otherwise intelligent people (like Morris!) need to be reminded of that. They should also know that candidates popularity will ebb and flow frequently along the way. John McCain is a good example of this, and we have seen him go from being all but down-for-the-count to being a contender once again.

Fred Thompson has been campaigning very hard in the past few weeks and will continue to do so in Iowa up until the caucus. And while a somewhat recent Rassmussen poll had Fred at 11% with an approval rating of 67% (highest of all), a new Strategic Vision poll from last Friday shows him moving into 3rd place at 16%. The final sprint to the January 3rd Caucuses is paying off!

The political ad shown above will not run on TV until $248,846 is raised for its distribution. As of this posting $65,256 has been raised thus far. There is a button in my left column you can click on that will take you to a fundraising page on Fred 08. So if you want a true conservative candidate (per Rush Limbaugh) then please help make it so by contributing an amount with which you are comfortable. Thank you for your support of Fred Thompson!

National Review's Jonah Goldberg on Huckabee

In the December 31st issue of National Review (and here) you can find a disturbing analysis by Johah Goldberg about former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, which goes into detail about why he seems appealing to many conservatives and also why they should run the other way. Here is a paragraph from said article:

So why, why on earth, are so many conservatives rallying around Mike Huckabee? He not only promises to be a different kind of Republican and a different kind of conservative, but makes it plain that he thinks conservatives who disagree with him are grumps. “I’m a conservative, but I’m not angry at anybody,” he says to the tittering glee of the liberal press, who love it when conservatives confirm their stereotypes. That government should do good wherever it can, whenever it can, is Huck’s North Star. Whereas Bush defenders say that compassionate conservatism was mostly a marketing slogan that became more only when political necessity demanded it (the prescription-drug benefit, relentless genuflection to post-Katrina New Orleans, etc.), Huckabee’s bleeding-heart conservatism informs Huckabee’s worldview. He gave clemency to rapists and murderers because forgiveness is a sign of compassion. He banned public smoking in Arkansas because he is his brother’s keeper, and he supports a national ban for the same reason. He imports the Golden Rule even into his foreign policy, believing that if we just do unto Iran, North Korea, and China as we would have them do unto us, everything will be fine. “You treat others the way you’d like to be treated. That’s to me the fundamental issue that has to be reestablished in our dealings with other countries.” This is breathlessly stupid.

Unfortunately to read the entire article you will have to subscribe to NR/Digital or buy a subscription to National Review in print. The link above will only get you half the article. Sorry. You will find the New York Times does that, too. It's called capitalism.

Why National Review chose to endorse Mitt Romney over Fred Thompson is breathlessly puzzling. Not that Romney is a horrible choice, but in my humble opinion Fred Thompson is the clear choice for President, being that he is the most consistantly conservative candidate running.

For Those Serving Overseas...

Our gratitude for your sacrifice and our sincere wish for a very merry Christmas.

Gloria In Excelsis Deo

Straight No Chaser Performs 12 Days

Time to lighten up a bit with some Christmas levity. Enjoy.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali Interview

I know it seems like Ive been a bit lazy lately posting all these videos and writing little. And there might be some truth to that. But mostly Ive been busy planning my move to a new location (physically, not online), which involves lots of time spent following up on things others are supposed to follow up on-----> like car insurance (agent forgot to call back), new furniture delivery (guy delivering my bed never called like he was supposed to), etc... And I have to do this by phone from the road...

But these interviews, parts one and two, that I snagged off Little Green Footballs (who got them from Hip Hop Republican) are quite informative about Islam in Europe. She seems quite adept at sorting it all out, albeit through a filter of atheism.

A Day Which Will Live In Infamy

66 years ago today...lest we forget.

The Only Real Conservative In The Race--Per Rush Limbaugh

Without making a full-fledged endorsement, Rush Limbaugh makes a pretty good case for Fred Thompson.

What's Up With Anderson Cooper?

Anderson Cooper has a problem with this? I have a problem with Anderson Cooper allowing liberal activists (posing as undecided voters) lobbing leading "attack"questions to Republican candidates, when the same wasn't allowed at the Democrat You-Tube debate months ago. CNN (Crescent News Network) has apologized for not taking a couple of minutes to Google the questioners to see if they were lying about their political disposition. I guess that's less self-injurious than admitting to gross liberal bias in their agenda-driven crusade to return the Democrats to the White House. Do they really think anyone buys that tripe?

N.O.W. Hangs Out The "Gone Shopping" Sign On Key Issues

There have been two recent headlines in the news lately that have grabbed my attention. One is about a 19 year old rape victim in Saudi Arabia having to undergo 200 lashes and six months in jail for being alone in a car with her boyfriend (also raped); and another is about the British teacher in Sudan serving a 15 day sentence for allowing her students to name a teddy bear after the prophet, Mohammed. Yesterday thousands marched in the streets of Sudan wielding knives and demanding her execution. The United States Government has voiced its displeasure about the former, while the UK has gotten involved in the latter. What I find truly amazing is that the National Organization for Women (NOW) has said virtually nothing about either news item.

Their silence is deafening. Though I may have heard something on the radio about NOW announcing they were not taking a position one way or the other on both news items, in checking their website I found no mention at all about either. I expected to find both listed under hot topics, but only found links to something called "love your body," sexual harassment, and National Caregivers Month among others.

Upon searching much deeper I finally came upon a link to a campaign against violence against women....in Juarez, Mexico. That seems to be about as international as these timid feminists care to get. They'll whine and complain about "lite" issues at home while ignoring helpless cries from oppressed women and girls around the world. And although if you dig really really deep into their site you can find a denunciation of honor killings (no specific cases or culprits mentioned here, just an agreement that they're bad), NOW still seems much more concerned with lesbian rights, promoting diversity, and recommending "easy holiday shopping."

Why isn't NOW dealing with Islamic subjugation of women? Don't they realize that if the Islamofascists have their way that all those NOW gals will be wearing burkas and having their butts tanned and blistered for violation of the merest infractions? Could it be that allying themselves with Republicans in the war on terror is more distasteful for NOW than the prospect of losing that war? Are they so lacking in foresight? Are they as delusional as Rosie O'Donnell in thinking that mainstream American Christians are as big a threat as Islamofascists? Sure looks that way.

Growing Nightmare At The Border

Today Sara Carter of the Washington Times dropped a bombshell in our collective laps that should have each of us cringing with fear of possibilities and angrily demanding answers from our elected officials, both locally and in Washington--not limited to the President himself.

It would appear that this last May, while many of us were pleading with our congressional leaders not to pass the Amnesty Bill, Islamist terrorists were being escorted across our southern border by illegal drug cartels for the purpose of attacking Fort Huachuca, a military base in Arizona. This facility, represented by all four military branches, is the nation's largest military intelligence training center with 12,000 workers, some of whom have families living on base.

Laura Ingraham asked a very good question on her show today (paraphrasing): Why was this information kept from us during the debate on the Immigration Bill? Perhaps the answer to that question could be found on the list of members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The fact that it's chaired by John D. Rockefeller is bad enough; but the list of members doesn't instill much confidence in the direction we're taking to secure this nation.

But while the worst elements of this world sneak across our borders with evil intent, trying to cloak themselves among poor Mexicans looking for a better life, President Bush and other supporters of Amnesty drag their feet on fence construction and fiddle like Nero while Rome burns. Are our leaders simply afraid of offending the Mexican government? Is President Bush of the mindset of those who think a border fence will push Mexico into the lap of the terrorists? It would appear that the Mexican government is having less and less of a say about the disposition of its borders, yielding power voluntarily or involuntarily to some very powerful drug cartels that are nations unto themselves. Will we declare war against them? Or will we actually attempt to negotiate a separate (covert?) peace, thereby legitimizing them and establishing them forever as a force to be reckoned with (like the P.L.O.)? Just thinking out loud here.

Kevin Gleeson Is Getting Serious

There is a new addition to my list of Favorite Conservative Blogs And Sites called The Serious Blog written by my old college roommate, Kevin Gleeson. You may have already noticed his other website, the not-so-serious Big Fat Hat, Kevins humor site located under the heading Some Friends (in left column).

As long as Ive known him, Kevin has been staunchly conservative and catholic, with firmly held traditional values coupled with a rather silly, warped sense of humor. And while I was late to the party politically speaking, Kevin was knee deep in the political scene back in college, joining the Illini Republicans, drawing political cartoons for the Illini Review, and rubbing elbows with such people as Michael Fumento, Betsy Hart, and Matt Kaufman, each of whom have earned accolades in their own right.

Now Kevin has decided to take his lamp out from under a bowl and mount it on a lamp stand for all to see. And if he is anything like his brother, Sean Gleeson, when it comes to engaging posts, Kevin Gleeson's The Serious Blog will put him on the map (provided he sticks with it).

As for me....Life has been busy lately, but the news about skin cells replacing embryonic stem cells is encouraging.

Colorado Supreme Court Plants A Seed

In 1967 the state of Colorado became the first state to ease abortion restrictions, starting a domino effect across the country. But Tuesday the Colorado Supreme Court may have paved the way for all that to change, hopefully, by allowing the pro-life group, Colorado For Equal Rights, to circulate a petition for a ballot measure to give inalienable rights, justice, and due process to the unborn starting at conception. The ballot measure would, in effect, define a fertilized egg as a human being.

Although this notion of humans producing other humans through the fertilization process is obvious to many of us, the so-called pro-choicers still feel that a fertilized egg is human only if the mother wants to see the pregnancy through. This latter notion seems consistent with the mind-set of most children, some angry teenagers, and a few old, fat US Senators.

Seventy-six thousand signatures must be collected in Colorado within the next six months in order for this measure to be on the November '08 ballot. Makes me wish I lived there, just for a moment to sign and vote anyway. Read the whole story here.

Whoooops!!!

What a nasty omen! Of course it was all unintentional, I'm sure. So it can't fall into the same disrespectful category as say,...Obama putting his hands in his pockets during the National Anthem. But what a nasty omen indeed.

We Remember...

To those of you in uniform, thank you for you service to our great nation.

Fighting Illini Upset #1 Ranked Ohio State 28-21

I couldn't watch the game---I was driving! But I heard the game on XM Radio and was cheering with every touchdown. And as the clock ran out it dawned on me that Illinois had accomplished something major here. Not since 1956 has an Illinois football team defeated a number one nationally ranked team.

The Fighting Illini have never finished at number one nationally in football in its century long history, nor has it played for the national championship in a bowl game. In my lifetime (I include my time in the womb for all intents and purposes) starting with January 1964 (I was born in March, got it?) Illinois has been to the Rose Bowl twice ('64 and '84)and a BCS (rip-off) Sugar Bowl birth once for winning the Big Ten Title. We won the '64 game but lost the other two.

So, in my humble opinion, beating the undefeated, nationally ranked number one team, on their own turf mind you, may be the single best accomplishment by the University of Illinois-Champaign football program in the last 50 years. I would say it even surpasses the '83 team that went undefeated in the Big Ten (surpasses because they choked against a 6-5 UCLA team in the '84 Rose Bowl 45-9, which I witnessed in person without the benefit of alcohol consumption to numb the pain).

Honestly, when Ohio State scored a touchdown in their first two plays I almost turned to another station. I thought it was over. But I remembered that we only lay down and wilt when we play Michigan. We've almost always given Ohio State a run for their money, win or lose, as we love to make them sweat. So I stayed tuned to the action.

We answered their touchdown with one of ours, then they got another, and we got another again. Then we didn't wait for them, but got another yet again. Then it was halftime. I just knew the Ohio State players would get their dander up in the locker room and come back out and stomp butt. But they didn't. They only got one more touchdown...and so did we. And then a strange euphoria at the thought of actually pulling this off (Illinois is unranked) mixed with worried fascination at the thought of upsetting the balance of the cosmos hit me. But then it dawned on me that Ohio State upset us a couple of years ago in basketball giving our number one nationally ranked team it's only regular season loss in the final game of the season. Therefore the cosmos was, in fact, correcting an imbalance and all would be okay...for now. Anyway it's almost 4am in Allentown, PA and I'm still giddy....

Hillary Not Among The Strong

I was sitting in a truck stop restaurant yesterday afternoon having a short conversation with another driver about Hillary Clinton and a recent news item we heard on the radio. It dealt with Hillary taking a question at a Q&A in Iowa from a "plant." That is Hillary's campaign recruited someone to pretend to be an Iowa voter and ask her a "soft-ball" question she could easily deal with.

The other driver and I were very critical of Hillary, her stand on the issues, and her campaign tactics. When our waitress overheard our conversation she came over and accused us both of being afraid of a strong woman. Having heard this ridiculous comment way too many times, I responded in detail. I let her have it...in spades.

I told her that I admired many strong women, among them Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, both of whom led their countries through wars and other major events after ascending to power without their husbands' help. I also mentioned some liberal Democrats, which really threw her for a loop. Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer both earned their stripes after cutting their teeth in years of local politics and hard won battles. I don't agree with the two Senators on most any issue, but I do respect them for their accomplishments.

"So what's wrong with Hillary, then?" the waitress asked.

"She has never stood the test of fire," I responded.

I went on to say that she has never run anything--not a business, nor a local or state government from an executive position. She rode into town on her husband's coat-tails, built a reputation for shrill attacks on staff, looked the other way during Bill's adultery and Bill's alleged sexual assaults, ignored Juanita Broaddrick's rape accusations (Jane Doe #5), and acted like a little girly-girl victim (playing the gender card) whenever she was attacked politically.

And don't get me started on her abortion position. It takes a strong woman to carry a baby to term, not abort it. She fights for the "right" for women to be weak and take the easy way out rather than be strong and accountable to God, their unborn child, or themselves.

Now she's running for President by avoiding the hard questions, taking both sides of issues (one within seconds of the other, and back and forth), and having her husband ride to her rescue when the kitchen gets hot.

"This is not the resume of a "strong woman," I said.

"Well, it's about time we got some woman in there. You fellas have run things long enough," she retorted.

My response to that comment would end our little conversation. I said "Yes, this may be true. But if you put THAT woman in office and she screws it up like I expect she would, it will likely be the LAST woman this country elects for another 50 to 100 years; because playing the gender card with leaders of other nations, some not friendly to ours, would invite another attack like 9-11 or greater."

Please feel free to comment below, ladies.

Bibles To Be Banned At Olympics In China!

Check out the story here.

Update: China denies story, calls it rumor. Read here. Believe whom you choose.

God's Christmas Letter?

My sister-in-law sent this to me the other day. I don't know who created it, but here it is:

Christmas letter from God

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:38:58 -0600

My Dear Children,

It has come to My attention that many of you are upset that folks are taking My name out of the season. Maybe you've forgotten that I wasn't actually born during this time of the year and that it was some of your predecessors who decided to celebrate My birthday on what was actually a time of a pagan festival. Although I do appreciate being remembered anytime. How I personally feel about this celebration can probably be most easily understood by those of you who have been blessed with children of your own.

I don't care what you call the day. If you want to celebrate My birth just.......GET ALONG AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

Now, having said that let Me go on.

If it bothers you that the town in which you live doesn't allow a scene depicting My birth, then just get rid of a couple of plastic Santas and snowmen and put in a small Nativity scene on your front lawn. If all My followers did that there wouldn't be any need for such a scene on the town square because there would be many of them all around town.

Stop worrying about the fact that people are calling the tree a holiday tree, instead of a Christmas tree. It was I who made all trees. You can and may remember Me anytime you see any tree. Decorate a grape vine if you wish; I actually spoke of that one in a teaching explaining who I am in relation to you and what each of our tasks are. If you have forgotten that one, look up John 15: 1-8.

If you want to give Me a present in remembrance of My birth here is my wish list. Choose something from it.

1. Instead of writing protest letters objecting to the way My birthday is being celebrated, write letters of love and hope to soldiers away from home. They are terribly afraid and lonely this time of the year. I know, they tell Me all the time.

2. Visit someone in a nursing home. You don't have to know them personally. They just need to know that someone cares about them.

3. Instead of writing the President complaining about the wording of the cards his staff sent out this year, why don't you write and tell him that you will be praying for him and his family this year. Then follow up. It will be nice hearing your prayers again.

4. Instead of giving your children a lot of gifts you can't afford and they don't need, spend time with them.

5. Pick someone that has hurt you in the past and forgive him or her.

6. Did you know that someone in your town will attempt to take their own life this season because they feel so alone and hopeless? Since you don't know who that person is, try giving everyone you meet a warm smile. It could make the difference. Also, you might consider supporting the local Hot Line: they talk with people like that every day.

7. Instead of nit picking about what the retailer in your town calls the holiday, be patient with the people who work there. Give them a warm smile and a kind word. Even if they aren't allowed to wish you a "Merry Christmas" that doesn't keep you from wishing them one. Then stop shopping there on Sunday. If the store didn't make so much money on Sunday they would close and let their employees spend the day at home and in church with their families.

8. If you really want to make a difference, support a missionary, especially one who takes My love and Good News to those who have never heard my name. You may already know someone like that.

9. Here's a good one. There are individuals and whole families in your town who not only will have no "Christmas" tree, but neither will they have any presents to give or receive. If you don't know them (and I suspect you don't) buy some food and a few gifts and give them to the Marines, The Salvation Army or some other charity which believes in Me and they will make the delivery for you.

10. Finally if you want to make a statement about your belief in and loyalty to Me, then behave like a Christian. Don't do things in secret that you wouldn't do in My presence. Let people know by your actions that you are one of mine.

P.S. Don't forget; I am God and can take care of myself. Just love Me and do what I have told you to do. I'll take care of the rest. Check out the list above and get to work; time is short. I'll help you, but the ball is now in your court. And do have a most blessed Christmas with all those whom you love.

And remember, I LOVE YOU.

(Origin Unknown)

A creative and cleverly worded letter for sure. Though I'm not sure I agree with everything in the first part, the 10 suggestions look pretty good.

But what the original writer of the "letter from God" fails to appreciate is that diluting the language (replacing the word Christmas with politically correct phrases) is the first step in eliminating the connection to God and making it one big generic Winter Festival with no Christ child at the center.

I must also challenge the very premise made by the writer that those 10 suggestions are not already being implemented by those who bring attention to and complain about watering down Christmas. It's like the guy who exclaimed "Where are the Christians?!?" after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf area, while it was the Christians who were the only ones mobilizing to bring aid to the victims.

I wonder, too, if the person who wrote that letter actually does the things suggested,...or if he/she merely brainstormed some good ideas for "other people" to do. I already do 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and always try to do 10 (but fall short at times). Will look into 2, 6, and 7. Hope you do, too. Whoever you are.

Catching Up On The Latest Buzz

Frankly I had no idea that Mike Huckabee had raised taxes so much as Governor of Arkansas, or that he was a currently a Senator (oops, Chris Wallace slip of the tongue). But the Club For Growth certainly knew it and wanted the rest of us to know it as well (the former, not the latter). Looks like they view Huckabee on fiscal issues the same way social conservatives (like me) view Giuliani on abortion and sanctuary cities.

Some have criticized Republicans for going after each other like this. But my own belief is that it's better to know things like this now rather than later when it's too late to change horses. Not sure how the Democrats will fare here with this in mind, as most of their candidates, until recently, have been very gentle with one another. Seems like Hillary Clinton has the nod (even with recent stumbling in mind) and the rest are running to be her Vice President. Seems also that the Democrat debate moderators are all running for Press Secretary, except for Meet The Press guru, Tim Russert, who probably has a contract out on him now for "attacking" the New York Senator by daring to ask her a "hard-ball" question.

Seriously it would appear at times that there might be some kind of...dare I say?...liberal bias in the media. But then what the heck does Harvard University know anyway? See their latest study here in IBD. But is liberal bias in all media? No. Not Fox News. Though it is simply my own impression, and the impression of several others like this, this, and this, that Fox News seems at times to have a Rudy Giuliani bias,...or at least some sort of anti-Fred Thompson attitude. But the latter may simply be because Fred poses a threat to Rudy's candidacy.

Meanwhile on Capitol Hill,.....nothing happened. And isn't it kind of funny how the Main Stream Media is rather quiet about this. Last year the Republican-led Congress was referred to as the most do-nothing Congress since 1948. And yet this Democrat-led Congress has done even less.

I'd like to direct your attention here to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's blog page and an entry from April 23rd of (2006?) when the Republicans led both Houses and Senator Reid was Minority Leader. In it he criticizes the Republican Majority Leader for ignoring vital issues in favor of "pet issues of the right wing" and other partisan matters. Sounds like the shoe is on the other foot these days. Senator Reid repeatedly claims that Democrats are interested in working with Republicans in a bipartisan manner to tackle the "real, urgent issues facing our country." I had to laugh when I read that, considering the recent move by Democrats to declare Turkey guilty of genocide in its WWI killing of thousands of Armenians from 1915 to 1917, at such a politically and militarily sensitive time when Kurdish terrorists were attacking Turkish civilians and possibly sparking a war with Iraq. President Bush attacked Congress recently for this and their laziness.

More Disturbing Trends In The UK

It will soon get to the point where we cannot relate to the United Kingdom anymore, as their values stray from our own. Here are a couple of examples here and here, in addition to the story listed in the October 25th posting below:

First, do-it-yourself at home abortions are being proposed by the Commons Science and Technology Committee (not to be confused with any “common sense” committee, which the UK has by now all but outlawed) to be added to the Human Tissues and Embryos Bill, which is expected to be introduced in the Queen’s speech next week. A couple of Tory MP’s, Nadine Dorries and Dr. Bob Spink, along with Labour MP Jim Dobbin represent the sane view that this proposal will encourage termination as a form of contraception by making it so much easier to carry out.

But in spite of the CSTC chairman’s admission that the current yearly figure of 200,000 abortions is “monstrous,” and also in spite of compelling scientific research showing fetuses “walking in the womb at 12 weeks,” or even that babies are now surviving earlier than the 24 week limit, the committee sees no reason to pull back from the 24 weeks rule or discourage abortion in any way.

Secondly, Labour’s favorite think tank, the Institute For Public Policy Research, has declared that Christmas should be downplayed for the sake of multiculturalism, as Great Britain is no longer a Christian nation. In addition they propose several other crazy notions…like birth ceremonies in which the state and parents agree to “work in partnership” to bring up children (who says communism is dead?), banning religious private schools, throwing bishops out of the House of Lords, flying flags other than the Union Jack, etc…

It appears that this think tank wants to destroy Britain’s national identity and eliminate its borders, allowing other cultures to enter the country and keep their own identity without assimilating. Hmmm that does sound familiar, doesn’t it? What happens over there can also happen here, if we are not careful. One problem with Britain is that it doesn’t currently have an opposing conservative voice on the air or in print. There is no Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. There is no Laura Ingraham, Bill O’Reilly, or Michelle Malkin. There is only the liberal BBC and several liberal newspapers. Perhaps Mark Steyn could broadcast a show and have it beamed over there ala Radio Free Europe simply to provide a little balance.

Hat tip: Culture Wire

UK's Labour Govt. Shoving Homosexuality Down The Throats Of The People

I haven't been living under a rock lately, so I cannot imagine why I haven't heard about this story sooner (sarcasm). But thanks to DrTony, who read it on HotAir (Allapundit), who saw it in the Daily Mail <----(click here for full article), this story is finally making its rounds. And that's how the Main Stream Media inadvertently invented blogs, by burying politically incorrect stories.

In the UK they have a law known as the "Equality Act of 2006" which has "Sexual Orientation Regulations" which among other things, require foster parents to promote homosexual lifestyles to children as young as 11 years, no matter the religious beliefs or values of the foster parents.

Vincent and Pauline Matherick, the latest victims of these new laws, were forced to give up their most recent foster child (number 28 that this Christian couple have successfully raised, but whose counting?) because they refused to teach him values that conflict with their faith.

When asked if they could look after the child until a new home is found, they were told by officials the child would be placed in a council hostel on Friday. Obviously the government cannot wait to indoctrinate this young boy into a state sanctioned perverted lifestyle. Don't believe me? The couple were also told they would be required to take the child to "gay association meetings" so he could hear the other side's point of view. It makes me wonder what's stopping the Labour Government from imposing this requirement on ALL parents. I'm also wondering if they'll force parents to introduce other religions (as if on par with their own) to their kids.

There is a ray of hope here in that the Mathericks are going to court, and not alone. The Lawyers' Christian Fellowship is backing them and others who have refused to take this lying down. Will keep you updated.

It should also be mentioned that this story comes out on the heels of another from early September of this year about the homosexual couple in Britain who freely sexually abused their foster children (one of the kids being autistic), because social workers feared retribution from investigating complaints. Obviously the social workers feared the same laws that have the Mathericks up in arms. Read more here (hat tip Michelle Malkin).

(photo from Daily Mail, SWNS)

UPDATE: GOOD NEWS! Friday morning 11-2-07, it was reported that our prayers were answered. The Mathericks can be foster parents without being forced to subject their foster children to homosexual propaganda. It is assumed that the 11 year old child that was taken from them has already been returned.

Fred Thompson Releases Immigration Plan

Here is Fred's plan in its entirety from his website:

Border Security and Immigration Reform Plan

In the post-9/11 world, immigration is much more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, fails in a fundamental responsibility. As we take steps to secure our borders and enforce our laws, we must also ensure that our immigration laws and policies advance our national interests in a variety of areas, and that the immigration process itself is as fair, efficient, and effective as possible.

Securing the Border and Enforcing the Law

A fundamental responsibility of the federal government is to secure the nation's borders and enforce the law. The following policies and initiatives will put the nation on a path to success:

1. No Amnesty. Do not provide legal status to illegal aliens. Amnesty undermines U.S. law and policy, rewards bad behavior, and is unfair to the millions of immigrants who follow the law and are awaiting legal entry into the United States. In some cases, those law-abiding and aspiring immigrants have been waiting for several years.

2. Attrition through Enforcement. Reduce the number of illegal aliens through increased enforcement against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal employment opportunities available, fewer illegal aliens will attempt to enter the country, and many of those illegally in the country now likely will return home. Self-deportation can also be maximized by stepping up the enforcement levels of other existing immigration laws. This course of action offers a reasonable alternative to the false choices currently proposed to deal with the 12 million or more aliens already in the U.S. illegally: either arrest and deport them all, or give them all amnesty. Attrition through enforcement is a more reasonable and achievable solution, but this approach requires additional resources for enforcement and border security:

A. Doubling ICE agents handling interior enforcement, increasing the Border Patrol to at least 25,000 agents, and increasing detention space to incarcerate illegal aliens we arrest rather than letting them go with a promise to show up later for legal proceedings against them.

B. Adding resources for the Department of Justice to prosecute alien smugglers, people involved in trafficking in false identification documents, and previously deported felons.

C. Maximizing efforts to prosecute and convict members of criminal alien gangs, such as MS-13 and affiliated gangs. These gangs have brought unusual levels of violence to more than 30 U.S. states and have also become very active in drug-smuggling, gun-smuggling, and alien-smuggling.

D. Implementing fully and making greater use of the expedited removal process already allowed under federal law.

E. Enabling the Social Security Administration to share relevant information with immigration and law enforcement personnel in a manner that will support effective interior enforcement efforts.

3. Enforce Existing Federal Laws. Enforce the laws Congress has already enacted to prevent illegal aliens from unlawfully benefiting from their presence in the country:

A. End Sanctuary Cities by cutting off discretionary federal grant funds as appropriate to any community that, by law, ordinance, executive order, or other formal policy directs its public officials not to comply with the provisions of 8 USC 1373 and 8 USC 1644, which prohibit any state or local government from restricting in any way communications with the Department of Homeland Security regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.

B. Deny discretionary Federal education grants as appropriate to public universities that violate federal law by offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens without also offering identical benefits to United States citizens, regardless of whether or not they live in the state, as required by 8 USC 1623.

C. Deny discretionary Federal grants as appropriate to states and local governments that violate federal law by offering public benefits to illegal aliens, as prohibited by 8 USC 1621(a).

4. Reduce the Jobs Incentive. Ensure employee verification by requiring that all U.S. employers use the Department of Homeland Security's electronic database (the E-Verify system) to confirm that a prospective employee is authorized to work in the U.S. Now that the technology is proven, provide sufficient resources to make the system as thorough, fast, accurate, and easy-to-use as possible.

5. Bolster Border Security. Finish building the 854-mile wall along the border by 2010 as required by 8 USC 1103. Extend the wall beyond that as appropriate and deploy new technologies and additional resources to enhance detection and rapid apprehension along our borders by 2012.

6. Increased Prosecution. Deploy the additional assets outlined above to prosecute alien smugglers ("coyotes"), alien gang members, previously deported felons, and aliens who have repeatedly violated our immigration laws much more vigorously.

7. Rigorous Entry/Exit Tracking. Complete the implementation of a system to track visa entrants and exits, as has been required by federal law for more than ten years, and connect it to the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC), in order to curb visa overstays and permit more effective enforcement.

Improving the Legal Immigration Process

The United States is a nation of immigrants. We must continue to welcome immigrants and foreign workers who come to our country legally, giving priority to those who can advance the nation's interests and common good. Immigrants and foreign workers who play by the rules need to be rewarded with faster and less burdensome service, not delays that last years. Advancing the following initiatives will require close cooperation between all levels of government, the business community, and concerned citizens:

1. Maximize Program Efficiency. Reduce the backlogs and streamline the process for immigrants and employers who seek to follow the law. Also, simplify and expedite the application processes for temporary visas. This can be accomplished by hiring more personnel at Citizenship and Immigration Services and the FBI. Caps for any category of temporary work visa would be increased as appropriate, if it could be demonstrated that there are no Americans capable and willing to do the jobs.

2. Enhanced Reporting. Improve reporting to the government by businesses that rely on temporary workers so that the government can track whether the visa holder remains employed.

3. Modernize Immigration Law/Policy. Change the nature of our legal immigration system to welcome immigrants who can be economic contributors to our country, are willing to learn the English language, and want to assimilate.

A. Reduce the scope of chain migration by giving family preference in the allocation of lawful permanent resident status only to spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, and no one else (no siblings, no parents, no adult children, etc.).

B. Eliminate the diversity visa lottery.

4. English As Official Language. Make English the official language of the United States to promote assimilation and legal immigrants' success, and require English proficiency in order for any foreign person to be granted lawful permanent resident status.

5. Freedom from Political Oppression. Preserve U.S. laws and policies to ensure that the United States remains a beacon and a haven for persons fleeing political oppression, while assuring appropriate admission standards are maintained.

6. Service to Country. Place those foreign persons who are lawfully present in the country and who serve honorably in the Armed Forces of the United States on a faster, surer track to U.S. citizenship.

Future Saint

Amen!

Now perhaps someone can explain the difference between this little Christian girl and the little Islamo-Nazis in the post below to Christiane Amanpour.

Future Mujahideen

Hello, and welcome to Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week! Created by David Horowitz, it started this morning. So in honor of this momentus occasion I had to post the above video of Muslim children which I found on Little Green Footballs' blog.

There are a few things I find disturbing about the video, not limited to the fact that children are being indoctrinated into a Hitler-Youth type cult of hatred and violence. One is that it looks like any normal tumbling or even karate class, minus the guns. Another is that...well,...how can I say this? A few of the children looked awfully white. One or two even had red hair. I only mention this (political correctness requires me to explain, though I really don't think I should have to) because we have almost always been able to tell the Muslim terrorists by their Middle Eastern features. Now it appears they could look like just about anybody--an advantage once shared by the IRA. This would come as a relief to those who look like Islamo-Fascists but don't think like them. But it may throw a monkey wrench in the profiling process....

Republican Debate In Orlando

Tonight's debate in Orlando, FL was a very lively one with fireworks-a-plenty. It started out with Chris Wallace playing let's-you-and-him-fight in which both Giuliani and Romney were presented with quotes about them from Fred Thompson which were critical in nature. They responded to Fred who responded back. The exchange was revealing about the inconsistencies in the conservatism of both Giuliani and Romney, while Fred responded well to Giuliani's attack about Tort reform.

Everyone but Giuliani and Ron Paul looked better than usual tonight. Rudy didn't look horrible, but didn't seem to measure up to past debates. No doubt he wasn't expecting Fred to be so aggressive.

Fred Thompson had a good night tonight with answers that were more clear and specific than the previous debate. And the final question of the debate directed at Fred's so-called "laziness" was answered with pleasure and wit by Fred himself, who gave a very brief biography of his experience and hurdles throughout his life, and in doing so revealed the ridiculous nature of the question. Artfully done.

But it was not Fred Thompson, nor was it Mike Huckabee, nor Tancredo, nor even Romney (who did very well on the health insurance question) who won tonight's debate, in my humble opinion. No, it was McCain...again. His answers were direct and to-the-point and at times very humorous. His comments about Hillary Clinton proposing a Woodstock music museum were very noteworthy: I wasn't there. I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time. The last part being a reference to his stay at the Hanoi Hilton as a POW.

McCain's ability to shine in a debate disturbs me. All but written off when several key members of his campaign staff abandoned him, he has risen in the polls over the past few months due to his nothing-to-lose attitude and feisty demeanor at debates. I really don't think he has the patience or mindset to be president. Nor does his record reflect the consistent conservatism he claims to have---see McCain-Feingold, Amnesty Bill, and Keating Five just to name a few. The only thing about him which lends confidence (to me, at least) is his ability to manage a war. Every time he disagreed with President Bush on war policy, McCain was proven right. But that alone is not reason enough to elect someone to the highest office.

If more candidates drop out perhaps we'll have debates with more than a one minute answer period. That would help Fred a lot. He doesn't seem to take well to the shot-gun approach. But he may get the hang of it before someone else calls it quits. I look forward to seeing Fred in the next debate.

I'm Back....Sort Of

Haven't posted for a bit due to the presence of a stubborn Trojan virus KillAV, which forced me to format the entire hard drive and reinstall XP. And if you ever had to reinstall Windows XP Media Edition you know just how painful that can be.

Things still aren't looking quite right on my computer's display, so I need to spend even more time on fixing things. In the meantime, please feel free to read the Fred widget to your left for Fred news (updated as it happens), as well as the NRA feed below that to see who's trying to trample our 2nd Amendment rights.

I will be posting more exciting news and commentary soon!

Revealing....Very Revealing

Write a caption for this by clicking on "comments" below....if you dare.

Bad News Good...Good News Not News....??????

The above video clip is from Howard Kurtz's show on CNN called "Reliable Sources." In it we see Robin Wright of the Washington Post and Barbara Starr of CNN rationalize why good news out of Iraq is buried, while bad news is news worth reporting.

Noel Sheppard of News Busters points out a couple of recent examples as to why this reasoning is so hypocritical:

[No such moral conundrum existed last month when media predicted a looming recession after the Labor Department announced a surprising decline in non-farm payrolls that ended up being revised up four weeks later to show an increase.

And, in the middle of a three and a half-year bull run in stocks, such "journalists" have no quandary predicting a bear market every time the Dow Jones Industrial Average falls a few hundred points.]

Read the rest of the article here.

Does anyone not realize that the real reason to suppress good news from Iraq is to keep President Bush's approval ratings low? Was this not the same reason the big three networks declared they would never again show video of the 9-11 attacks and the WTC crashing to the ground? I believe the official reason given for the latter was that it would be too upsetting for viewers. But we know the real reason was that it would add to President Bush's popularity and give him a mandate for responding forcefully---which would insure his reelection. After all, since when did the major networks give a hoot about our sensibilities? Read my posting below about being DONE with CBS. But I digress...

(Hat tip to LGF)

I Am So DONE With CBS

While I'm out on the road I don't watch much TV; and I don't watch it for the simple reason that I don't keep one in my truck. Because of this there are some shows many people watch that I haven't seen in years, like 60 Minutes on the CBS Network for instance.

Tonight Steve Kroft interviewed Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on 60 Minutes for the simple reason that Justice Thomas has written a new book. I cannot imagine any other reason he would appear on that show and undergo the typical liberal line of questioning, except for something like a book release. I won't bore you with details, except to say that Kroft interrupted his interview to remind us viewers that if another justice with Thomas's point of view lands on the Supreme Court, abortion would likely be outlawed in 40% of the United States (with the overturning of Roe vs. Wade). How nice of Steve Kroft to remind us of that. Good thing he's looking out for his audience. I guess it's up to the rest of us to look out for the unborn.

After the interview Andy Rooney whined at length about state mottoes on license plates. I guess you last as long as Andy has when you never try to tackle something bigger than yourself. Actually that isn't too fair. Andy Rooney was a war correspondent in World War 2, back when it was okay for the US to win wars. And those bold comments about Mel Gibson's The Passion Of The Christ were just that, if not downright foolish. But there is no fool like an old fool (he's 88 years old)--Now he's doing fluff for the liberal Main Stream Media.

Just when I was going to turn off the TV a very interesting show started: Cold Case. Since I remembered police drama being rather entertaining I decided to hang around and watch...much to my chagrin. The show's title is somewhat self-explanatory in that five homicide detectives dig up unsolved cases from long ago and use today's technology and science to solve them. Sounds like a pretty good premise for gripping drama. But tonight's episode was nothing short of Christian bashing.

We learn that a girl found dead at the beginning of the show had a reputation for promiscuity before joining a small Christian group based upon chastity. As the show progresses and clues are found we come to understand that the murderer HAD to be someone from that group. As each one gets interviewed we learn something about that group member that flies in the face of their faith, much to the delight of the detectives who seem to enjoy pointing out their hypocrisy with comments like "Well, that wasn't very Christian of you now was it?"

And as I'm holding my breath waiting for the detectives to ferret out the evil Christian murderer, we are suddenly brought to the realization that all four of the Christian students took part in the murder. They surrounded the poor girl, called her names, and literally threw stones at her until she died, as if this is something Christians do all the time. Seems more like something Muslim fundamentalist students would do under Shari'a Law, but not to CBS. To the creepy eyeball network this lascivious ending was quite fitting and natural.

I have caught CSI shows before in which main characters make Christian bashing comments; and other episodes, too, in which authorities of the church, like nuns or priests, are portrayed as evil doers. Sometimes those shows have Christians who cannot respond to the simplest criticism against their faith (usually due to the script writers own ignorance of scripture, I suppose). Anyway, to me it was the last straw. I hereby proclaim that under no circumstances will I ever watch that hideously secular and anti-Christian network again.

And if the rest of you care to join me in this boycott you are more than welcome. Read a book. Go for a walk. Learn to tell jokes. Play a board game with your family. Get to know your neighbors. Get involved in evening church activities. Take the kids with you. Let them grow socially and spiritually.

From The Land Of Obama...

From the Chicago Sun Times yesterday:

First Jell-O, now Santa

OAK LAWN School district considers banning traditions seen as offensive to Muslims

September 28, 2007

BY ANGELA CAPUTO Daily Southtown

So long, Halloween parade. Farewell, Santa's gift shop.

The holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn schools this year after complaints that the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students.

Final decisions on which of the festivities will be axed will fall to the principals at each of Ridgeland School District 122's five schools, Supt. Tom Smyth said.

Parents expect that the announcement is going to add to the tension that has been building since officials agreed earlier this month to change the lunch menu to exclude items containing pork to accommodate Muslim students. News that Jell-O was struck from the menu caused such a stir that officials have agreed to bring it back. Gelatin is often made with tissue or bones of pigs or other animals.

That controversy now appears to have been been dwarfed by the holiday debate, which became so acrimonious Wednesday that police were called to Columbus Manor School to intervene in a shouting match among parents.

"It's difficult when you change the school's culture," said Columbus Manor Principal Sandy Robertson.

Elizabeth Zahdan, a mother of three District 122 students, says she took her concerns to the school board this month, not because she wanted to do away with the traditions, but rather to make them more inclusive. "I only wanted them modified to represent everyone," she said.

Nixing them isn't the response she was looking for. "Now the kids are not being educated about other people," she said.

For the complete article click here.

Just what makes so many of us bend over backwards to please (or appease) the Muslims in our communities? Is it our good nature? There may be some of that. Or is it simply FEAR?

All over the world Muslims have non-Muslims dancing on strings because of their fear of the violent overreaction of Muslims. We saw the horrible violence in the revenge-killing of Van Gogh and in the reaction to the display of political cartoons portraying Mohammad in rather unflattering ways. We also saw it in the crazy response to offhand comments made by Pope Benedict, which were taken out of context, in the form of nuns being set afire.

The fear response in the West to Muslim violence has been for many countries to withdraw troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan and to appease Muslims minorities in Western countries at nearly every turn. You can read more examples of the latter in Fallaci's The Force Of Reason and in Mark Steyn's America Alone. Really, it's as if a bully moved into the neighborhood---NO,...it's as if some kind of MAFIA moved its base of operations into our neighborhoods, extorting shopkeepers to sell Muslim products and taking "offensive" Christian products off the shelf. And now they're telling us which holidays we can celebrate.

What's next, I wonder? Knocking crosses off of church steeples because they offend Muslims? Or the requirement that every American city broadcast the Muslim "call to prayer" over loud speakers five times a day, and that we all stop what we're doing while the prayers commence? Don't get me wrong, though. I'm all for Freedom of Religion! As far as I'm concerned they can practice their religion whenever they want and however they wish....within reason--the same reason that limits my religion. But don't deny my right to eat jello, or deny my rights to corrupt and commercialize my religion by celebrating Santa Claus (the latter being as close as Christianity is allowed in public schools).

The Pew Research Center did a poll recently of Muslims in America and found that American Muslims have mostly mainstream views, and that only a minority would ever approve of suicide bombing for any reason. It is these mainstream Muslims that deserve at least partial credit for there being no major terrorist attack in the US since 9-11. Many have supplied much needed intelligence by reporting on their more extreme neighbors to American authorities.

However Pew also found that younger Muslims are far more devout and radical than their more reasonable parents. One can infer that the older ones have actually lived in suppressive societies and lost their taste for Shari'a, while the younger ones were born here and enticed by the mystique, though the report doesn't actually say this.

I don't believe we'll ever have to send the Muslims back home. We simply need to grow a backbone and treat Muslims the same as we treat ourselves, or at least treat Christians with as much reverence as Muslims are treated. That would be nice.

Why I Like Fred Thompson

From Fred Thompson's official website []:

[McLean, VA - Senator Fred Thompson issued the following statement today regarding Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's appearance this afternoon at Columbia University:

"Columbia University gave a public forum today to a tyrant to spread his lies and deceit. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a mockery of free speech by standing in front of an auditorium of academicians and students and denying the existence of the Holocaust and his deadly intentions toward Israel."

"I find it ironic that Iran's president accepted an invitation to speak at Columbia University, since students who dissent on Iranian campuses are not met with debate, they are met by a gun and imprisonment. A few months ago, eight college students were imprisoned in Iran's notorious Evin Prison for publishing articles and cartoons critical of Iran's government in a student-run newspaper. The Evin facility has been described as Iran's 'most feared prison' and is known to stone women to death. We need to do our best to empower freedom-loving people throughout Iran." ]

Fred Thompson seems to have a Reagan-like ability to put the situation, no matter what it is, in its proper perspective. I would think that even those students who applauded Ahmadinejad yesterday at Columbia University would have second thoughts about their cheer-leading behavior after reading Fred's quote. But I wouldn't count on too many of them reading it, since they're so cloistered in their own liberal "utopia" where dissenting opinion is smothered and the speakers treated abhorrently.

These kids aren't stupid. They simply lack life experience. A man like Ahmadinejad can show up and spin a yarn cloaking his evil, and the students eat it up because they feel betrayed by those whose role it was to protect us. This, even though it wasn't long ago that Yasser Arafat expressed desires for peace to OUR ears while steadfastly calling for the death of Israel to the ears of his own people. And we know how that turned out. This time it may turn out with a nuclear attack on the United States and/or Israel. What a shame that recent history is lost on young, angry, naive children.

The President of Columbia University should've known this before inviting such a creature to speak on campus, giving the "stinky yak" both international credibility as well as an overconfidence from hearing cheers from those students, in spite of Bollinger's supurb introduction speech. I wonder what Ahmadinejad must have thought upon hearing so much support from those kids... and how will it affect his policy toward us in the future?

___________________________________________

UPDATE: Sept 29, 2007----- Ahmadinejad returns home to a hero's welcome.

"Dream Act" A Nightmare For America

I knew that Congress would try to pass immigration reform piecemeal eventually, but I had not fathomed they would try it so soon. Perhaps they see their own mortality as office holders (due to historically low approval ratings) and are desperate to get it done before next year's election.

This latest installment is proposed by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D) and is called the Dream Act, which allows illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition for college, while the rest of us have to pay the significantly higher out-of-state fee if we live in neighboring states. This is especially incredulous to American military families who have to relocate frequently and cannot qualify for in-state tuition. Would you believe 10 states allow illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition without proof of residency NOW???

Anyone who is here illegally can claim to have been here since age 16 (no documentation required!) and qualify for a conditional green card,...which will make them eligible for a regular green card,...which will allow them to get green cards for their families in the "old country." And so on and so on...

This latest shamnesty attempt is being attached (Senate Amendment 2237) to the Department of Defence Authorization Bill by Durbin and his co-sponsors:

Sen Hagel, Chuck [NE]202-224-4224;

Sen Lugar, Richard G. [IN]202-224-4814

Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]202-224-4242

Sen Obama, Barack [IL]202-224-2854

Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT]202-224-4041

Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA]202-224-3841

Sen Kerry, John F. [MA]202-224-2742

Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI]202-224-5323

Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]202-224-4451

Sen Bayh, Evan [IN]202-224-5623

Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]202-224-4744

Sen Murray, Patty [WA]202-224-2621

Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA]202-224-3553

Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA]202-224-3441

Sen Salazar, Ken [CO]202-224-5852

Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT]202-224-2823

(These lists courtesy of Michelle Malkin, who has fax numbers, too.)

And as you can see they are a list of the usual suspects, most of whose phone numbers you may already have attached to your refrigerator from past senate battles. Make use of them. These people are supposed to be working for us,...not MoveOn.org or Mexico.

And here is Michelle Malkin's list of wafflers who voted no on the illegal alien shamnesty bill in June, but have not yet pledged to vote no on the DREAM Act amnesty:

Phone them by contacting the Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121.

Alaska: Murkowski, Stevens

Arkansas: Pryor

Florida: Martinez

Idaho: Crapo

Indiana: Bayh

Iowa: Grassley, Harkin

Kansas: Brownback

Louisiana: Landrieu

Maine: Collins

Michigan: Stabenow

Minnesota: Coleman

Mississippi: Cochran

Missouri: McCaskill

Montana: Baucus, Tester

Nebraska: Nelson (Ben)

Nevada: Ensign

New Hampshire: Sununu

New Mexico: Domenici

North Dakota: Dorgan

Ohio: Voinovich

Oregon: Smith

South Dakota: *Johnson

Texas: Hutchison

Utah: Hatch

Vermont: Sanders

Virginia: Warner, Webb

West Virginia: Byrd, Rockefeller

Wyoming: Barrasso

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has postponed the vote until next week. 41 no votes are needed. You know what to do.

_____________

UPDATE, Friday, September 28, 2007: Reid pulls Dream Act from Defense Bill. Good work, people!

Fred Thompson's Stern Statement On Iranian Leader's Visit To UN

Today Fred Thompson had this to say in Dallas, TX:

"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of the world's premier terrorist state, is speaking before the United Nations next week. He has also asked to visit Ground Zero. If I were President of the United States none of this would have been an issue--I wouldn't have let him into the country in the first place.

"It's time for the world to finally send a stern message to Iran. Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of Israel, is supporting terrorist groups throughout the Middle East, and is responsible for supplying weapons to extremists who are killing US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. And with Iran's ongoing pursuit of nuclear weapons and development of long-range missiles, that country is a threat not only to the region and our allies, but to the entire free world. It's time for the United Nations to take more serious action against this terror regime.

"The Security Council needs to begin placing comprehensive, multilateral sanctions on Iran's economy, to include banning foreign investment, stopping export credits to companies doing business there, and prohibiting any business dealings with Iran's Revolutionary Guard. Iranian banks should be denied access to international banking and financial institutions, and World Bank loans should be suspended. All arms sales to Iran need to be halted. And travel by Iranian officials should be stopped and their assets frozen. Cutting off Iranian access to refined gas imports will certainly get Tehran's attention and cause them to reconsider their priorities. If the UN can't reach agreement on these measures due to continued Russian, Chinese or others' intransigence, then we need to work directly with our allies and go around the UN roadblock.

"The international community has been negotiating with Iran for more than four years to no avail in seeking to halt the mullahs' nuclear program. I believe strongly in diplomacy, but it has its limits, especially when the other side is made up of extremists. If we don't get serious and act now--before they build atomic weapons--the stakes will be even higher, and our hand much weaker. The United States and its allies cannot afford to let that happen. As president, I certainly will not."

Photo borrowed from Fox News

Update On Ahmadinejad's Possible "Visit" To Ground Zero

After learning that the New York City Port Authority banned Ahmadinejad from Ground Zero, it's been reported he may try to visit the site Monday morning, anyway. But NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne said today that any visit by the Iranian leader to the Ground Zero area would be "opposed" by the NYPD based on security reasons. So Ahmadinejad would not be able to lay a wreath on or near the "foot print" of the towers. Read the extended article in the New York Sun.

Word has it that Columbia University has invited Ahmadinejad to speak on Monday. I wonder if he'll be embraced by Bush-hating liberals or heckled off stage like the Minutemen were. My bet is on the former. After all they love Castro, don't they?

Congressman Jack Murtha Cuts And Runs...Into Elevator

Video courtesy of Hot Air.

In an era where apologies are all-important, especially to Democrats, I wouldn't hold my breath in waiting for Murtha to apologize for condemning accused Marines before their case was even brought to trial. Now that the charges are in the process of being dropped, he'll be ducking into a lot of elevators to avoid answering for his rash comments.

And don't expect condemnation from the other Democrats, either. Murtha has built up a lot of clout since his ABSCAM days. So much so that Speaker Nancy Pelosi would back him for the position of House Majority Leader. I'm almost sorry Hoyer got it instead. Congress would have an even lower approval rating than they do now.

Fred On The Issues

Here's a good interview with Fred (about 8 minutes) on a variety of topics:




Hat tip: BFFT Team.

Banned From Ground Zero

Okay, we can stop getting all worked up over what appeared to be the likelihood of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's visit to Ground Zero, following his planned visit to New York City on Sunday for a speech to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday. Mark the latter in your calendar if you have time to swing by and shout your displeasure. I only regret my time off isn't until Thursday. That would've been fun. Read more about it here.

Ahmadinejad has always been a sponsor or participant of terrorism throughout his "career" in Islamic-style, hate-mongering, starting well before the 444-day hostage crisis. Because of this, former Governor and current Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney asked the President of the General Assembly to revoke the invite to speak, and has called for an indictment to be presented to the Iranian hostage-taker upon arrival on American soil. Don't count on it happening.

Ahmadinejad Shows His Evil Hand

Y. Mansharof and A. Savyon of MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute) have compiled recent speeches made by Ahmadinejad (the apocalyptic, Hitler-wannabe) which betray his true intentions, and hopefully puts things in perspective for those who wish to appease Iran:

Escalation in the Positions of Iranian President Ahmadinejad– Special Report

Introduction

In several recent speeches, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad outlined Iran's nuclear policy and set forth his vision regarding the interrelationship between Iran and the West.

In a speech about Iran's nuclear program, Ahmadinejad declared that Iran has become a global power, and that it would place its nuclear technology at the service of those determined to confront the U.S. and other Western countries. He announced that Iran was now successfully operating over 3,000 centrifuges, continued to downplay the impact of the U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran, and reiterated Iran's official stance of refusal to freeze its nuclear activity. Ahmadinejad also harshly censured senior Iranian officials who had called for compromise with the West on Iran's nuclear program out of fear of a possible U.S. attack on Iran, hinting that they were traitors.

In addition, Ahmadinejad declared that today, the world was at an historic turning point. The history of the West, he said, had reached its end, and the appearance of the Hidden Imam, heralding the era of Islamic Shi'ite rule, was nigh. Thus, he called on the nations of the world to rise up against the hegemony of the West, headed by the U.S., and predicted the imminent collapse of Israel, which he called "Satan's standard-bearer."

Read the rest by clicking here.

Something needs to be done about Iran.

In June of this year Fred Thompson said the following:

"Iran's poor economy and domestic opposition to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could prompt "regime change."

"We have a lot of friends in Iran who apparently feel their leader is trying to drive them off of a militant, religious extremism cliff," he said.

"Some of these problems might work in our favor especially if we ratcheted the sanctions a bit more. I would think that certainly a blockade would be a possibility if we could get the international cooperation to do that.

"I think regime change might be an option ... but you can't take the military option off the table."

In the mean time, perhaps Diane Sawyer could fly back over to Iran and ask the little kook more questions about his I-Pod. Don't forget your headscarf, Diane. No telling what that suppressed freak will do if he sees your pretty blond hair exposed.

Hat tip: Noisy Room

Picture borrowed from: Moonbattery