All of our posts are no longer here. Check out our latest posts over here.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Remembering To Listen
“Putting yourself on the line means revealing yourself for who you truly are. Taking a stand for what you believe in. Allowing your friends, family and complete strangers the rare opportunity to see amazing possibilities for themselves because of who you are being and what we are all capable of doing. It means being UNSTOPPABLE and FEARLESS! “
Jeffrey Schecter
Currently playing Mike in the Broadway Revival of A Chorus Line
Schoenfeld Theater
It would an amazing opportunity for all of our students to witness the revival of A Chorus Line on Broadway this autumn. Well, the subject matter and mature themes make the material more appropriate for our high school juniors and seniors and university students. The ideals of individual freedom, competitiveness, tolerance, and responsibility are all illuminated in this classic Broadway show from 1975. The creative energies and artistic authenticity found in A Chorus Line provide a compelling story laced with earthy songs that have the flavor and spirit of the middle 1970’s in urban America.
Music and theater provide a limitless forum for teaching many life lessons. Practical lessons, history lessons, lessons in critical thinking, and the lesson of working productively with others to achieve a goal are encompassed in the production of live theater. These essential lessons in education are not contemplated in any part of any piece of legislation or statute.
As one of the world’s greatest settings for collaboration, live theater challenges and educates. The street-wise and salty characters of A Chorus Line bring a cavalcade of emotions as they relate their educational experiences, both good and bad. No character is truly shy and as they reveal the days of their lives, these multi-faceted characters provide useful insights and reminders for teachers in across the spectrum of education. We work with real people.
These rich characters remind us all to listen. Even though our students often lack proper perspective, and while we must provide mentoring and guidance, we must listen to their perceptions of reality in order to address their educational needs. We, as professionals, must guide their thinking and encourage them to use a variety of resources to formulate standards and create values for living.
We never know what our students might remember and present on stage someday. Our influence plays out on the stages of their lives every day. In an age of truncated assessment methods and measurements, the authentic nature of recollections by former students could be a useful tool for all educators striving for professional excellence.
Jeffrey Schecter
Currently playing Mike in the Broadway Revival of A Chorus Line
Schoenfeld Theater
It would an amazing opportunity for all of our students to witness the revival of A Chorus Line on Broadway this autumn. Well, the subject matter and mature themes make the material more appropriate for our high school juniors and seniors and university students. The ideals of individual freedom, competitiveness, tolerance, and responsibility are all illuminated in this classic Broadway show from 1975. The creative energies and artistic authenticity found in A Chorus Line provide a compelling story laced with earthy songs that have the flavor and spirit of the middle 1970’s in urban America.
Music and theater provide a limitless forum for teaching many life lessons. Practical lessons, history lessons, lessons in critical thinking, and the lesson of working productively with others to achieve a goal are encompassed in the production of live theater. These essential lessons in education are not contemplated in any part of any piece of legislation or statute.
As one of the world’s greatest settings for collaboration, live theater challenges and educates. The street-wise and salty characters of A Chorus Line bring a cavalcade of emotions as they relate their educational experiences, both good and bad. No character is truly shy and as they reveal the days of their lives, these multi-faceted characters provide useful insights and reminders for teachers in across the spectrum of education. We work with real people.
These rich characters remind us all to listen. Even though our students often lack proper perspective, and while we must provide mentoring and guidance, we must listen to their perceptions of reality in order to address their educational needs. We, as professionals, must guide their thinking and encourage them to use a variety of resources to formulate standards and create values for living.
We never know what our students might remember and present on stage someday. Our influence plays out on the stages of their lives every day. In an age of truncated assessment methods and measurements, the authentic nature of recollections by former students could be a useful tool for all educators striving for professional excellence.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Oh no! Rosie Shows Some Skin...
This is just a little bit too much information…
BURBANK, Calif. - Rosie O’Donnell gave Julian McMahon an eyeful when they were shooting a sex scene for FX Networks’ “Nip/Tuck.” She tells “Access Hollywood” they had her wear a tube-top that they would shoot around. But O’Donnell says they kept yelling “cut” because a bit of the tube-top could be seen in the shot. So, she fixed that by pulling down the top.
She says McMahon, who plays plastic surgeon Dr. Christian Troy on the show, looked down and told her “nice boobs,” adding, “but he was so nice.” O’Donnell says she would “love to do that show again and again and again.”
O’Donnell’s episode of “Nip/Tuck” airs Oct. 3. She plays a woman who has just won $381 million in a Powerball lottery and goes to the South Beach plastic surgery practice for her whole family.
Wow! For more insanity, check out the Rosie Blog. Maybe Rosie can have brunch at Sara Beth’s West Side with Hugo, Cindy, Danny, and other liberal activists.
Rosie and Joy bash Bush for the Chavez metldown.
BURBANK, Calif. - Rosie O’Donnell gave Julian McMahon an eyeful when they were shooting a sex scene for FX Networks’ “Nip/Tuck.” She tells “Access Hollywood” they had her wear a tube-top that they would shoot around. But O’Donnell says they kept yelling “cut” because a bit of the tube-top could be seen in the shot. So, she fixed that by pulling down the top.
She says McMahon, who plays plastic surgeon Dr. Christian Troy on the show, looked down and told her “nice boobs,” adding, “but he was so nice.” O’Donnell says she would “love to do that show again and again and again.”
O’Donnell’s episode of “Nip/Tuck” airs Oct. 3. She plays a woman who has just won $381 million in a Powerball lottery and goes to the South Beach plastic surgery practice for her whole family.
Wow! For more insanity, check out the Rosie Blog. Maybe Rosie can have brunch at Sara Beth’s West Side with Hugo, Cindy, Danny, and other liberal activists.
Rosie and Joy bash Bush for the Chavez metldown.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
The Carter/Chavez Alliance
Jimmy Carter has major issues. If “60 Minutes,” “Prime Time,” and “Dateline NBC” would all start exposing the details of his absurdity, Jimmy an Rosalyn would be forced into the retirement in Plains that the American intended for him when they voted him out of office. As he rotates from North Korea to Venezuela, from friendships with Hugo Chavez, Cindy Sheehan, Howard Dean, Michael Moore, and Kim Jung IL, Jimmy Carter damages the credibility of the United States every time he opens his mouth. When he side swipes President Bush at the funeral for Coretta Scott King, he shows the lack of class that began to tarnish our national portrait in 1976.
Jimmy Carter is a disgrace. We’ve said so before, and we’ll continue saying so as long as he merits the criticism. If you want to learn more, read Steven Hayward’s book The Real Jimmy Carter. Carter panted after the Nobel Peace Prize for years, seeing it as a means of gaining official redemption for his humiliation at the hands of the voters in 1980. He lobbied quietly behind the scenes for years to get the prize, and finally met with success in 2002 when the left-wing Nobel Prize committee saw an opportunity to use Carter as a way of attacking President Bush and embarrassing the United States. The head of the Nobel Prize committee openly admitted that this was their motivation in selecting Carter. Any other ex-president would have refused to be a part of such an obvious anti-American intrigue, but not Jimmy. Here we should observe that Carter conceives himself much more as a citizen of the world than as a citizen of the United States, and I think it is highly revealing that Carter is most popular overseas in those nations that hate America the most, such as Syria, where they lined the streets cheering for Carter when he visited.
Uncanny Carter poked his head up this week on Larry King Live to accuse President Bush of supporting torture. In other words, he accused the President of breaking the law again. Hell, if Nancy Pelosi gets elected Speaker of the House, she can appoint this admirer of Hugo Chavez to lead her charge against the White House. The team of Carter, Chavez, Pelosi, Murtha, Dean, Reid and Company sound like a really elect-able ticket this Fall.
Jack Kinsella has written a marvelous article demonstrating the methods Carter used in presiding over the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Thirty years after being elected President of the United States, Jimmy Carter is still as incompetent today.
During his four years in the White House, Jimmy Carter presided over the worst economic downturn since World War II, allowed a bunch of thugs to seize our embassy and our citizens, and supported Philippine dictator Fernando Marcos, Pakistani General Zia al Huq, Saudi King Faud and many other dictators. But Jimmy Carter was a much better president than he is an ex-president.
In fact, Jimmy Carter holds the hands-down record for being the worst ex-president the United States has ever known. His post-presidential meddling in foreign affairs has cost America dearly, both in terms of international credibility and international prestige.
Read More...
Jimmy Carter is a disgrace. We’ve said so before, and we’ll continue saying so as long as he merits the criticism. If you want to learn more, read Steven Hayward’s book The Real Jimmy Carter. Carter panted after the Nobel Peace Prize for years, seeing it as a means of gaining official redemption for his humiliation at the hands of the voters in 1980. He lobbied quietly behind the scenes for years to get the prize, and finally met with success in 2002 when the left-wing Nobel Prize committee saw an opportunity to use Carter as a way of attacking President Bush and embarrassing the United States. The head of the Nobel Prize committee openly admitted that this was their motivation in selecting Carter. Any other ex-president would have refused to be a part of such an obvious anti-American intrigue, but not Jimmy. Here we should observe that Carter conceives himself much more as a citizen of the world than as a citizen of the United States, and I think it is highly revealing that Carter is most popular overseas in those nations that hate America the most, such as Syria, where they lined the streets cheering for Carter when he visited.
Uncanny Carter poked his head up this week on Larry King Live to accuse President Bush of supporting torture. In other words, he accused the President of breaking the law again. Hell, if Nancy Pelosi gets elected Speaker of the House, she can appoint this admirer of Hugo Chavez to lead her charge against the White House. The team of Carter, Chavez, Pelosi, Murtha, Dean, Reid and Company sound like a really elect-able ticket this Fall.
Jack Kinsella has written a marvelous article demonstrating the methods Carter used in presiding over the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Thirty years after being elected President of the United States, Jimmy Carter is still as incompetent today.
During his four years in the White House, Jimmy Carter presided over the worst economic downturn since World War II, allowed a bunch of thugs to seize our embassy and our citizens, and supported Philippine dictator Fernando Marcos, Pakistani General Zia al Huq, Saudi King Faud and many other dictators. But Jimmy Carter was a much better president than he is an ex-president.
In fact, Jimmy Carter holds the hands-down record for being the worst ex-president the United States has ever known. His post-presidential meddling in foreign affairs has cost America dearly, both in terms of international credibility and international prestige.
Read More...
Friday, September 22, 2006
Blogging For America
The issues loom larger today, and the battle has grown more fierce, but my reasons for starting to blog are still the same: people living the American dream of a life filled with a career, family, and friends are easily duped into convenient and accessible thinking patterns that are promoted and reinforced on a daily basis by a fuming, fanatical, and lopsided mainstream media. The elite media, clustered in the insular urban culture of the eastern seaboard often have no daily balancing perspective from friends and associates who haven’t joined the involuntary fraternity of artificial liberal intellectuals. This casual way of thinking, with its constantly changing code of moral equivalency, and a slippery, sliding scale of values is a comfortable fit for many Americans. The liberals and the media are always there hoping that a lot of voters want to take the easy way out.
The vacancy of ideas prevalent in this liberal theory of existence has become finely tuned in these last six years, as liberals have had to assume no responsibility for anything they say as a minority party. The media rarely holds any of these leftists accountable for any of their contrived mantras. The current cast of characters, forming the Marxist, Leninist wing of the liberal party, is forced to ratchet up their rhetoric every week to maintain the media spotlight that they crave.
Jack Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, and John Kerry have become outright extremists in their hatred of George Bush, and they have used this premise as their most commonly articulated theme. They espouse the same sentiments as Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and have paved the way for these rogue dictators to ridicule our President and our nation on our soil. If Tim Russert were an honest journalist, he would use this Sunday’s Meet The Press to place statements of Pelosi, Dean, Kerry and Murtha side by side with the text of the Chavez piece and demonstrate the similarities of the tone and the language. If you include Cindy Sheehan, Danny Glover and others who side with Chavez and Ahmadinejad, the November election would be starting to look like a rout for the President and his party. Rest assured, if the shoe were on the other foot, Dick Durbin, Tim Russert and George Stephanapoulos would all be comparing the statements of republicans with these terrorists.
Undoubtedly, the media will be too preoccupied over the weekend with the news that Bush supports torture. This is another manufactured plotline that has no truth and comes directly from the liberal talking points for this election cycle. The liberal media and their colleagues in the House of Representatives are highly rehearsed in the endless repetition of false statements in a desperate effort to give these mantras the aura of truth. The amazing ability of the voters to see the transparent efforts of phony liberals in Washington is always forgotten until the votes are tallied. Let’s hope that this election cycle is no different.
Wake up America! Be certain that you are registered to vote, and go vote with our national security in mind. Bush/Cheney and Company have kept us safe for more than five years. They are leading a battle in Iraq which Osama Bin Laden calls the “first front” in the war with the Islamic fascists. Murtha, Pelosi and the party of cut and run can’t be put in charge of anything; they are so far left that they have almost left America.
Bullwinkle Blog, Stop The ACLU, Stuck on Stupid, The Conservative Cat, Outside the Beltway,
Perish The Thought, Adam's Blog, Hard Astarboard, Michelle Malkin, Betsy's Page,
The vacancy of ideas prevalent in this liberal theory of existence has become finely tuned in these last six years, as liberals have had to assume no responsibility for anything they say as a minority party. The media rarely holds any of these leftists accountable for any of their contrived mantras. The current cast of characters, forming the Marxist, Leninist wing of the liberal party, is forced to ratchet up their rhetoric every week to maintain the media spotlight that they crave.
Jack Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, and John Kerry have become outright extremists in their hatred of George Bush, and they have used this premise as their most commonly articulated theme. They espouse the same sentiments as Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and have paved the way for these rogue dictators to ridicule our President and our nation on our soil. If Tim Russert were an honest journalist, he would use this Sunday’s Meet The Press to place statements of Pelosi, Dean, Kerry and Murtha side by side with the text of the Chavez piece and demonstrate the similarities of the tone and the language. If you include Cindy Sheehan, Danny Glover and others who side with Chavez and Ahmadinejad, the November election would be starting to look like a rout for the President and his party. Rest assured, if the shoe were on the other foot, Dick Durbin, Tim Russert and George Stephanapoulos would all be comparing the statements of republicans with these terrorists.
Undoubtedly, the media will be too preoccupied over the weekend with the news that Bush supports torture. This is another manufactured plotline that has no truth and comes directly from the liberal talking points for this election cycle. The liberal media and their colleagues in the House of Representatives are highly rehearsed in the endless repetition of false statements in a desperate effort to give these mantras the aura of truth. The amazing ability of the voters to see the transparent efforts of phony liberals in Washington is always forgotten until the votes are tallied. Let’s hope that this election cycle is no different.
Wake up America! Be certain that you are registered to vote, and go vote with our national security in mind. Bush/Cheney and Company have kept us safe for more than five years. They are leading a battle in Iraq which Osama Bin Laden calls the “first front” in the war with the Islamic fascists. Murtha, Pelosi and the party of cut and run can’t be put in charge of anything; they are so far left that they have almost left America.
Bullwinkle Blog, Stop The ACLU, Stuck on Stupid, The Conservative Cat, Outside the Beltway,
Perish The Thought, Adam's Blog, Hard Astarboard, Michelle Malkin, Betsy's Page,
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Ghost Light: Thespis Glow
Keeping the ghost light on to keep the theater from going dark:
The Carnival of Ohio Politics is posted over at Newshound. Take time to read one or two of the interesting articles.
The Carnival of Education is posted at The Median Sib. There are many wonderful articles and topis.
Jay at Stop the ACLU deals with Hugo Chavez's temper tantrum at the UN today. Chavez, Cindy Sheehan's best friend, is a certifiable kook.
AJ Strata says they are handing out huge fig leaves for McCain, Warner and Graham to cover their collective rear ends as the President wins the battle over interogation techniques.
Hot Air has strong evidence from ABC News that the CIA treatment of prisoners has had great success!
MsUnderestimated takes her best shot at Chavez. "Cindy Sheehan should go build her treehouse in Venezuela and live under Hugo as she said before that she’d prefer that to living under President Bush. Goodbye, good riddance, and take the rest off the peace-at-any-price freaks with you." Surely, Chavez will win idiot of the week.
Seth has a theory about the moonbat left. Read the many comments.
The Keeler Political Report has some information on the Ohio senate race, and other news items.
You'll enjoy this Lamont cartoon. It's so true!
The Confederate Yankee has it right on the so-called torture issue.
If you miss Brit Hume's grapevine, you can watch it here.
I'm a little worried about Ted Strickland. Tell the truth Ted is asking for more answers from Ted Strickland.
Check out this Broadway.com story about blogging the previews and opening of A Chorus Line on Broadway.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Update: Carter Quacks Again
After dedicating the latest edition of “Ten Stupid Things Said by Liberals” to Jimmy Carter, our contempt for Jimmy Carter should be obvious. Carter continues to be one of the greatest embarrassments in United States history, so his latest idiocy is no surprise.
In a twisted rhetorical flourish, Carter claims that President Bush supports torture for terrorists. Well, about two-thirds of America would agree with President Bush on that one, and it’s too bad that it isn’t true. If the goons of mad-dogs of the middle east got word that the United States of America would not tolerate their horrid, inhumane actions any longer, some of these bad boys would shrink from the sheer acts of cowardice that have plagued the world for more than twenty five years. Too bad Mr. Carter has it wrong again.
Courtesy of News Max: "We've lost the support and trust and confidence and admiration that we've had for generations," Carter said, adding the administration "has stonewalled so they can continue to perpetrate this illegal punishment."
"They have obviously subverted facts, that has been proven, and subversion of the law is now becoming more and more apparent," he said, referring to the administration's repeated appeals of court rulings concerning the treatment and legal rights of prisoners at the Guantanamo prison in Cuba.
Carter, who has called treatment of detainees at Guantanamo an embarrassment and disgrace, said Americans were less safe since Sept. 11 because Bush mishandled the Iraq war and failed to promote peace efforts between Israel and Palestinians.
Those two factors, he said, "combined to stir up additional animosity and threats of violence not only against us but against allies like Great Britain."
Mr. Carter has no evidence of any illegal punishment. He is purposefully engaging in deceptive word games to bash President Bush, and plays to the moonbats that currently control his party. What is torture Mr. Carter? Lack of a private toilet? Loud music? Forcing a prisoner to stand for several hours? All of the various techniques which have prevented attacks on the United States since 9-11?
President Bush has not engaged in any torture. Torture is already illegal. Wouldn’t the liberal Supreme Court have already struck down the torture if it were happening?
Mr. Carter is every bit as clueless as he was in 1979. The senate and the President are debating the interrogation techniques that will be spelled out as legal to comply with the injudicious ruling of the Supreme Court. Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter should retire (again) to Plains, and stay there with their mouths shut! We’re all for free speech, but not speech that endangers our national security, and gives aid and comfort to the horrendous enemy that threatens our way of life. Carter is nothing more than a useful idiot for every enemy and adversary of the United States of America.
Poor Jimmy Carter, he can’t help it. He was born with the peanut of idiocy in his mouth!
Sam Houston, Moonbat Monitor, More on Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter Quacks Again.
Jimmy Carter Hall of Shame
In a twisted rhetorical flourish, Carter claims that President Bush supports torture for terrorists. Well, about two-thirds of America would agree with President Bush on that one, and it’s too bad that it isn’t true. If the goons of mad-dogs of the middle east got word that the United States of America would not tolerate their horrid, inhumane actions any longer, some of these bad boys would shrink from the sheer acts of cowardice that have plagued the world for more than twenty five years. Too bad Mr. Carter has it wrong again.
Courtesy of News Max: "We've lost the support and trust and confidence and admiration that we've had for generations," Carter said, adding the administration "has stonewalled so they can continue to perpetrate this illegal punishment."
"They have obviously subverted facts, that has been proven, and subversion of the law is now becoming more and more apparent," he said, referring to the administration's repeated appeals of court rulings concerning the treatment and legal rights of prisoners at the Guantanamo prison in Cuba.
Carter, who has called treatment of detainees at Guantanamo an embarrassment and disgrace, said Americans were less safe since Sept. 11 because Bush mishandled the Iraq war and failed to promote peace efforts between Israel and Palestinians.
Those two factors, he said, "combined to stir up additional animosity and threats of violence not only against us but against allies like Great Britain."
Mr. Carter has no evidence of any illegal punishment. He is purposefully engaging in deceptive word games to bash President Bush, and plays to the moonbats that currently control his party. What is torture Mr. Carter? Lack of a private toilet? Loud music? Forcing a prisoner to stand for several hours? All of the various techniques which have prevented attacks on the United States since 9-11?
President Bush has not engaged in any torture. Torture is already illegal. Wouldn’t the liberal Supreme Court have already struck down the torture if it were happening?
Mr. Carter is every bit as clueless as he was in 1979. The senate and the President are debating the interrogation techniques that will be spelled out as legal to comply with the injudicious ruling of the Supreme Court. Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter should retire (again) to Plains, and stay there with their mouths shut! We’re all for free speech, but not speech that endangers our national security, and gives aid and comfort to the horrendous enemy that threatens our way of life. Carter is nothing more than a useful idiot for every enemy and adversary of the United States of America.
Poor Jimmy Carter, he can’t help it. He was born with the peanut of idiocy in his mouth!
Sam Houston, Moonbat Monitor, More on Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter Quacks Again.
Jimmy Carter Hall of Shame
Chasing The Caboose
Last Thursday evening when I arrived at school for a 6-9pm rehearsal, a bewildered looking student was waiting to talk with me. It is routine, if not advantageous, that students seize the time before and after these weeknight rehearsals as an opportunity to talk about the surplus of topics in the mind of a teenager. My role as surrogate parent to many teenagers has its' roots in these talks beginning twenty years ago. For those of you who may not know, we maintain an after school/evening rehearsal schedule that ranges from six hours to over forty hours per week for the select vocal ensemble, dance/choreography, play, or musical rehearsals.
Throughout the last ten years, there has been a push at the school to promote and develop advisory groups as a method of providing a safe and comfortable bonding environment for all of our students. It is believed that students need a strong identity with a "family group" within the school to make them safe, invited, and wanted in the learning environment. I have stated repetitively that our performing arts students are experiencing the most unique and lasting of advisory groups through the length and scope of our program in theater, dance, and singing. The long lasting constructive influence of hours invested in rehearsals and performance has been borne out in the many diverse and flourishing careers of students who experienced the very best of our performing arts programs.
Anyway, the student said that he needed to talk to me about “a lot of things.” The conversation immediately took a turn to the serious as the student announced that he would be transferring to another school beginning the upcoming Monday-in just three days. What was said next shocked me. This well-liked, talented and well adjusted student said that he was experiencing harassment and bullying from a small group of students not involved in performing arts. The student, let’s call him Jim, is also an athlete in addition to being a budding actor/singer/dancer.
Please understand: I am not naïve about bullying in our school, or the many power plays that students pull on each other as they attempt to scrape to the top of the highly insulated world and faux society that dominates the culture at every high school. Students seem to have grown increasingly mean to each other over the last twenty years. I am also regularly startled by the kindness that students demonstrate toward their teachers and fellow students. Both of these behaviors, the mean spirited and vindictive teenager alongside the teenager who truly empathizes with fellow students and faculty members, are displayed on a daily basis, sometimes in the same student.
Jim stated that is harassed for his stature and demeanor on an almost daily basis. After seeking counseling and conferencing with his parents, he had decided to enroll at a parochial school in Dayton. The parochial school has exceedingly limited offerings in the performing arts, and is known for its core basic academic curriculum and for being an oasis from the culturally diverse population that compromises Dayton. This school has a narrow focus, and does an adequate job of educating the privileged students who pass through their doors.
It is a sad day for our school as another student who perceives that he is being harassed leaves our building for another environment. The administration, who practically stopped school for several days to avoid two football players leaving just last year, paid lip service regarding Jim’s departure, but said nothing to the student or his parents. The dual standard of treatment and privileges for athletes and non-athletes has simply been reaffirmed at our school.
Furthermore, there seems to be no plan in place to address the obvious bullying occurring in our school. The basic goal of providing a safe and secure learning environment has not been met. An apathetic attitude by administrators and some teachers creates the artificial ambiance of a productive and healthy school atmosphere. We have failed in our obligation to invite our learners to the show, give them a great seat, and be certain that the show we give them is valuable, participatory by design, and open to all. None of this is to say that the purpose or blueprint of education should be entertainment oriented. The theatrical analogy is simply a convenient method of thinking about keeping our students in the house.
As teachers and administrators, we allow extrinsic events to determine the focus of our professional spotlight. Administrators have the unique role of aiming the spotlight and keeping it shining on school-wide issues that rise to the top.
At our high school, we often have the problem of running to jump on the caboose of the latest “educational fad train” and never finishing the trip. We never bother to decide why we got on the train in the first place or what was good or bad about the train or appraise the quality of the ride. We need to set clear priorities, implement strategies to address the priorities, and utilize pre-designed assessment measurements to determine the merits of the idea or program.
This is the summit of my current thinking and the rationale for my rant today: We need to stop running to catch the caboose, and be proactive in addressing the most over-riding educational concerns in our building. Regardless of the number of committees we may form, or the number of meetings we may hold, we must set priorities, and address these priorities in a professional manner. Several well-respected colleagues have believed for a number of years that many of our students do not feel safe. In this exceedingly pressurized high stakes testing realm that we now know as public education, we must address the primary needs of our students regardless if our legislators or our voters care about the topic or not.
Throughout the last ten years, there has been a push at the school to promote and develop advisory groups as a method of providing a safe and comfortable bonding environment for all of our students. It is believed that students need a strong identity with a "family group" within the school to make them safe, invited, and wanted in the learning environment. I have stated repetitively that our performing arts students are experiencing the most unique and lasting of advisory groups through the length and scope of our program in theater, dance, and singing. The long lasting constructive influence of hours invested in rehearsals and performance has been borne out in the many diverse and flourishing careers of students who experienced the very best of our performing arts programs.
Anyway, the student said that he needed to talk to me about “a lot of things.” The conversation immediately took a turn to the serious as the student announced that he would be transferring to another school beginning the upcoming Monday-in just three days. What was said next shocked me. This well-liked, talented and well adjusted student said that he was experiencing harassment and bullying from a small group of students not involved in performing arts. The student, let’s call him Jim, is also an athlete in addition to being a budding actor/singer/dancer.
Please understand: I am not naïve about bullying in our school, or the many power plays that students pull on each other as they attempt to scrape to the top of the highly insulated world and faux society that dominates the culture at every high school. Students seem to have grown increasingly mean to each other over the last twenty years. I am also regularly startled by the kindness that students demonstrate toward their teachers and fellow students. Both of these behaviors, the mean spirited and vindictive teenager alongside the teenager who truly empathizes with fellow students and faculty members, are displayed on a daily basis, sometimes in the same student.
Jim stated that is harassed for his stature and demeanor on an almost daily basis. After seeking counseling and conferencing with his parents, he had decided to enroll at a parochial school in Dayton. The parochial school has exceedingly limited offerings in the performing arts, and is known for its core basic academic curriculum and for being an oasis from the culturally diverse population that compromises Dayton. This school has a narrow focus, and does an adequate job of educating the privileged students who pass through their doors.
It is a sad day for our school as another student who perceives that he is being harassed leaves our building for another environment. The administration, who practically stopped school for several days to avoid two football players leaving just last year, paid lip service regarding Jim’s departure, but said nothing to the student or his parents. The dual standard of treatment and privileges for athletes and non-athletes has simply been reaffirmed at our school.
Furthermore, there seems to be no plan in place to address the obvious bullying occurring in our school. The basic goal of providing a safe and secure learning environment has not been met. An apathetic attitude by administrators and some teachers creates the artificial ambiance of a productive and healthy school atmosphere. We have failed in our obligation to invite our learners to the show, give them a great seat, and be certain that the show we give them is valuable, participatory by design, and open to all. None of this is to say that the purpose or blueprint of education should be entertainment oriented. The theatrical analogy is simply a convenient method of thinking about keeping our students in the house.
As teachers and administrators, we allow extrinsic events to determine the focus of our professional spotlight. Administrators have the unique role of aiming the spotlight and keeping it shining on school-wide issues that rise to the top.
At our high school, we often have the problem of running to jump on the caboose of the latest “educational fad train” and never finishing the trip. We never bother to decide why we got on the train in the first place or what was good or bad about the train or appraise the quality of the ride. We need to set clear priorities, implement strategies to address the priorities, and utilize pre-designed assessment measurements to determine the merits of the idea or program.
This is the summit of my current thinking and the rationale for my rant today: We need to stop running to catch the caboose, and be proactive in addressing the most over-riding educational concerns in our building. Regardless of the number of committees we may form, or the number of meetings we may hold, we must set priorities, and address these priorities in a professional manner. Several well-respected colleagues have believed for a number of years that many of our students do not feel safe. In this exceedingly pressurized high stakes testing realm that we now know as public education, we must address the primary needs of our students regardless if our legislators or our voters care about the topic or not.
Monday, September 18, 2006
Teacher Blogs...
There is a fascinating article posted at the USA Today that highlights teachers who blog. The account features bloggers that write anonymously and some that blog publicly. These recreational writers all have something in common; they have the need to sound-off with their thoughts, inspirations, frustrations, wisdom, experiences, expertise and rants against the administration. It’s a great (if all too short) column that should be of great interest to all bloggers who teach. Celebrity Bloggers: The Education Wonks, History is Elementary, JoAnne Jacobs, and A Shrewdness of Apes are all featured in the column.
There is a lot to be said after every long day of interacting with the students, colleagues, and administrators. Get ready for the Carnival of Education this Wednesday and read posts from all around the educational blogosphere.
Hat Tip: Board Buzz
Another article at Board Buzz
There is a lot to be said after every long day of interacting with the students, colleagues, and administrators. Get ready for the Carnival of Education this Wednesday and read posts from all around the educational blogosphere.
Hat Tip: Board Buzz
Another article at Board Buzz
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Thespis Journal Exclusive Essay: Misunderestimated Again!
President Bush has used another brilliant master stroke of political genius to put the democrats on the run (they are born to cut and run). The fact that McCain and Company got in the way just adds to the President’s credibility. It’s interesting to note that the most basic of issues in the War on Islamic Fascism continue to mystify the most strident of liberal voices. Since their ideas are superficial and vacant, these liberals have allowed wide openings for a smart leader to repeatedly out maneuver their amateur political grandstanding. Democrats and their friends at Netroots and Moveon.org spent a lot of energy gloating over the misguided decision rendered in June by the Supreme Court awarding broad rights to terrorists who have been captured. The preposterous decision of the court to award rights to illegal enemy combatants provides a unique opportunity for President Bush and his administration.
Now that President Bush has sent his legislation up to the hill, the democrats are left caterwauling. They have used the most common of liberal techniques to diffuse the issue. They are attempting to win public support from people who hate Bush so much that they ignore national security and regularly support the Al Qaeda position. Pathetically, the democrats claim that President Bush is trying to legalize torture. Not that it would stop any liberal desperately hungry for power, but their characterization of interrogation techniques used during and since World War II as torture is blatantly false. The liberals, along with their allies in the media, are trying to “pull a fast one” on the American people, and McCain and Company have placed themselves in the crossfire purposefully.
As media darlings, McCain and Company are caught up in the liberal miasma inside the beltway. They want to appear like giant mavericks of our time, and see themselves as the heirs to Henry Clay, Lyndon Johnson, and other great compromisers of the past. McCain and Company ignore two factors that make our situation unique today: Clay and Johnson served in time when sincerity and diligence characterized the behind the scenes efforts of elected leaders. Secondly, and more significantly, none of these great compromisers served in a time of war.
The Supreme Court said that the President needs a law, so George Bush is forcing the congress to step up to the plate and specify which techniques they will legalize, and which of the techniques constitute torture. Funny thing, now that the ball is clearly in their court, the democrats, joined by McCain and Company want to write a law so vague and imprecise that the legislation is useless in fighting the terrorists. While it is probably terrible for the security of our nation, congress has been forced by the Supreme Court to be accountable for interrogation techniques, and Bush is forcing them to write a detailed bill specifying the legal interrogation strategies.
Rather then write a law drawn in meaningless platitudes that leaves and promotes a ready made platform for all the critics of the administration to continue to exploit interrogation techniques for political gain and rhetorical points, President Bush is demanding a law that leaves no technique to the imagination. President Bush has called their bluff: he is demanding a clear standard.
The senators have even publicly stated that they will not trap the CIA agents or military personnel into legal culpability as long as they can produce a bill that is vague and leaves the senators free from any responsibility. It is sadly comedic that the senators refuse to take a stand when our nation is at war. The democrats used the Supreme Court to bash the President, however when the duty in on McCain and Company they abdicate all responsibility.
President Bush should win. President Bush will win. American military and intelligence personnel will win, and the United States will win. If the President does not win this legislative battle, he will win big in the November elections. It seems that the liberals have misunderestimated George W. Bush again.
Additional Reading: William Kristol:The Trap, The Washington Times, The New York Post, Previously at Thespis Journal.
Also: Dr. Sanity, Hot Air, MsUnderestimated, TMH Bacon Bits, Stuck on Stupid, JunkYard Blog,
Red State, The Absurd Report, More from the Absurd Report, The BullWinkle Blog.
Now that President Bush has sent his legislation up to the hill, the democrats are left caterwauling. They have used the most common of liberal techniques to diffuse the issue. They are attempting to win public support from people who hate Bush so much that they ignore national security and regularly support the Al Qaeda position. Pathetically, the democrats claim that President Bush is trying to legalize torture. Not that it would stop any liberal desperately hungry for power, but their characterization of interrogation techniques used during and since World War II as torture is blatantly false. The liberals, along with their allies in the media, are trying to “pull a fast one” on the American people, and McCain and Company have placed themselves in the crossfire purposefully.
As media darlings, McCain and Company are caught up in the liberal miasma inside the beltway. They want to appear like giant mavericks of our time, and see themselves as the heirs to Henry Clay, Lyndon Johnson, and other great compromisers of the past. McCain and Company ignore two factors that make our situation unique today: Clay and Johnson served in time when sincerity and diligence characterized the behind the scenes efforts of elected leaders. Secondly, and more significantly, none of these great compromisers served in a time of war.
The Supreme Court said that the President needs a law, so George Bush is forcing the congress to step up to the plate and specify which techniques they will legalize, and which of the techniques constitute torture. Funny thing, now that the ball is clearly in their court, the democrats, joined by McCain and Company want to write a law so vague and imprecise that the legislation is useless in fighting the terrorists. While it is probably terrible for the security of our nation, congress has been forced by the Supreme Court to be accountable for interrogation techniques, and Bush is forcing them to write a detailed bill specifying the legal interrogation strategies.
Rather then write a law drawn in meaningless platitudes that leaves and promotes a ready made platform for all the critics of the administration to continue to exploit interrogation techniques for political gain and rhetorical points, President Bush is demanding a law that leaves no technique to the imagination. President Bush has called their bluff: he is demanding a clear standard.
The senators have even publicly stated that they will not trap the CIA agents or military personnel into legal culpability as long as they can produce a bill that is vague and leaves the senators free from any responsibility. It is sadly comedic that the senators refuse to take a stand when our nation is at war. The democrats used the Supreme Court to bash the President, however when the duty in on McCain and Company they abdicate all responsibility.
President Bush should win. President Bush will win. American military and intelligence personnel will win, and the United States will win. If the President does not win this legislative battle, he will win big in the November elections. It seems that the liberals have misunderestimated George W. Bush again.
Additional Reading: William Kristol:The Trap, The Washington Times, The New York Post, Previously at Thespis Journal.
Also: Dr. Sanity, Hot Air, MsUnderestimated, TMH Bacon Bits, Stuck on Stupid, JunkYard Blog,
Red State, The Absurd Report, More from the Absurd Report, The BullWinkle Blog.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Ten Stupid Things Said by Liberals in Just Four Days
In honor of a week of liberal insanity, we at Thespis Journal are happy to bring back one of most requested features, Ten Stupid Things Said by Liberals in just four days. Read on, it was quite a week. We should have sub-titled this the Special Jimmy Carter Edition.
1. It was another week of classic Jimmy Carter absurdity. To paraphrase the much beloved liberal icon and late Governor of Texas Ann Richards: “Poor Jimmy. He cain’t help it; He was born with the peanut of idiocy in his mouth.”
The first of his verbal blunders this week slammed both President Bush and British prime Minister Tony Blair. The 81-year-old former President said: “There had once been a very strong voice from London in the shaping of a common policy. I have been really disappointed in the apparent subservience of the British government’s policies related to many of the serious mistakes that have originated in Washington.” Mr. Carter, an opponent of the war in Iraq, continued: “No matter what kind of radical or ill-advised policy was proposed from the White House, it seems to me that almost automatically the Government of Great Britain would adopt the same policy without exerting its influence. This was the case in the Middle East peace process, in the case of the Lebanese/Israeli war in the recent past and certainly in the ill-advised abandonment of the war against terrorism to substitute the war in Iraq.” (Wow, Mr. Carter, you really will say ANYTHING to get your liberal media friends to notice you again.)
2. Mr. Carter used his favorite forum, Larry King Live, as the platform of choice to cloak his treasonous ideas in the perception of objectivity while spewing Bush hatred at every turn. Mr. Carter continues with his idiocy by giving us numbers 2-6 of “ten stupid things” in just this one public appearance. Well, I don't think there's any doubt that the present altercation with terrorists is a very serious problem that every person of respect in the whole world, including the United States, ought to address. But it certainly ought not to be escalated to a struggle for civilization. (Ok, Mr. Carter, tell this to the families of those who lost someone on September 11.)
3. KING: We're back with President Jimmy Carter. Your reaction to Vice President Cheney's assertion that the criticism of Iraq, the Iraq war, emboldens United States enemies and makes allies doubt American resolve.
CARTER: Well, the vice president unfortunately has been consistently very careless with the truth. He still maintains some preposterous comments and attitudes toward the origins of the Iraqi war, the circumstances in Iraq now and he's had a policy in my opinion of deliberately trying to mislead the American people by making untrue statements and there's no reason to give any credence to his ridiculous claims that you've just described. (Right, Mr. Carter. Repeatedly taking the same side with Al Quada and Al Jazeera does nothing to embolden our enemies.)
4. Jimmy Carter: “We've alienated the almost unanimous support that we had around the world for our policy in fighting terrorism as we shifted out of Afghanistan and let Osama bin Laden go free. All of these emphases have been mistaken. And when any Democrat or any citizen who doesn't have any political orientation says that we've made a mistake it seems that the vice president says "Well you are unpatriotic if you disagree with anything we've done." (Mr. Carter takes leave of his senses again: he allowed the Iranian government to walk over America for his entire term in office. Does he really think that the President “let Bin Laden go free?” Does Carter still get a daily intelligence briefing? What credentials does Carter bring to the table to criticize, his own failures in office?” Rush Limbaugh put it this way: I'm going to make some of you mad, but I'll bet you back in 1979 when the American hostages were taken from the US embassy in Iran, what did America do? Forget Jimmy Carter. What did we do? Anybody remember? I'll give you a hint: What became the theme song, essentially, on top 40 radio for the Iranian hostage crisis? "Tie a Yellow Ribbon Around the Old Oak Tree!" You don't think the Iranians got a big chuckle out of that? The big, mighty, United States of America tying yellow ribbons around trees and so forth?)
5. In a statement bound to curse Nutty Ned Lamont, Jimmy Carter slams Joe Lieberman. “I'm really sorry that he's running as an Independent and I'm grateful to notice that all the Democrats who are loyal to our party, loyal to our principles are not supporting him and are hoping that he will be defeated. I think Joe Lieberman is a good man. He's been strongly in favor of the Iraqi war from its very beginning. He was one of the originators of the public statements that misled the American people into believing that the Iraqi war was justified.” (Just a clue to the clueless, Jimmy Carter used to try to fool the American people into believing that he was a moderate. We knew better all the time, and recently he has confirmed his leftist credtenials repetitively.)
6. Carter sides with Hezbollah again: “Well I think Israel should have responded by attacking the southern part of Lebanon and by dealing with the Hezbollah threat if they were going to refuse to make any sort of prisoner exchange to alleviate the tension. But for them to decide to bomb the entire nation of Lebanon and to declare that the Hezbollah threat across the border that only involved the taking of two soldiers and the killing of a few others I think greatly and unnecessarily escalated the entire conflict and caused tens of thousands of people to suffer unnecessarily.” (Ok, Jimmy, we knew you were always against Israel, but we didn’t know you would take the same position as the terrorists and be stupid enough to get on Larry King and announce it to the world.)
7. A slight shift in perspective from one liberal to another. John Kerry is hinting broadly at another run for the presidency. He says he is ready to kick some (Swift Boat Veteran) ass. Even many of the goons who supported him before think his statement is too little too late.
John O’Neill of the Swift Vets states the following in the face of Mr. Kerry’s latest bloviating: It is a little difficult to imagine Kerry (“I voted for it before I voted against it”) kicking the most decorated living serviceman, Bud Day, a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, or our salty commander, Adm. Roy Hoffman, anywhere. Perhaps Kerry had in mind using a “Rice Fanny Grenade” as he did by mistake on himself shortly before leaving Vietnam. If so, based on the record, he is in far more danger than anyone else. Kerry and his friends certainly seem to show much greater anger and hatred toward us than toward the murderous al Qaeda terrorists.
8. Poor George Stephanopoulos; he didn’t get the media talking points. On Monday night after President Bush’s speech George said, “Charlie, the headline is: "The War is Not Over." The president's tone tonight was not political.” On Tuesday morning, Stephanopoulos said, “The fact that the president focused on Iraq was political by its very nature.” (Thanks George for making an obvious contribution to our list.)
9. Senator Russell Feingold is really clueless. From the Washington Post, September 16, 2006: “Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) is calling on President Bush to refrain from using the phrase "Islamic fascists," saying it offends Muslims and has nothing to do with America's enemies. In a speech to the Arab American Institute in Washington, Feingold said: "We must avoid using misleading and offensive terms that link Islam with those who subvert this great religion or who distort its teachings to justify terrorist activities." (We should be publishing a weekly list so that there is a regular outlet to humiliate Feingold while using his own words.)
10. No list would be complete without mentioning Rosie O’Donnell’s faux pas of the week on The View.” Loudly and proudly, Rosie compared people of the Christian faith to radical Islamic terrorists. How many weeks until Barbara Walters has to dump Rosie?
Previous Edition of Ten Stupid Things
Others on this topic: Little Green Footballs, Noble Eagle, Decision '08, Sam Houston, Jim Rose,
View From Above, Brothers Judd.
1. It was another week of classic Jimmy Carter absurdity. To paraphrase the much beloved liberal icon and late Governor of Texas Ann Richards: “Poor Jimmy. He cain’t help it; He was born with the peanut of idiocy in his mouth.”
The first of his verbal blunders this week slammed both President Bush and British prime Minister Tony Blair. The 81-year-old former President said: “There had once been a very strong voice from London in the shaping of a common policy. I have been really disappointed in the apparent subservience of the British government’s policies related to many of the serious mistakes that have originated in Washington.” Mr. Carter, an opponent of the war in Iraq, continued: “No matter what kind of radical or ill-advised policy was proposed from the White House, it seems to me that almost automatically the Government of Great Britain would adopt the same policy without exerting its influence. This was the case in the Middle East peace process, in the case of the Lebanese/Israeli war in the recent past and certainly in the ill-advised abandonment of the war against terrorism to substitute the war in Iraq.” (Wow, Mr. Carter, you really will say ANYTHING to get your liberal media friends to notice you again.)
2. Mr. Carter used his favorite forum, Larry King Live, as the platform of choice to cloak his treasonous ideas in the perception of objectivity while spewing Bush hatred at every turn. Mr. Carter continues with his idiocy by giving us numbers 2-6 of “ten stupid things” in just this one public appearance. Well, I don't think there's any doubt that the present altercation with terrorists is a very serious problem that every person of respect in the whole world, including the United States, ought to address. But it certainly ought not to be escalated to a struggle for civilization. (Ok, Mr. Carter, tell this to the families of those who lost someone on September 11.)
3. KING: We're back with President Jimmy Carter. Your reaction to Vice President Cheney's assertion that the criticism of Iraq, the Iraq war, emboldens United States enemies and makes allies doubt American resolve.
CARTER: Well, the vice president unfortunately has been consistently very careless with the truth. He still maintains some preposterous comments and attitudes toward the origins of the Iraqi war, the circumstances in Iraq now and he's had a policy in my opinion of deliberately trying to mislead the American people by making untrue statements and there's no reason to give any credence to his ridiculous claims that you've just described. (Right, Mr. Carter. Repeatedly taking the same side with Al Quada and Al Jazeera does nothing to embolden our enemies.)
4. Jimmy Carter: “We've alienated the almost unanimous support that we had around the world for our policy in fighting terrorism as we shifted out of Afghanistan and let Osama bin Laden go free. All of these emphases have been mistaken. And when any Democrat or any citizen who doesn't have any political orientation says that we've made a mistake it seems that the vice president says "Well you are unpatriotic if you disagree with anything we've done." (Mr. Carter takes leave of his senses again: he allowed the Iranian government to walk over America for his entire term in office. Does he really think that the President “let Bin Laden go free?” Does Carter still get a daily intelligence briefing? What credentials does Carter bring to the table to criticize, his own failures in office?” Rush Limbaugh put it this way: I'm going to make some of you mad, but I'll bet you back in 1979 when the American hostages were taken from the US embassy in Iran, what did America do? Forget Jimmy Carter. What did we do? Anybody remember? I'll give you a hint: What became the theme song, essentially, on top 40 radio for the Iranian hostage crisis? "Tie a Yellow Ribbon Around the Old Oak Tree!" You don't think the Iranians got a big chuckle out of that? The big, mighty, United States of America tying yellow ribbons around trees and so forth?)
5. In a statement bound to curse Nutty Ned Lamont, Jimmy Carter slams Joe Lieberman. “I'm really sorry that he's running as an Independent and I'm grateful to notice that all the Democrats who are loyal to our party, loyal to our principles are not supporting him and are hoping that he will be defeated. I think Joe Lieberman is a good man. He's been strongly in favor of the Iraqi war from its very beginning. He was one of the originators of the public statements that misled the American people into believing that the Iraqi war was justified.” (Just a clue to the clueless, Jimmy Carter used to try to fool the American people into believing that he was a moderate. We knew better all the time, and recently he has confirmed his leftist credtenials repetitively.)
6. Carter sides with Hezbollah again: “Well I think Israel should have responded by attacking the southern part of Lebanon and by dealing with the Hezbollah threat if they were going to refuse to make any sort of prisoner exchange to alleviate the tension. But for them to decide to bomb the entire nation of Lebanon and to declare that the Hezbollah threat across the border that only involved the taking of two soldiers and the killing of a few others I think greatly and unnecessarily escalated the entire conflict and caused tens of thousands of people to suffer unnecessarily.” (Ok, Jimmy, we knew you were always against Israel, but we didn’t know you would take the same position as the terrorists and be stupid enough to get on Larry King and announce it to the world.)
7. A slight shift in perspective from one liberal to another. John Kerry is hinting broadly at another run for the presidency. He says he is ready to kick some (Swift Boat Veteran) ass. Even many of the goons who supported him before think his statement is too little too late.
John O’Neill of the Swift Vets states the following in the face of Mr. Kerry’s latest bloviating: It is a little difficult to imagine Kerry (“I voted for it before I voted against it”) kicking the most decorated living serviceman, Bud Day, a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, or our salty commander, Adm. Roy Hoffman, anywhere. Perhaps Kerry had in mind using a “Rice Fanny Grenade” as he did by mistake on himself shortly before leaving Vietnam. If so, based on the record, he is in far more danger than anyone else. Kerry and his friends certainly seem to show much greater anger and hatred toward us than toward the murderous al Qaeda terrorists.
8. Poor George Stephanopoulos; he didn’t get the media talking points. On Monday night after President Bush’s speech George said, “Charlie, the headline is: "The War is Not Over." The president's tone tonight was not political.” On Tuesday morning, Stephanopoulos said, “The fact that the president focused on Iraq was political by its very nature.” (Thanks George for making an obvious contribution to our list.)
9. Senator Russell Feingold is really clueless. From the Washington Post, September 16, 2006: “Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) is calling on President Bush to refrain from using the phrase "Islamic fascists," saying it offends Muslims and has nothing to do with America's enemies. In a speech to the Arab American Institute in Washington, Feingold said: "We must avoid using misleading and offensive terms that link Islam with those who subvert this great religion or who distort its teachings to justify terrorist activities." (We should be publishing a weekly list so that there is a regular outlet to humiliate Feingold while using his own words.)
10. No list would be complete without mentioning Rosie O’Donnell’s faux pas of the week on The View.” Loudly and proudly, Rosie compared people of the Christian faith to radical Islamic terrorists. How many weeks until Barbara Walters has to dump Rosie?
Previous Edition of Ten Stupid Things
Others on this topic: Little Green Footballs, Noble Eagle, Decision '08, Sam Houston, Jim Rose,
View From Above, Brothers Judd.
McCain, Graham, and Warner Side with the Terrorists
While Senator John McCain took another turn as darling of the media elite late this week, he and his co-conspirators Senators Warner and Graham better hope that the United States is not attacked any time soon. They appear foolish to all those who have carefully examined the issue five years after the last attack. Yet, if (God Forbid) the nation is attacked by the rogue Islamic terrorists again, the American people will not be screaming for terrorist rights in the same tones as these so-called republican mavericks. McCain, Warner, and Graham have spent their energies and credibility standing with the party of Europe alongside the terrorists and in opposition to President Bush and the best interests of the United States.
Two great pieces today summarize the case against the republican rascals in the senate. The Washington Times editorial board makes a crystal clear case.
In the New York Post, Richard Miniter says we a performing “A Deadly Kindness.”
As usual, you won’t see any of these facts highlighted in the mainstream media’s latest coverage. It’s too much fun to scandalize the absurd posturing of media stunt artists McCain and Lindsay Graham. One would think that an intellectual media would tire of the excessive preening of McCain and Graham. However, these mainstream media types recycle plotlines more often than “As The World Turns,” “Dallas,” or “Dynasty.”
President Bush made a vigorous defense of the administration’s view of two pending bills at his rose garden news conference on Friday.
The bill would also provide clear rules for our personnel involved in detaining and questioning captured terrorists. The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States.
For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.
He gave us information that helped uncover al Qaeda cells' efforts to obtain biological weapons.
The second bill before Congress would modernize our electronic surveillance laws and provide additional authority for the terrorist surveillance program. I authorized the National Security Agency to operate this vital program in response to the 9/11 attacks. It allows us to quickly monitor terrorist communications between someone overseas and someone in the United States, and it's helped detect and prevent attacks on our country.
The principle behind this program is clear: when an al Qaeda operative is calling into the United States or out of the country, we need to know who they're calling, why they're calling, and what they're planning. Both these bills are essential to winning the war on terror. We will work with Congress to get good bills out. We have a duty, we have a duty to work together to give our folks on the front line the tools necessary to protect America. Time is running out. Congress is set to adjourn in just a few weeks. Congress needs to act wisely and promptly so I can sign good legislation.
While moonbat warrior chief Keith Olbermann and his sidekicks Jonathon Turley and Howard Fineman falsely attacked President Bush in a profane edition of “Countdown” on MSNBC on Friday night, Mr. Bush is actually headed toward a moral victory on this issue that will translate into a win for our nation and the republican party.
The President was very effective in the news conference on Friday, and George Bush has succeeded once again in controlling the political agenda by playing terrific offense and cornering his opposition into a rhetorical box from which they are squealing hysterical slogans and unhinged melodies.
Senators Warner and Collins may seem like statesmen with conviction, but McCain, Graham and their admirers in the chattering class have discredited themselves by accusing President Bush of attempting to codify torture. They know that this isn’t true, and these strident voices are dangerously close to the treasonous model set forth by the New York Times.
It is time for the media’s brightest spotlight to shine on those who repeatedly share the views of our enemies the terrorists.
More at News Busters, AJ Strata, Little Green Footballs, A Lady's Ruminations, Powerline.
Moonbat rants: Tennessee Guerilla Women, Coalition for a Republican Free America, MoronCowboy.com, The Ricardo Web.
Two great pieces today summarize the case against the republican rascals in the senate. The Washington Times editorial board makes a crystal clear case.
Messrs. Warner, McCain and Graham, joined by a panoply of active-duty and retired military lawyers, suggest that the administration's proposed changes to Article 3 give too much authority to the military, and would undermine our international credibility and give other nations a pretext for mistreating American troops.
Leave aside the question of whether the rogue states confronting America today would ever afford decent treatment under any circumstances. Since actual torture is already illegal, it would be helpful if Mr. Warner, et al., could explain what interrogation methods or punishment they object to (loud music? interrogating someone for a prolonged period of time? limiting commissary privileges?) even if it lessens the likelihood of preventing the next attack on Washington or on U.S. servicemen in Kabul or Baghdad.
If this is the legal standard Mr. Warner and Company insist on, they are making a serious mistake. This will compromise our ability to discover and block future terrorist attacks. And we suspect that polling will soon show that the U.S. public by a wide margin will be with the president and his commonsense views.
In the New York Post, Richard Miniter says we a performing “A Deadly Kindness.”
The kinder we are to terrorists, the harsher we are to their potential victims.
One detainee slashed a doctor who was trying to save his life; the doctors wear body armor to treat their patients.
Striking the balance between these two goods (humane treatment, foreknowledge of deadly attacks) is difficult, but the Bush administration seems to lean too far in the direction of the detainees. No expense spared for al Qaeda health care: Some 5,000 dental operations (including teeth cleanings) and 5,000 vaccinations on a total of 550 detainees have been performed since 2002 - all at taxpayer expense. Eyeglasses? 174 pairs handed out. Twenty two detainees have taxpayer-paid prosthetic limbs. And so on.
What if a detainee confesses a weakness (like fear of the dark) to a doctor that might be useful to interrogators, I asked the doctor in charge, would he share that information with them? "My job is not to make interrogations more efficient," he said firmly. He cited doctor-patient privacy. (He also asked that his name not be printed, citing the potential for al Qaeda retaliation.)
Food is strictly halal and averages 4,200 calories per day. (The guards eat the same chow as the detainees, unless they venture to one of the on-base fast-food joints.) Most prisoners have gained weight.
Much has been written about the elaborate and unprecedented appeal process. Detainees have their cases reviewed once a year and get rights roughly equivalent to criminals held in domestic prisons. I asked a military legal adviser: In what previous war were captured enemy combatants eligible for review before the war ended? None, he said.
America has never faced an enemy who has so ruthlessly broken all of the rules of war - yet never has an enemy been treated so well.
As usual, you won’t see any of these facts highlighted in the mainstream media’s latest coverage. It’s too much fun to scandalize the absurd posturing of media stunt artists McCain and Lindsay Graham. One would think that an intellectual media would tire of the excessive preening of McCain and Graham. However, these mainstream media types recycle plotlines more often than “As The World Turns,” “Dallas,” or “Dynasty.”
President Bush made a vigorous defense of the administration’s view of two pending bills at his rose garden news conference on Friday.
The bill would also provide clear rules for our personnel involved in detaining and questioning captured terrorists. The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States.
For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.
He gave us information that helped uncover al Qaeda cells' efforts to obtain biological weapons.
The second bill before Congress would modernize our electronic surveillance laws and provide additional authority for the terrorist surveillance program. I authorized the National Security Agency to operate this vital program in response to the 9/11 attacks. It allows us to quickly monitor terrorist communications between someone overseas and someone in the United States, and it's helped detect and prevent attacks on our country.
The principle behind this program is clear: when an al Qaeda operative is calling into the United States or out of the country, we need to know who they're calling, why they're calling, and what they're planning. Both these bills are essential to winning the war on terror. We will work with Congress to get good bills out. We have a duty, we have a duty to work together to give our folks on the front line the tools necessary to protect America. Time is running out. Congress is set to adjourn in just a few weeks. Congress needs to act wisely and promptly so I can sign good legislation.
While moonbat warrior chief Keith Olbermann and his sidekicks Jonathon Turley and Howard Fineman falsely attacked President Bush in a profane edition of “Countdown” on MSNBC on Friday night, Mr. Bush is actually headed toward a moral victory on this issue that will translate into a win for our nation and the republican party.
The President was very effective in the news conference on Friday, and George Bush has succeeded once again in controlling the political agenda by playing terrific offense and cornering his opposition into a rhetorical box from which they are squealing hysterical slogans and unhinged melodies.
Senators Warner and Collins may seem like statesmen with conviction, but McCain, Graham and their admirers in the chattering class have discredited themselves by accusing President Bush of attempting to codify torture. They know that this isn’t true, and these strident voices are dangerously close to the treasonous model set forth by the New York Times.
It is time for the media’s brightest spotlight to shine on those who repeatedly share the views of our enemies the terrorists.
More at News Busters, AJ Strata, Little Green Footballs, A Lady's Ruminations, Powerline.
Moonbat rants: Tennessee Guerilla Women, Coalition for a Republican Free America, MoronCowboy.com, The Ricardo Web.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Rosie O'Donnell: Barking Moonbat
We have previously stated that Rosie O’Donnell will probably not last very long at The View. The writers at Newsday appear to agree. For Rosie, there was confusion from the first day about her role as a team player. Rosie is used to being the King of her own domain.
She began by steamrolling through her first day on the show, yet this turned out to be only a warm-up for the return of her trademark liberal rants that characterized her earlier self-titled show. Rosie has been a tireless supporter of Broadway, and appears to be genuine in her love for mankind: until it comes to conservatives. Her message of peace, love, joy, and tolerance abruptly ends when she meets with any conservative. She is the darling of screeching liberals and is often championed by the most extreme elements of the liberal party.
One pro Rosie Web site describes her most celebrated controversy in the following manner: “Rosie caused much controversy on one episode of her talk show when she made comments to Tom Selleck about the National Rifle Association. The controversy only heightened when Rosie applied for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, not for herself but for her son's bodyguard.”
Fans of the Rosie O’Donnell Show tend to remember her many great moments and forget her blatant extremism and daily pontificating which dominated her show. Another site that views Rosie in rosy terms write this, “Rosie had occupied the moral high ground in the long-running daytime talk-show wars with her favorite topics: Broadway, children, extended families and charitable works, people and organizations. Even Tom Selleck would have shed a tear to see this last great bastion of decency go the way of Seinfeld and Michael Jordan - Leaving at the top of its game.”
This week, Rosie lost it in a lively debate with “The View” co-host Elizabeth Hasselbeck-the woman liberals love to hate.
Others on this topic: Restoring Hope, Denny Burk, Slice of Laodicea, Illinois Review, Think Christian, The Curt Jester, The Conservative Voice, The Flomblog, Dumb Ox News.
News Busters, More at News Busters, Mary Katharine Ham, Stop The ACLU, TMH Bacon Bits.
Stuck on Stupid. Michelle Malkin. The Anchoress. Gateway Pundit,
She began by steamrolling through her first day on the show, yet this turned out to be only a warm-up for the return of her trademark liberal rants that characterized her earlier self-titled show. Rosie has been a tireless supporter of Broadway, and appears to be genuine in her love for mankind: until it comes to conservatives. Her message of peace, love, joy, and tolerance abruptly ends when she meets with any conservative. She is the darling of screeching liberals and is often championed by the most extreme elements of the liberal party.
One pro Rosie Web site describes her most celebrated controversy in the following manner: “Rosie caused much controversy on one episode of her talk show when she made comments to Tom Selleck about the National Rifle Association. The controversy only heightened when Rosie applied for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, not for herself but for her son's bodyguard.”
Fans of the Rosie O’Donnell Show tend to remember her many great moments and forget her blatant extremism and daily pontificating which dominated her show. Another site that views Rosie in rosy terms write this, “Rosie had occupied the moral high ground in the long-running daytime talk-show wars with her favorite topics: Broadway, children, extended families and charitable works, people and organizations. Even Tom Selleck would have shed a tear to see this last great bastion of decency go the way of Seinfeld and Michael Jordan - Leaving at the top of its game.”
This week, Rosie lost it in a lively debate with “The View” co-host Elizabeth Hasselbeck-the woman liberals love to hate.
“Rosie O’Donnell didn’t take long to break out of her shell and spew her liberal hate. On yesterday’s garrulous fem talk show “The View”, Meredith Viera’s replacement compared the “threat” of “radical” Christianity in America to radical Islam throughout the world. Yeah, because you know about those crazy Christians beheading terrorists and flying planes into buildings.”Poor Rosie, she has reduced herself to playing the role of a barking moonbat. There are evangelical Christians whose views differ from mainstream Christianity, but there is no terrorism endorsed by world-wide Christianity. Murder, terrorism, and death to innocents are soundly condemned by all sects of the Christian faith. While Rosie’s lifestyle and views are not endorsed by many who follow the Christian faith, they are not suggesting, promoting, or engaging in terrorism of Rosie or any other Americans. Rosie’s unspoken demand that everyone embrace her belief system clouds her view of Christians, and her intolerant and bigoted remarks should be disavowed by the ABC television network. In making her radical comments and sticking to them, Rosie has placed herself on the side of the Islamic terrorists along with many other American liberals.
Others on this topic: Restoring Hope, Denny Burk, Slice of Laodicea, Illinois Review, Think Christian, The Curt Jester, The Conservative Voice, The Flomblog, Dumb Ox News.
News Busters, More at News Busters, Mary Katharine Ham, Stop The ACLU, TMH Bacon Bits.
Stuck on Stupid. Michelle Malkin. The Anchoress. Gateway Pundit,
Thursday, September 14, 2006
A Trilogy of Truth
The columns highlighted below won’t appear on CNN, CBS, or NBC as they attempt to manipulate the American voter for elections being held on November 7. These propaganda artists spin their yarn, creating and imagining conspiracy theories with elaborate plotlines, yet when their stories unravel, the drive-by media never bothers to set the record straight.
The new day on Today began on Wednesday with Meredith Vierra in for Katie, and by this morning, they had Kelly O’Donnell on from the White House morphing the entire congressional election intoa referendum on George Bush. These screeching liberals are replaying their dearest hopes from 2002, 2002, and 2004. It seems like the new day on Today means taking a page or two from the hay-day of Pravda.
I am afraid that the highly cultivated view of the war in Iraq thrust on the American people by the media, Jack Murtha, and all the remaining mouth pieces of the latest liberal creed will carry disproportionate value in the Fall voting. The media has tried to make us believe this before in 1980, 1988, 2000, 2002, and 2004. Promote the truth about our national security situation.
Robert Novak hasa lot to say about the “leak scandal” that has captivated the liberal media for the last three years. Speaking of the mainstreamers, they haven’t said much since the truth came out. Maybe they have become such exquisite writers of fiction that they can peddle their convoluted plot to a Broadway Producer.
An accurate depiction of what Armitage actually said deepens the irony of him being my source. He wasa foremost internal skeptic of the administration's war policy, and I long had opposed military intervention in Iraq. Zealous foes of George W. Bush transformed me improbably into the president's lapdog. But they cannot fit Armitage into the left-wing fantasy of a well-crafted White House conspiracy to destroy Joe and Valerie Wilson. The news that he and not Karl Rove was the leaker was devastating news for the Left.
Late in my hour-long interview with Armitage, I asked why the CIA had sent Wilson -- lacking intelligence experience, nuclear policy or recent contact with Niger -- on the African mission. He told the Washington Post last week that his answer was: "I don't know, but I think his wife worked out there."
Neither of us took notes, and nobody else was present. But I recalled our conversation that week in writinga column, while Armitage reconstructed it months later for federal prosecutors. He had told me unequivocally that Mrs. Wilson worked in the CIA's Counter-Proliferation Division and that she had suggested her husband's mission. As for his current implications that he never expected this to be published, he noted that the story of Mrs. Wilson's role fit the style of the old Evans-Novak column -- implying to me it continued reporting Washington inside information.
Michael Barone takes on Clown Wilson and his elaborate fiction made for an elitist political play in the inner sanctum of liberal expression. Remember Wilson saying that he “wanted Karl Rove frog marched in front of the White House.” It seems that Mr. Wilson should be doinga little marching of his own: right out to “Happy Times:” the local ward for the mentality unbalanced.
This was supposedly done to discredit Wilson's July 2003 New York Times article, in which he said he had debunked George W. Bush's claim that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium in Africa. The Wilson claim helped to embed the "Bush lied, people died" theme in public discourse.
It has long since come out that just about everything Wilson said was false. He was not,as he suggested, sent on his mission to Niger by Dick Cheney. He was recommended for the trip, contrary to his denial, by his wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame. He reported to the CIA that an Iraqi official had come to Niger on a trade mission in 1999 -- evidence that tended to confirm rather than refute the British intelligence claim that Iraq was uranium-shopping in Africa -- a claim that Britain's Lord Butler judged "well founded.
Michelle Malkin hits the nail when it comes to the American Left and their views this week:
Let me sum up in two words how the unhinged Left copes with the threat of global jihad: "Kill Bush!"
On the fifth anniversary week of the September 11 attacks, the anger of entertainment industry liberals and anti-war zealots is directed not at Islamic terrorists telling us to convert or die. Not at American al Qaeda operative Adam Gadahn smirking at our country's pain and praising the throat-slitting, children-incinerating hijackersas "strong-willed men."
No, their thoughts are not focused on killing jihadists. Their dreams lie with killing George W. Bush. The mainstreaming of presidential assassination chic is on.
The new day on Today began on Wednesday with Meredith Vierra in for Katie, and by this morning, they had Kelly O’Donnell on from the White House morphing the entire congressional election into
I am afraid that the highly cultivated view of the war in Iraq thrust on the American people by the media, Jack Murtha, and all the remaining mouth pieces of the latest liberal creed will carry disproportionate value in the Fall voting. The media has tried to make us believe this before in 1980, 1988, 2000, 2002, and 2004. Promote the truth about our national security situation.
Robert Novak has
An accurate depiction of what Armitage actually said deepens the irony of him being my source. He was
Late in my hour-long interview with Armitage, I asked why the CIA had sent Wilson -- lacking intelligence experience, nuclear policy or recent contact with Niger -- on the African mission. He told the Washington Post last week that his answer was: "I don't know, but I think his wife worked out there."
Neither of us took notes, and nobody else was present. But I recalled our conversation that week in writing
Michael Barone takes on Clown Wilson and his elaborate fiction made for an elitist political play in the inner sanctum of liberal expression. Remember Wilson saying that he “wanted Karl Rove frog marched in front of the White House.” It seems that Mr. Wilson should be doing
This was supposedly done to discredit Wilson's July 2003 New York Times article, in which he said he had debunked George W. Bush's claim that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium in Africa. The Wilson claim helped to embed the "Bush lied, people died" theme in public discourse.
It has long since come out that just about everything Wilson said was false. He was not,
Michelle Malkin hits the nail when it comes to the American Left and their views this week:
Let me sum up in two words how the unhinged Left copes with the threat of global jihad: "Kill Bush!"
On the fifth anniversary week of the September 11 attacks, the anger of entertainment industry liberals and anti-war zealots is directed not at Islamic terrorists telling us to convert or die. Not at American al Qaeda operative Adam Gadahn smirking at our country's pain and praising the throat-slitting, children-incinerating hijackers
No, their thoughts are not focused on killing jihadists. Their dreams lie with killing George W. Bush. The mainstreaming of presidential assassination chic is on.
In her new book, "Peace Mom," Cindy Sheehan confesses on page 29 that she has imagined going back in time and killing the infant George W. Bush in order to prevent the Iraq War. It's the moonbat version of pre-emption. Sheehan admits she has entertained this infanticidal fantasy "often." That ice-cream-and-coffee hunger strike is getting to her head.
Share these great columns with anyone willing to listen.
Share these great columns with anyone willing to listen.
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Where's the Outrage
Karen Hughes has an article at USA Today that expresses a common sense concern. In “Where’s The Outrage,” Ms. Hughes wonders why the world has failed to come together in condemning terrorism and the goals and tactics of the Islamic-fascists. Even liberals in Washington spend much more time criticizing President Bush and they join the terrorists and their supporters in calling for American to cut and run from Iraq. Karen Hughes has it right.
It is in the best interest of all the civilized people that the terror stops. And we have a model. Slavery’s path from international norm to pariah began with moral outrage. In 1833, one of every seven adults in Britain signed a petition against slavery. That was twice the number of people eligible to vote at the time and the largest public petitioning of Parliament to that date. The grassroots petition drive was born of the conviction that every person has value — a conviction that should guide us today.
Our challenge is to launch a new grassroots movement across all faiths and continents, a movement that clearly states that no grievance, no complaint, no matter how legitimate, can ever justify the targeting and killing of innocent civilians. A movement that commits to teach our children that life is precious, diversity should be celebrated, and hope can conquer hate.
I have read many stories of lives cut short by acts of terrorism. Almost all the victims’ families speak of the joy their loved ones brought to those around them. They didn’t deserve to die. And those who killed them earned only shame, not glory. The least the rest of us can do is say so loudly and in concert.
Of course, there will be opposition in U.S. politics, and we have previously made the case for a strong and appropriate opposition to President Bush. The appropriate response should not be treason that is extolled at the New York Times.
It is in the best interest of all the civilized people that the terror stops. And we have a model. Slavery’s path from international norm to pariah began with moral outrage. In 1833, one of every seven adults in Britain signed a petition against slavery. That was twice the number of people eligible to vote at the time and the largest public petitioning of Parliament to that date. The grassroots petition drive was born of the conviction that every person has value — a conviction that should guide us today.
Our challenge is to launch a new grassroots movement across all faiths and continents, a movement that clearly states that no grievance, no complaint, no matter how legitimate, can ever justify the targeting and killing of innocent civilians. A movement that commits to teach our children that life is precious, diversity should be celebrated, and hope can conquer hate.
I have read many stories of lives cut short by acts of terrorism. Almost all the victims’ families speak of the joy their loved ones brought to those around them. They didn’t deserve to die. And those who killed them earned only shame, not glory. The least the rest of us can do is say so loudly and in concert.
Of course, there will be opposition in U.S. politics, and we have previously made the case for a strong and appropriate opposition to President Bush. The appropriate response should not be treason that is extolled at the New York Times.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
President Bush on September 11
President Bush gave a marvelous speech commemorating the events of September 11, 2001. Today, the liberals are caterwauling about the speech. A lot is revealed in the overblown protestations of the crazed left. It’s all politics to the liberals; they must do anything to win this November. The harsh critics forget, the President is the President. He must lead! President Bush is leading the nation in the direction that he believes is right. History will record that he, Vice-President Cheney, and Condoleeza Rice were the right leaders at the right moment in the history of our great nation.Below are excerpts from the Bush speech.
“For America, 9/11 was more than a tragedy -- it changed the way we look at the world. On September the 11th, we resolved that we would go on the offense against our enemies, and we would not distinguish between the terrorists and those who harbor or support them. So we helped drive the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. We put al Qaeda on the run, and killed or captured most of those who planned the 9/11 attacks, including the man believed to be the mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed. He and other suspected terrorists have been questioned by the Central Intelligence Agency, and they provided valuable information that has helped stop attacks in America and across the world. Now these men have been transferred to Guantanamo Bay, so they can be held to account for their actions. Osama bin Laden and other terrorists are still in hiding. Our message to them is clear: No matter how long it takes, America will find you, and we will bring you to justice. “
“On September the 11th, we learned that America must confront threats before they reach our shores, whether those threats come from terrorist networks or terrorist states. I'm often asked why we're in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks. The answer is that the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat. My administration, the Congress, and the United Nations saw the threat -- and after 9/11, Saddam's regime posed a risk that the world could not afford to take. The world is safer because Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. And now the challenge is to help the Iraqi people build a democracy that fulfills the dreams of the nearly 12 million Iraqis who came out to vote in free elections last December.”
At the start of this young century, America looks to the day when the people of the Middle East leave the desert of despotism for the fertile gardens of liberty, and resume their rightful place in a world of peace and prosperity. We look to the day when the nations of that region recognize their greatest resource is not the oil in the ground, but the talent and creativity of their people. We look to the day when moms and dads throughout the Middle East see a future of hope and opportunity for their children. And when that good day comes, the clouds of war will part, the appeal of radicalism will decline, and we will leave our children with a better and safer world.
On this solemn anniversary, we rededicate ourselves to this cause. Our nation has endured trials, and we face a difficult road ahead. Winning this war will require the determined efforts of a unified country, and we must put aside our differences and work together to meet the test that history has given us. We will defeat our enemies. We will protect our people. And we will lead the 21st century into a shining age of human liberty.
Earlier this year, I traveled to the United States Military Academy. I was there to deliver the commencement address to the first class to arrive at West Point after the attacks of September the 11th. That day I met a proud mom named RoseEllen Dowdell. She was there to watch her son, Patrick, accept his commission in the finest Army the world has ever known. A few weeks earlier, RoseEllen had watched her other son, James, graduate from the Fire Academy in New York City. On both these days, her thoughts turned to someone who was not there to share the moment: her husband, Kevin Dowdell. Kevin was one of the 343 firefighters who rushed to the burning towers of the World Trade Center on September the 11th -- and never came home. His sons lost their father that day, but not the passion for service he instilled in them. Here is what RoseEllen says about her boys: "As a mother, I cross my fingers and pray all the time for their safety -- but as worried as I am, I'm also proud, and I know their dad would be, too."
Our nation is blessed to have young Americans like these -- and we will need them. Dangerous enemies have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. They're not the first to try, and their fate will be the same as those who tried before. Nine-Eleven showed us why. The attacks were meant to bring us to our knees, and they did, but not in the way the terrorists intended. Americans united in prayer, came to the aid of neighbors in need, and resolved that our enemies would not have the last word. The spirit of our people is the source of America's strength. And we go forward with trust in that spirit, confidence in our purpose, and faith in a loving God who made us to be free.
Thank you, and may God bless you.
In Memory and Commemoration...
This slideshow was created by Travis Matson in honor of the Five year anniversary of September 11, 2001. May God Bless all of the families and friends of those lost on 9.11.01
Monday, September 11, 2006
Outrage of the Week
ABC News presented a special edition of "Nightline" last night to bash the Bush administration after presenting the failures of the Clinton administration in the docu-drama "The Path to 9-11." As I sat and watched in amazement, I realized the master strategy of ABC News: air the movie as an excuse to stage a news event that would blame President Bush and Condoleeza Rice for all of the events of 9-11. The ABC News division should be totally ashamed for the manner in which "Nightline" was staged and fabricated. This contrived "news program" represented little more than propaganda forced upon the public in the style of Pravda and Al-Jazeera.
By interviewing Richard Clarke as the resident expert, ABC demonstrated their slanted bias toward his twisted view of events. He was repeatedly fed softball questions by host Cynthia McFadden. Richard Clarke has been totally discredited before.
It is a shame that the liberals and their co-horts in the mainstream media have collaborated to try to discredit conservatives for the November elections. Clinton, Sandy Burglar, and other Clinton cronies pre-emptively tried to spin the movie as totally innacurate. Fortunately, Dick Morris was there in those Clinton years, and is still around to provide some facts.
Several other bloggers have more extensive coverage on this topic today. We covered the Sandy Burglar angle in detail on Saturday. with Trousergate.
Others on this topic. You really have to read them all; it's unbelievable: Betsy Newmark, Michelle Malkin
Hot Air, Betsy has more, AJ Strata,
Another Contrived Clinton Controversy
By interviewing Richard Clarke as the resident expert, ABC demonstrated their slanted bias toward his twisted view of events. He was repeatedly fed softball questions by host Cynthia McFadden. Richard Clarke has been totally discredited before.
It is a shame that the liberals and their co-horts in the mainstream media have collaborated to try to discredit conservatives for the November elections. Clinton, Sandy Burglar, and other Clinton cronies pre-emptively tried to spin the movie as totally innacurate. Fortunately, Dick Morris was there in those Clinton years, and is still around to provide some facts.
Several other bloggers have more extensive coverage on this topic today. We covered the Sandy Burglar angle in detail on Saturday. with Trousergate.
Others on this topic. You really have to read them all; it's unbelievable: Betsy Newmark, Michelle Malkin
Hot Air, Betsy has more, AJ Strata,
Another Contrived Clinton Controversy
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Looking Forward From September 11
We have watched and waited as the planners worked on a final design for the World Trade Center site in lower Manhattan. On Thursday there was an unveiling of the new scheme for the sixteen acre site which has been largely vacant space for five years. Surely, everyone looks forward to the day when the new towers are complete, and the downtown skyline is restored.
A master design of three buildings which draw the eye to the 9.11 memorial that will be the central focus of the development is the latest concept for the site.
From the New York Daily News: The new World Trade Center came into dazzling view yesterday with designs for three gleaming towers intended to complete the sacred site and revive the downtown skyline.
The tallest and most striking of the new buildings will feature a top cut into four diamond shapes that will shine down upon the sunken pools where the twin towers stood.
Unlike the fallen towers, the planned office buildings - 78, 71 and 61 stories tall - will show off different profiles, while working as an ensemble when they're completed by 2012.
Standing along the eastern side of the 16-acre site, opposite the much bigger Freedom Tower, the newly designed buildings will form a descending spiral toward the planned World Trade Center Memorial, architects said yesterday.
May God Bless The United States of America
The New York Daily News, The New York Post
A master design of three buildings which draw the eye to the 9.11 memorial that will be the central focus of the development is the latest concept for the site.
From the New York Daily News: The new World Trade Center came into dazzling view yesterday with designs for three gleaming towers intended to complete the sacred site and revive the downtown skyline.
The tallest and most striking of the new buildings will feature a top cut into four diamond shapes that will shine down upon the sunken pools where the twin towers stood.
Unlike the fallen towers, the planned office buildings - 78, 71 and 61 stories tall - will show off different profiles, while working as an ensemble when they're completed by 2012.
Standing along the eastern side of the 16-acre site, opposite the much bigger Freedom Tower, the newly designed buildings will form a descending spiral toward the planned World Trade Center Memorial, architects said yesterday.
May God Bless The United States of America
The New York Daily News, The New York Post
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Remembering September 11. 2001
Ronald Reagan’s principal speech writer, Peggy Noonan, has an exemplary column at the Wall Street Journal from Friday. In all of the reflective pieces to be written and aired in the next two days, Ms. Noonan captures the essence of the moment in her illuminating words. The creative genius which characterizes all of Noonan’s work is supremely evident in this column.
Everyone remembers the pictures, but I think more and more about the sounds. I always ask people what they heard that day in New York. We've all seen the film and videotape, but the sound equipment of television crews didn't always catch what people have described as the deep metallic roar. The other night on TV there was a documentary on the Ironworkers of New York's Local 40, whose members ran to the site when the towers fell. They pitched in on rescue, then stayed for eight months to deconstruct a skyscraper some of them had helped build 35 years before. An ironworker named Jim Gaffney said, "My partner kept telling me the buildings are coming down and I'm saying 'no way.' Then we heard that noise that I will never forget. It was like a creaking and then the next thing you felt the ground rumbling."
Noonan powerfully concludes her thoughts:
This reminded me of that moment when Todd Beamer of United 93 wound up praying on the phone with a woman he'd never met before, a Verizon Airfone supervisor named Lisa Jefferson. She said later that his tone was calm. It seemed as if they were "old friends," she later wrote. They said the Lord's Prayer together. Then he said "Let's roll." This is what I get from the last messages. People are often stronger than they know, bigger, more gallant than they'd guess. And this: We're all lucky to be here today and able to say what deserves saying, and if you say it a lot, it won't make it common and so unheard, but known and absorbed. I think the sound of the last messages, of what was said, will live as long in human history, and contain within it as much of human history, as any old metallic roar.
May God Bless the United States of America on this fifth anniversary of one of our greatest tragedies.
Check out our effort in The 2996 Project
See our September 11, 2005 Tribute
Everyone remembers the pictures, but I think more and more about the sounds. I always ask people what they heard that day in New York. We've all seen the film and videotape, but the sound equipment of television crews didn't always catch what people have described as the deep metallic roar. The other night on TV there was a documentary on the Ironworkers of New York's Local 40, whose members ran to the site when the towers fell. They pitched in on rescue, then stayed for eight months to deconstruct a skyscraper some of them had helped build 35 years before. An ironworker named Jim Gaffney said, "My partner kept telling me the buildings are coming down and I'm saying 'no way.' Then we heard that noise that I will never forget. It was like a creaking and then the next thing you felt the ground rumbling."
Noonan powerfully concludes her thoughts:
This reminded me of that moment when Todd Beamer of United 93 wound up praying on the phone with a woman he'd never met before, a Verizon Airfone supervisor named Lisa Jefferson. She said later that his tone was calm. It seemed as if they were "old friends," she later wrote. They said the Lord's Prayer together. Then he said "Let's roll." This is what I get from the last messages. People are often stronger than they know, bigger, more gallant than they'd guess. And this: We're all lucky to be here today and able to say what deserves saying, and if you say it a lot, it won't make it common and so unheard, but known and absorbed. I think the sound of the last messages, of what was said, will live as long in human history, and contain within it as much of human history, as any old metallic roar.
May God Bless the United States of America on this fifth anniversary of one of our greatest tragedies.
Check out our effort in The 2996 Project
See our September 11, 2005 Tribute
The 2996 Project: Remembering Ivan Vale
The 2996 Project is a blogosphere memorial, conceived by D.Challener Roe, where each victim of September 11 is remembered by a writer to mark the five year anniversary of that infamous day. Apparently, most bloggers were randomly linked to the September 11 hero they would be memorializing, allowing fate to make the connection between two lives, between blogger and hero.
As a part of the blogosphere tribute to each and every victim of the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, we are honored, humbled, and grateful for the opportunity to present one of those heroes of September 11, Ivan Vale, an employee of Cantor Fitzgerald, who was working at the Trade Center at the time of the attack. Ivan was a remarkable man to his family, and a regular American like the rest of us, trying to live and lead his life on September 11.
Ivan Vale was obviously loved by his wife, mother, and older brother. His middle brother, Felix was also killed on September 11, 2001.
Newsday had this lovely article on December 7, 2001.
There were no tearful memorial services for Felix and Ivan Vale, brothers who worked floors apart in the World Trade Center. Instead, the family decided to throw a block party in the neighborhood where the two grew up in the East New York section of Brooklyn.
Read More...
Check out Stop The ACLU
Michelle Malkin
AJ Strata
As a part of the blogosphere tribute to each and every victim of the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, we are honored, humbled, and grateful for the opportunity to present one of those heroes of September 11, Ivan Vale, an employee of Cantor Fitzgerald, who was working at the Trade Center at the time of the attack. Ivan was a remarkable man to his family, and a regular American like the rest of us, trying to live and lead his life on September 11.
Ivan Vale was obviously loved by his wife, mother, and older brother. His middle brother, Felix was also killed on September 11, 2001.
Newsday had this lovely article on December 7, 2001.
There were no tearful memorial services for Felix and Ivan Vale, brothers who worked floors apart in the World Trade Center. Instead, the family decided to throw a block party in the neighborhood where the two grew up in the East New York section of Brooklyn.
Read More...
Check out Stop The ACLU
Michelle Malkin
AJ Strata
Trousergate Convict Serves as Source on CNN
Simply astounding: Sandy Berger is taken seriously by the mainstream media as a credible source for events in the Clinton administration leading up to September 11, 2001. You must be kidding. Surely this is a joke. Even after Burglar stole classified national security documents hid them in his trousers, and cut up the only copy of the documents, CNN even takes the incredible step of having Wolf Blitzer interview Berger. Certainly the powerful bosses at CNN have forgotten about Berger's Burglary.From the New York Post, April 4, 2005:
Sandy Berger, the top Clinton national- security official and erstwhile close adviser to Sen. John Kerry, has finally confessed what he spent nearly a year heatedly denying: that he intentionally smuggled classified documents from the National Archives — and deliberately destroyed them.
In pleading guilty to a misdemeanor count Friday — for which he'll get a slap-on-the-wrist $10,000 fine and lose his security clearance for three years (but probably not his law license) — Berger admits to secreting the documents in his suit jacket.
Then, once he got them home, he cut them to pieces with a pair of scissors.
So much for the "honest mistake" Berger last year maintained he'd committed.
From the Washington Times:
As we noted last week, Sandy Berger stole some of the nation's most highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives. He scissored them to pieces in his downtown Washington offices. Then he lied about it. Mr. Berger's lenient plea bargain with the Justice Department fines him an amount he can shake from the couches at his Stonebridge International LLC offices and promises his security clearances will be restored in time for Election 2008.
It's hard to underestimate the effect a case like this has on national-security professionals. For cynics, it shows that big players get off easy when they commit the crimes smaller fry lose their careers over. Meanwhile, spies, policy-makers and other handlers of secrets are effectively being told their efforts aren't taken seriously. It's a classic Washington double standard.
"This is one of the most dissatisfying and demoralizing legal decisions possible from a national-security standpoint," former National Security Council staffer John Lenczowski told us. "It sends the signal that the U.S. government is not nearly as serious about the protection of classified information as our laws would indicate."
In conversations about the case, foreign-affairs veterans use words like "stomach-turning" and "demoralizing" to describe their reaction to the plea agreement. It is not hard to see why. Lives depend upon observing national-security rules. Untold man-hours and billions of dollars are spent acquiring and keeping secrets. All this is risked when the rules and laws are broken. In this case, Mr. Berger's stolen documents detailed the Clinton administration's failure to guard adequately against terrorist plots during the 2000 millennial celebrations. These weren't some low-level briefing papers. They were among the most-sensitive materials anywhere in government.
Far from acknowledging the ill effects of Mr. Berger's free pass, however, some of his defenders are actually excusing his behavior and sweeping its ill effects under the carpet. We wouldn't have thought the Wall Street Journal editorial page would number among them, but it does. The Journal praised the agreement for "restraint" and glossed over its morale-wrecking effects, pausing only to note that "lesser officials have received harsher penalties for more minor transgressions."
With this wink and nod, the Wall Street Journal is telling national-security professionals that double standards should govern the nation's secrets.
Meanwhile, Mr. Berger seems to be getting away with a novel defense: that he's ignorant. Mr. Berger "didn't exactly know how to return the documents once he'd taken them out," the Wall Street Journal explains credulously. This is laughable. Mr. Berger was the highest-ranking official at the National Security Council and has held national-security jobs since the Carter administration. If a former national security adviser "didn't exactly know" the rules, who does?
From the New York Sun:
According to the commission report Sandy Berger was presented with plans to take action against the threat of Al-Qaeda four separate times, spring '98, June '99, December '99, and August 2000, and each time, Mr. Berger was an obstacle to action. Had he been a little less reluctant to act, a little more open to taking preemptive action, maybe the 3,000 killed in the September 11th attacks would be alive today.
From the CNN Program, The Situation Room:
The following is a portion of hte transcript with Mr. Burglar trying to rewrite history on Friday. Mr. Burglar's desperation to rewrite the history of the days leading up to 9-11 is obvious in even the written form of this interview. Read the whole transcript look here.
SAMUEL BERGER, CHAIRMAN, STONEBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL: I haven't been told that at all, Wolf. And I've not seen the movie. I've not seen -- been provided with a copy of it. Those who have seen it describe it as misleading, inaccurate, and in some cases, a fabrication. The producers themselves say it's fictionalized. The events of 9/11 are very real and we don't need to play fiction with 9/11.
BLITZER: Is it a problem of those scenes? Because in this letter that you wrote, you together with Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state, you want ABC to simply pull the entire film. What's wrong with simply making those last-minute edits, those changes so that the controversy perhaps would go away?
BERGER: I don't think this is just a question of fixing something around the edges, Wolf. My impression is that this is a misleading film to the core. And it seems to me the only appropriate thing at this point is for ABC to withdraw the series.
BLITZER: I know you've had friends, former Clinton officials, who have actually seen it who have said to you that -- what have they said to you about the film?
BERGER: They said that some parts of it are fabrications, other parts are misleading and inaccurate, and this is simply a work of fiction, as the producers have said. In some cases, they've said the actors improvised on the set. Well, you know, 9/11 is something very powerful to the American people and we shouldn't be playing fiction with 9/11.
BLITZER: Have you spoken to your former boss, former President Bill Clinton about this?
BERGER: I have.
BLITZER: And what did he say to you?
BERGER: He's very upset about it as well.
BLITZER: And did he -- can't one of you or both of you pick up the phone and call Bob Iger, the chairman of Disney and complain?
BERGER: I have written to Mr. Iger and said that we believe that the scenes that we're talking about are complete fabrications. They simply did not happen. They should be fixed. But quite honestly, at this point, I don't think this is something you can fix. I think you just have to yank it.
BLITZER: Do you have any sense they will do that?
BERGER: I would hope so. I think that's appropriate. The credibility of this show has been called into question.
BLITZER: Do you know if the former president has called Bob Iger himself and said, you know what, yank this film?
BERGER: I have no idea what the president and Mr. Iger did or did not say. But I can tell you my own view is this is not something that we should be showing to the American people.
BLITZER: What about the bigger picture? Forget about that one specific scene, because the 9/11 Commission, a lot of other people, say it wasn't you that pulled the trigger on going after Osama bin Laden, it was George Tenet, the CIA director. I wonder if you want to clarify that before we move on.
BERGER: On no situation, Wolf, did we ever refuse authorization to the CIA for an operation against bin Laden. The one time we had good information about bin Laden's whereabouts was in August of 1998. We fired 50 tomahawk missiles into the camp where we believed he was.
We apparently missed him by a few hours. There was no other occasion while we were in office that we had an opportunity to get bin Laden or eyes on bin Laden. And the fact is, Wolf, five years later, despite the fact that we have thousands of American troops in Afghanistan, we still have not gotten bin Laden.
BLITZER: Because there was one incident. There was some intelligence that he was in a place -- Osama bin Laden -- called Tarnak Farms. You remember that incident?
BERGER: That incident -- I believe in that situation the CIA itself called off the operation because they didn't believe it was reliable.
Is Mr. Berger capable of judging the difference between fact and fiction?
Since Berger stole and destroyed some of the documents related to this precise circumstance, he and Bill Clinton can tell any story that they wish to tell. Burglar's story doesn't match up well with the slightly left of center report issued by the 9-11 commission.
Wake-up America! No serious person can give Sandy Burglar any credibility. Talk about needing a disclaimer every time he appears on the television screen...
Rush Hits the Nail
The reaction of the loony left to the movie The Path to 9-11 has been hilarious. Combatting this unhinged, moonbat, nutroots faux outrage and demand of censorship requires the efforts of all conservatives. Rush Limbaugh hits the nail on the head:
RUSH: I warned you people about this. I told you this was going to happen. Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party are just a bunch of thin-skinned bullies now trying to pressure ABC and the Disney CEO, Robert Iger, into dropping the mini-series, The Path to 9/11. The entire Democratic establishment is now involved. They are essentially demanding censorship. I told you that this was going to happen. I warned you about it, and I don't know how this is going to end up, I really don't. I don't want to talk about how this is going to end up, because I don't know. I don't know what ABC is going to do. But a couple things I want to focus on here, folks.
This illustrates just how flimsy the surface on which the Clinton legacy is built. This illustrates the desire that they have to get this whole thing not shown. You know, I've always told you, when somebody says something about you, and you scream the loudest, that's the indication, "man, they must have hit gold, must have hit the bull's eye with the criticism." The Clinton administration and all of its members have tried for years now to build a legacy where one does not exist. We had a president in the nineties who did not tackle big issues, preferring, instead, to score phenomenally high approval ratings, creating the image that we had a happy-go-lucky carefree decade of rampant economic expansion, no threats anywhere, while Americans are being bombed and killed all over the world and not a single act of retaliation that had any substance was taken to avenge any of it.
What's really driving 'em nuts is, is that I have said on the radio that I know the guy who wrote it! That's in every story. "Rush Limbaugh, who knows Cyrus Nowrasteh --" Well, that automatically fires up the libs, that fires up the Clinton people and automatically discredits the work of the writer. I didn't write it. I didn't talk to Cyrus when he was writing it. Well, he did tell me that he was working on this movie a long time ago, and he'd send me a copy of it when it was done. A long time, it slipped my mind until all it is came up, until this screening in Washington. You ever heard Bush complain about any of the books that have been written about his assassination? The latest one from Cindy Sheehan, by the way. She admits she had fantasies about killing Bush before he was born or when he was a kid so he wouldn't become president. We've got this movie debuting in Canada at the film festival up there in Toronto and it's all about Bush's assassination. Do you hear the White House blowing and whining and complaining about anything?
Contrast these two administrations and contrast these two men. Does Bush whine and moan about what's in the media about him, ever? No. You know why? Because Bush is not depending on the media to write his legacy and his history. Clinton has to because there was nothing of any real substance in his administration, other than welfare reform, which was a product of the Republican Congress, that he can point back to. "We were safe, Limbaugh, we didn't have--" No, Mr. President, we were not. Do we have to go through this? You want me to go through it? World Trade Center attacks '93, we cut-and-run in Mogadishu.
Thanks Rush!
Read the whole commentary.
RUSH: I warned you people about this. I told you this was going to happen. Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party are just a bunch of thin-skinned bullies now trying to pressure ABC and the Disney CEO, Robert Iger, into dropping the mini-series, The Path to 9/11. The entire Democratic establishment is now involved. They are essentially demanding censorship. I told you that this was going to happen. I warned you about it, and I don't know how this is going to end up, I really don't. I don't want to talk about how this is going to end up, because I don't know. I don't know what ABC is going to do. But a couple things I want to focus on here, folks.
This illustrates just how flimsy the surface on which the Clinton legacy is built. This illustrates the desire that they have to get this whole thing not shown. You know, I've always told you, when somebody says something about you, and you scream the loudest, that's the indication, "man, they must have hit gold, must have hit the bull's eye with the criticism." The Clinton administration and all of its members have tried for years now to build a legacy where one does not exist. We had a president in the nineties who did not tackle big issues, preferring, instead, to score phenomenally high approval ratings, creating the image that we had a happy-go-lucky carefree decade of rampant economic expansion, no threats anywhere, while Americans are being bombed and killed all over the world and not a single act of retaliation that had any substance was taken to avenge any of it.
What's really driving 'em nuts is, is that I have said on the radio that I know the guy who wrote it! That's in every story. "Rush Limbaugh, who knows Cyrus Nowrasteh --" Well, that automatically fires up the libs, that fires up the Clinton people and automatically discredits the work of the writer. I didn't write it. I didn't talk to Cyrus when he was writing it. Well, he did tell me that he was working on this movie a long time ago, and he'd send me a copy of it when it was done. A long time, it slipped my mind until all it is came up, until this screening in Washington. You ever heard Bush complain about any of the books that have been written about his assassination? The latest one from Cindy Sheehan, by the way. She admits she had fantasies about killing Bush before he was born or when he was a kid so he wouldn't become president. We've got this movie debuting in Canada at the film festival up there in Toronto and it's all about Bush's assassination. Do you hear the White House blowing and whining and complaining about anything?
Contrast these two administrations and contrast these two men. Does Bush whine and moan about what's in the media about him, ever? No. You know why? Because Bush is not depending on the media to write his legacy and his history. Clinton has to because there was nothing of any real substance in his administration, other than welfare reform, which was a product of the Republican Congress, that he can point back to. "We were safe, Limbaugh, we didn't have--" No, Mr. President, we were not. Do we have to go through this? You want me to go through it? World Trade Center attacks '93, we cut-and-run in Mogadishu.
Thanks Rush!
Read the whole commentary.
Another Contrived Clinton Controversy
All of the contrived hysteria in the last two days regarding the ABC made for television movie, The Path to 9-11 has its’ generations in the political philosophy of Bill Clinton. The highly orchestrated response of the Clinton spin machine wafted over the mainstream media like stale remnants of Hurricane Lewinsky. The unique ambiance replete with faux outrage that Clinton displays when he is caught in a lie (“I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky) made its’ reappearance right on cue. Clinton simply can not be trusted on any critical matter.
Clinton’s team made the war room famous in 1992 when they managed, against all odds, to win a plurality of the vote in a three way race dominated by the antics of Ross Perot. The shrill tone piercing through the media bubble this week indicates that the dramatic representation of the Clinton administration is more truthful, more detailed, and more complete than any previous account of Bill Clinton, his team, and Osama Bin Laden. By threatening the ABC network, and by dispatching every Clinton acolyte to shriek “foul” to all of the liberal media outlets, the movie is being altered to match the Clintonite, sanitized view of “The Path to 9-11.” This 9-10 mentality dominates most liberal thinking today, and truthful representations of the failures of the Clinton administration would be a virtual earthquake to the democrat party. It might also remind voters that liberals can not be trusted with national security.
It’s too bad that Dick Morris already penned his wonderful book “Rewriting History.” Perhaps Mr. Morris will now write a sequel. Madelaine Albright, Sandy Burgler, and other flunkies from the Clinton years were eerily omnipresent in their odious unison as they sang from that tarnished Clinton songbook of half-truths and detestable lies.
Let us be clear: anything that is blatantly false has no credibility whether it is shown or not. Michael Moore’s ode to fantasy: Fahrenheit 9-11, the upcoming Bush Assassination movie, and countless other tools of propaganda should be the subject of the same standard and scrutiny and outrage as this ABC movie.
Of course ABC blew it! They seemed to have no interest in presenting an accurate documentary/drama that would show the real picture of the Clinton administration’s failures on the topic of National Security and terrorism. On what could have a useful part of the public discourse on the matter, ABC seems to have been more interested in publicity stunts than revealing any truth. The truth in the movie may be now entirely overshadowed by the hysterical ranting of the Clintonites.
John Podhoretz of the New York Post makes the point crystal clear. "The Path to 9/11 gives the impression that, as president, Clinton never took bin Laden's declaration of war against the United States and the West seriously enough. And that is simply the unvarnished, undeniable truth.”
In this way, the entire controversy misses the point. The obvious failures of the Clinton Administration were manifested on September 11, 2001. Clinton and his failed national security team never took Bin Laden’s declaration of War on the United States seriously enough. Clinton believed in treating episodic terrorist acts with a disconnected law enforcement strategy. Clinton was unable and unwilling to put this war at the top of his agenda.
America has been paying the price for Clinton’s delinquencies ever since. Hopefully when history is recorded, the Clinton legacy will include his irresponsible lack of action, lack of seriousness, and lack of a coordinated strategy to fight this 21st Century War. If Clinton were the intellectual heavy-weight, legendary leader that his minions still embrace, America might not be in peril in the same way that we are today.
Others on this topic: AJ Strata always has it right! Michelle Malkin, Powerline, The Anchoress. Seth at Hard Astarboard is wonderful. You have to see Stuck on Stupid! Stop the ACLU is great!The State of Ohio Blogger Alliance, A great suggestion from the Cosmic Conservative...
The Bullwinkle Blog
Clinton’s team made the war room famous in 1992 when they managed, against all odds, to win a plurality of the vote in a three way race dominated by the antics of Ross Perot. The shrill tone piercing through the media bubble this week indicates that the dramatic representation of the Clinton administration is more truthful, more detailed, and more complete than any previous account of Bill Clinton, his team, and Osama Bin Laden. By threatening the ABC network, and by dispatching every Clinton acolyte to shriek “foul” to all of the liberal media outlets, the movie is being altered to match the Clintonite, sanitized view of “The Path to 9-11.” This 9-10 mentality dominates most liberal thinking today, and truthful representations of the failures of the Clinton administration would be a virtual earthquake to the democrat party. It might also remind voters that liberals can not be trusted with national security.
It’s too bad that Dick Morris already penned his wonderful book “Rewriting History.” Perhaps Mr. Morris will now write a sequel. Madelaine Albright, Sandy Burgler, and other flunkies from the Clinton years were eerily omnipresent in their odious unison as they sang from that tarnished Clinton songbook of half-truths and detestable lies.
Let us be clear: anything that is blatantly false has no credibility whether it is shown or not. Michael Moore’s ode to fantasy: Fahrenheit 9-11, the upcoming Bush Assassination movie, and countless other tools of propaganda should be the subject of the same standard and scrutiny and outrage as this ABC movie.
Of course ABC blew it! They seemed to have no interest in presenting an accurate documentary/drama that would show the real picture of the Clinton administration’s failures on the topic of National Security and terrorism. On what could have a useful part of the public discourse on the matter, ABC seems to have been more interested in publicity stunts than revealing any truth. The truth in the movie may be now entirely overshadowed by the hysterical ranting of the Clintonites.
John Podhoretz of the New York Post makes the point crystal clear. "The Path to 9/11 gives the impression that, as president, Clinton never took bin Laden's declaration of war against the United States and the West seriously enough. And that is simply the unvarnished, undeniable truth.”
In this way, the entire controversy misses the point. The obvious failures of the Clinton Administration were manifested on September 11, 2001. Clinton and his failed national security team never took Bin Laden’s declaration of War on the United States seriously enough. Clinton believed in treating episodic terrorist acts with a disconnected law enforcement strategy. Clinton was unable and unwilling to put this war at the top of his agenda.
America has been paying the price for Clinton’s delinquencies ever since. Hopefully when history is recorded, the Clinton legacy will include his irresponsible lack of action, lack of seriousness, and lack of a coordinated strategy to fight this 21st Century War. If Clinton were the intellectual heavy-weight, legendary leader that his minions still embrace, America might not be in peril in the same way that we are today.
Others on this topic: AJ Strata always has it right! Michelle Malkin, Powerline, The Anchoress. Seth at Hard Astarboard is wonderful. You have to see Stuck on Stupid! Stop the ACLU is great!The State of Ohio Blogger Alliance, A great suggestion from the Cosmic Conservative...
The Bullwinkle Blog
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Rush Speaks for America
The great one, the all-knowing Rush Limbaugh (with talent on loan from God) appeared on Katie Couric's newscast tonight in her "free speech" segment. Since I never get to watch the evening news, I watched the video online. The entire transcript appears below.
Rush understands the crisis facing our country. It is unfortunate that the loony left of this country chooses repeatedly to brazenly politicize the global war on Islamo-fascism. Rush states emphatically that America will win. In his plain spoken Missouri manner laced in the reverberations of Ronald Reagan, Rush asserts that each generation must protect peace and freedom for the next generation.
Here are the words of Rush Limbaugh: one of the greats of our time appearing on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.
Rush understands the crisis facing our country. It is unfortunate that the loony left of this country chooses repeatedly to brazenly politicize the global war on Islamo-fascism. Rush states emphatically that America will win. In his plain spoken Missouri manner laced in the reverberations of Ronald Reagan, Rush asserts that each generation must protect peace and freedom for the next generation.
Here are the words of Rush Limbaugh: one of the greats of our time appearing on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.
“My friends., it's time to face a hard cold fact: Militant Islam wants to kill us just because we're alive and don't believe as they do. And they have been killing us for decades. It is time to stop pretending these are mere episodic events and face the reality that our way of life is in grave danger. Now, this threat is not just go away because we choose to ignore it.
“Some say we try diplomacy. Yeah, well tell me, how do we negotiate with people whose starting point is our death? Ask them to wait for 10 years, before they kill us? When Good negotiates with Evil, Evil will always win. And peace follows victory, not words issued by diplomats.
“But some Americans, sadly, are not interested in victory. And yet they want us to believe that their behavior is Patriotic. Well, it's not. When the critics are more interested in punishing this country over a few incidents at Abu Grahib and Guantanamo Bay than they are in defeating those who want to kill us; when they seek to destroy a foreign surveillance program which is designed to identify those who want to kill us and how they intend to do it; when they want to grant those who want to kill us, U.S. constitutional rights, I don't call that patriotic.
“Patriotism is rallying behind the country, regardless of party affiliation, to defeat Islamo-Fascism. Patriotism is supporting our troops on the battlefield, not undermining the mission and morale. But let there be no doubt about this. America will prevail. We're the same country that survived a bloody Civil War, defeated the Nazis and the Soviets. Each generation has a responsibility to the next. Our generation will not disappoint.”
Check out more at News Busters, Rush Limbaugh Home Page, Hot Air.
“Some say we try diplomacy. Yeah, well tell me, how do we negotiate with people whose starting point is our death? Ask them to wait for 10 years, before they kill us? When Good negotiates with Evil, Evil will always win. And peace follows victory, not words issued by diplomats.
“But some Americans, sadly, are not interested in victory. And yet they want us to believe that their behavior is Patriotic. Well, it's not. When the critics are more interested in punishing this country over a few incidents at Abu Grahib and Guantanamo Bay than they are in defeating those who want to kill us; when they seek to destroy a foreign surveillance program which is designed to identify those who want to kill us and how they intend to do it; when they want to grant those who want to kill us, U.S. constitutional rights, I don't call that patriotic.
“Patriotism is rallying behind the country, regardless of party affiliation, to defeat Islamo-Fascism. Patriotism is supporting our troops on the battlefield, not undermining the mission and morale. But let there be no doubt about this. America will prevail. We're the same country that survived a bloody Civil War, defeated the Nazis and the Soviets. Each generation has a responsibility to the next. Our generation will not disappoint.”
Check out more at News Busters, Rush Limbaugh Home Page, Hot Air.
Revisiting Clown Wilson's Calamity
The Joe Wilson/Liberal media debacle is worth revisiting for the rich tapestry of truth that has been exposed within Mr. Wilson’s and Senator Schumer’s tangled web. As much as the media touted, exploited, and overplayed this contrived plot that is so well-matched for a tabloid excursion, the journalists have not been at all interested in revisiting the embarrassing facts revealed as Wilson’s grand production became a tattered fairy-tale. It is well worth it for all of us who are sick and tired of the media’s repetitive mantra that Karl Rove and the Bush administration had broken the law and leaked the name of a secret CIA operative. Clown Wilson should consider moving to Hollywood (they already adore him), and working in idea and script development. His imagination is obviously brilliant and fiction is his forte. As Hollywood and Michael Moore develop their moonbat fantasies into movies that they affectionately refer to as documentaries, Wilson and his subordinate wife, Valerie Plame, could certainly develop second vocations, and live happily after with the over-population of liberals in America’s entertainment Mecca.
The unrelenting Ann Coulter has been on the story since day one. Oh how her enemies hate it when she is right all along. From the beginning, Ann smelled a rat, and the truth turned out to be worse than she suspected.
One would think that the liberal media could admit the mistake and correct the record. David Broder comes close in today’s Washington Post.
Of course it is of no benefit to the deranged hate-Bush crowd, however, dignity, ethical behavior, and the very lining of our nation’s dialogue has been harmed by the amplification of Wilson’s strident and libelous statements. Admission of the errors in the matter would go a long way toward restoring faith in a mainstream media that seems a lot more like a promoter of fictionalized tales that supplant a liberal agenda than being a responsible part of the public discourse. Wilson’s close association with the democrat party leadership should be enough to convince voters not to elect Sherrod Brown and other liberal voices this November.
Others on the topic: Brent Bozell, The Muslim Question, Mark Levin, Ankle Biting Pundits, Webloggin', The American Spectator, From on High.
The unrelenting Ann Coulter has been on the story since day one. Oh how her enemies hate it when she is right all along. From the beginning, Ann smelled a rat, and the truth turned out to be worse than she suspected.
Now it turns out, even point No. 3 of liberals' conspiracy theory was false: The original "leaker" of Plame's name to columnist Bob Novak -- not a crime -- was not in the White House at all. It was Richard Armitage, a State Department official and opponent of the Iraq war.
The information that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA had nothing to do with harming Wilson. It did not come from the White House. It did not even come from someone who supported the war in Iraq.
The rest of the world found out Armitage was Novak's source last week, something Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew from the first week of his investigation. So what was Fitzgerald investigating?
Even people who think the president should not be subject to civil suits in office do not deny that Bill Clinton had an affair with Monica Lewinsky and lied about it in a civil suit brought by Paula Jones. However irritating it is to liberals that lying about sex under oath is a crime, there was a crime that Ken Starr was investigating.
What was Fitzgerald investigating? Not only was there no underlying crime, there was not even -- as the Times put it -- "an attempt to silence Mrs. Wilson's husband" (or an attempt "to respond to people calling you a liar in the New York Times," as normal people put it).
Fitzgerald's entire investigation was nothing but a perjury trap from beginning to end for anyone who misremembered anything about who told whom what about a low-level nobody at the CIA who happened to be married to a Walter Mitty fantasist.
One would think that the liberal media could admit the mistake and correct the record. David Broder comes close in today’s Washington Post.
Of course it is of no benefit to the deranged hate-Bush crowd, however, dignity, ethical behavior, and the very lining of our nation’s dialogue has been harmed by the amplification of Wilson’s strident and libelous statements. Admission of the errors in the matter would go a long way toward restoring faith in a mainstream media that seems a lot more like a promoter of fictionalized tales that supplant a liberal agenda than being a responsible part of the public discourse. Wilson’s close association with the democrat party leadership should be enough to convince voters not to elect Sherrod Brown and other liberal voices this November.
Others on the topic: Brent Bozell, The Muslim Question, Mark Levin, Ankle Biting Pundits, Webloggin', The American Spectator, From on High.
Kander Without Ebb...Start Spreading The News
There is an instructive article over at The New York Times that I have been meaning to post for anyone who may have missed it. Kander without Ebb, Start Spreading the News, is a marvelous piece about one of the greatest writing teams of the 20th century. Best known for their hit musicals Chicago and Cabaret, this writing team has had an almost unparalleled string of artistic and commercial hits.
“Constant to their themes and to each other, Kander and Ebb were among the most
successful songwriting partners in musical theater, and among the longest
lasting. Most of the great composers and lyricists either hooked up serially
(Rodgers with Hart then Hammerstein) or were, like Cole Porter, professionally
celibate. But from “Flora, the Red Menace” in 1965 through “Steel Pier” in 1997,
and for a few years on either side, Kander and Ebb, who seldom socialized with
each other, wrote almost nothing with anyone else. (Mr. Ebb even declined an
offer to work with Rodgers, post-Hammerstein, on “Rex.”) In all, 11 Kander and
Ebb musicals appeared on Broadway; when Mr. Ebb died, at 76, another four were
waiting in the wings.”
Kander and Ebb’s library of works may not be quite finished. Their final musical Curtains recently opened in Los Angeles to successful reviews. It will be interesting to watch the path of this show, and to hear the melodious music of Mr. Kander yet again.
“Constant to their themes and to each other, Kander and Ebb were among the most
successful songwriting partners in musical theater, and among the longest
lasting. Most of the great composers and lyricists either hooked up serially
(Rodgers with Hart then Hammerstein) or were, like Cole Porter, professionally
celibate. But from “Flora, the Red Menace” in 1965 through “Steel Pier” in 1997,
and for a few years on either side, Kander and Ebb, who seldom socialized with
each other, wrote almost nothing with anyone else. (Mr. Ebb even declined an
offer to work with Rodgers, post-Hammerstein, on “Rex.”) In all, 11 Kander and
Ebb musicals appeared on Broadway; when Mr. Ebb died, at 76, another four were
waiting in the wings.”
Kander and Ebb’s library of works may not be quite finished. Their final musical Curtains recently opened in Los Angeles to successful reviews. It will be interesting to watch the path of this show, and to hear the melodious music of Mr. Kander yet again.
The ACLU: Defending the Contemporary Hitler
The comparisons of terrorists to Hitler, Hirohito, and Lennin made by President Bush and Don Rumsfeld in the last week have the liberals screeching! One of the patron saints of American liberalism is screeching the loudest.
From Jay at Stop the ACLU, their latest Blogburst:
It isn’t surprising that the ACLU were quick to react to Bush’s jaw dropping speech admitting to secret CIA prisons and pushing Congress to pass legislation that would put captured terror suspects under the rule of a military tribunal.
Via ACLU:
America is a nation dedicated to upholding the rule of law. However, President Bush’s draft proposal for military commissions fails to meet the standards recognized by the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The court held the President’s initial military commission scheme was illegal because it violated Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the most basic standards regarding treatment of detainees. The new proposal has nearly all of the same problems, and will eventually be found to be illegal. For example, it would allow a person to be convicted based on secret evidence and would allow the use of evidence obtained as the result of horrific abuse.
Of course the ACLU automatically accuses the U.S. of using horrific abuse to obtain our evidence without any evidence whatsoever to back that claim up. You can also bet that if one of their terrorist plaintiffs were to go before our court system they would make the claim that any evidence we have against them was obtained through such procedures and argue it was inadmissible. This is only one of hundreds of reasons that Congress needs to pass the legislation the President is requesting so these terrorist creeps, several of which are in the top Al Qaeda chain of command, need to go before a military tribunal. They are not American citizens and we can not afford the dangers involved in allowing them to be represented before the U.S. courts, in all probability represented by the ACLU.
“The president should have listened to the current Judge Advocates General for the four military services, all of whom have urged close adherence to the court-martial procedures, and all of whom oppose the use of secret evidence and coerced evidence. By contrast, Senators John Warner (R-VA), John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are reportedly following the advice of these top generals and admirals and supporting due process protections that are more in line with the time-tested courts-martial procedures.
“The president also proposes to gut enforceability of the Geneva Conventions by amending the War Crimes Act to completely immunize from prosecution civilians who subjected persons to horrific abuse that may have fallen short of the definition of ‘torture.’ As a result, government officials and civilian contractors who authorized or carried out water boarding, threats of death, and other abuse would get a ‘get out of jail free’ card under the president’s bill. The nation’s soldiers and sailors would remain liable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but civilians would be immune from prosecution under the only statute that applies to many of these acts.
That is simply wrong.
No, what is “simply wrong” is that cowards committed to terrorism and jihad against America that do are not signatories of nor abide by the Geneva Conventions should be afforded the protections of it. The sickening fact that the ACLU would steep low enough to represent an enemy of our nation to sue a military member for doing their job in capturing and interrogating these killers. This is exactly what the President is asking Congress to keep from happening. The President is asking Congress to make it clear what our protectors can and can not do and to protect them from prosecution of being sued by the very scum buckets they protect us from.
“The new Army Field Manual avoids some of the worst problems with earlier drafts and clarifies that those held by the military or at military facilities must be afforded the protections of the Geneva Conventions. However, it then creates loopholes for so-called ‘unlawful combatants’ by depriving them of the same protections–and specifically authorizes holding persons in isolation. And, the new manual does not apply to those held by the CIA. The Bush proposal is lip service unless the executive branch actually holds people accountable for violating it."
“So called” unlawful combatants? If you are not abiding by the rules of being a lawful combatant then you aren’t one. It is that simple. The ACLU are the ones looking for loop holes in the system, and the very reason they are so up and arms on this is that it closes them up. What the President is asking is for Congress to make the definitions clear. In the Hamdan case, which the ACLU played a major part in, the door was left wide open for Congress to clarify and create legislation making military tribunals the main process for due process dealing with terrorists caught on the battle field. What does the ACLU have against bringing these murderers to justice?
The ACLU Defend the enemy. They have a long history of this one. They defended the P.L.O. in 1985. They defended Quadafi in the 1980’s. And they continue today. They have told Gitmo detainees they have the right to remain silent, as in not talking to interrogators. One issue that really disturbs me is their refusal of funds from organizations such as the United Way that were concerned the money would be used to support terrorism.
In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of its most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.
“The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that “promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.”
The Rockefeller Foundation’s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not “directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.”
They have since then demanded that the government release and make public top secret security information regarding not only the activities of our military, but also that of our intelligence forces. They have also initiated one lawsuit after another against the government to stop the searching of individuals for security purposes in mass transit situations, to stop what they call profiling (we will never see a Protestant white middle-aged woman as a terrorist working with an extremist Islamic organization) by race, sex and religion, and to stop the government from detaining and questioning or interrogating individuals who have ties or contact with known terrorist individuals and organizations.
They tried to kill the Patriot Act because they see the rights of an individual who may or may not be an American citizen as more important than the safety of the nation at large. They want the borders open because they see that as an infringement of the rights of non-Americans to become Americans however they can manage it. They want to have military and intelligence sources, activities, and planning revealed to the public so they can “watch dog” and ensure freedoms of individuals and/or groups are not being compromised, but in doing so will enable those very individuals and/or groups under surveillance the ability to avoid surveillance and possible capture before they do something destructive to American citizens.
When it comes to America’s enemies you can count on the ACLU to be there to defend them.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Ghost Light: September Morning
You can see a lot of Katie Couric coverage at the MRC Couric Summary Blog.
Thank goodness for Ms. Underestimated and Josh Bolten. Both of these mavericks put foolish Harry Reid in check!
Katie's debut looks confusing.
The New York Daily News reviews Katie's Opening Night.
You have to see Scott's Education Carnival over at Get on The Bus.
The New York Post pans Rosie's debut. The Daily News on Rosie.
Check out the Carnival of Ohio Politics.
Katie's debut looks confusing.
The New York Daily News reviews Katie's Opening Night.
You have to see Scott's Education Carnival over at Get on The Bus.
The New York Post pans Rosie's debut. The Daily News on Rosie.
Check out the Carnival of Ohio Politics.
Bush Shows His Presidential Timber Again
"Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them."President Bush, September 5, 2006
President Bush demonstrated his Presidential timber in a speech today. Read the whole speech here. Many of our citizens rely on disengenious reporting and commentary that comes from political enemies of George Bush. The President lays out a clear case here. It would be interesting to note the coverage of his speech today. President Bush made the case again. Rally the common sense conservative base. It's time to come home and vote Republican this fall in all of the federal elections. Way to go President Bush. The following are excerpts of the President's speech today.
In the five years since our nation was attacked, we've also learned a great deal about the enemy we face in this war. We've learned about them through videos and audio recordings, and letters and statements they've posted on websites. We've learned about them from captured enemy documents that the terrorists have never meant for us to see. Together, these documents and statements have given us clear insight into the mind of our enemies -- their ideology, their ambitions, and their strategy to defeat us.
We know what the terrorists intend to do because they've told us -- and we need to take their words seriously. So today I'm going to describe -- in the terrorists' own words, what they believe… what they hope to accomplish, and how they intend to accomplish it. I'll discuss how the enemy has adapted in the wake of our sustained offensive against them, and the threat posed by different strains of violent Islamic radicalism. I'll explain the strategy we're pursuing to protect America, by defeating the terrorists on the battlefield, and defeating their hateful ideology in the battle of ideas.
The terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, are men without conscience -- but they're not madmen. They kill in the name of a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs that are evil, but not insane. These al Qaeda terrorists and those who share their ideology are violent Sunni extremists. They're driven by a radical and perverted vision of Islam that rejects tolerance, crushes all dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women and children in the pursuit of political power. They hope to establish a violent political utopia across the Middle East, which they call a "Caliphate" -- where all would be ruled according to their hateful ideology. Osama bin Laden has called the 9/11 attacks -- in his words -- "a great step towards the unity of Muslims and establishing the Righteous… [Caliphate]."
During the last five years we've learned a lot about this enemy. We've learned that they're cunning and sophisticated. We've witnessed their ability to change their methods and their tactics with deadly speed -- even as their murderous obsessions remain unchanging. We've seen that it's the terrorists who have declared war on Muslims, slaughtering huge numbers of innocent Muslim men and women around the world.
Now, I know some of our country hear the terrorists' words, and hope that they will not, or cannot, do what they say. History teaches that underestimating the words of evil and ambitious men is a terrible mistake. In the early 1900s, an exiled lawyer in Europe published a pamphlet called "What Is To Be Done?" -- in which he laid out his plan to launch a communist revolution in Russia. The world did not heed Lenin's words, and paid a terrible price. The Soviet Empire he established killed tens of millions, and brought the world to the brink of thermonuclear war. In the 1920s, a failed Austrian painter published a book in which he explained his intention to build an Aryan super-state in Germany and take revenge on Europe and eradicate the Jews. The world ignored Hitler's words, and paid a terrible price. His Nazi regime killed millions in the gas chambers, and set the world aflame in war, before it was finally defeated at a terrible cost in lives.
Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. The question is: Will we listen? Will we pay attention to what these evil men say? America and our coalition partners have made our choice. We're taking the words of the enemy seriously. We're on the offensive, and we will not rest, we will not retreat, and we will not withdraw from the fight, until this threat to civilization has been removed. (Applause.)
We know what the terrorists believe, we know what they have done, and we know what they intend to do. And now the world's free nations must summon the will to meet this great challenge. The road ahead is going to be difficult, and it will require more sacrifice. Yet we can have confidence in the outcome, because we've seen freedom conquer tyranny and terror before. In the 20th century, free nations confronted and defeated Nazi Germany. During the Cold War, we confronted Soviet communism, and today Europe is whole, free and at peace.
And now, freedom is once again contending with the forces of darkness and tyranny. This time, the battle is unfolding in a new region -- the broader Middle East. This time, we're not waiting for our enemies to gather in strength. This time, we're confronting them before they gain the capacity to inflict unspeakable damage on the world, and we're confronting their hateful ideology before it fully takes root.
We see a day when people across the Middle East have governments that honor their dignity, and unleash their creativity, and count their votes. We see a day when across this region citizens are allowed to express themselves freely, women have full rights, and children are educated and given the tools necessary to succeed in life. And we see a day when all the nations of the Middle East are allies in the cause of peace.
We fight for this day, because the security of our own citizens depends on it. This is the great ideological struggle of the 21st century -- and it is the calling of our generation. All civilized nations are bound together in this struggle between moderation and extremism. By coming together, we will roll back this grave threat to our way of life. We will help the people of the Middle East claim their freedom, and we will leave a safer and more hopeful world for our children and grandchildren.
Next week, America will mark the fifth anniversary of September the 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks. As this day approaches, it brings with it a flood of painful memories. We remember the horror of watching planes fly into the World Trade Center, and seeing the towers collapse before our eyes. We remember the sight of the Pentagon, broken and in flames. We remember the rescue workers who rushed into burning buildings to save lives, knowing they might never emerge again. We remember the brave passengers who charged the cockpit of their hijacked plane, and stopped the terrorists from reaching their target and killing more innocent civilians. We remember the cold brutality of the enemy who inflicted this harm on our country -- an enemy whose leader, Osama bin Laden, declared the massacre of nearly 3,000 people that day -- I quote -- "an unparalleled and magnificent feat of valor, unmatched by any in humankind before them." Five years after our nation was attacked, the terrorist danger remains. We're a nation at war -- and America and her allies are fighting this war with relentless determination.
In the five years since our nation was attacked, we've also learned a great deal about the enemy we face in this war. We've learned about them through videos and audio recordings, and letters and statements they've posted on websites. We've learned about them from captured enemy documents that the terrorists have never meant for us to see. Together, these documents and statements have given us clear insight into the mind of our enemies -- their ideology, their ambitions, and their strategy to defeat us.
We know what the terrorists intend to do because they've told us -- and we need to take their words seriously. So today I'm going to describe -- in the terrorists' own words, what they believe… what they hope to accomplish, and how they intend to accomplish it. I'll discuss how the enemy has adapted in the wake of our sustained offensive against them, and the threat posed by different strains of violent Islamic radicalism. I'll explain the strategy we're pursuing to protect America, by defeating the terrorists on the battlefield, and defeating their hateful ideology in the battle of ideas.
The terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, are men without conscience -- but they're not madmen. They kill in the name of a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs that are evil, but not insane. These al Qaeda terrorists and those who share their ideology are violent Sunni extremists. They're driven by a radical and perverted vision of Islam that rejects tolerance, crushes all dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women and children in the pursuit of political power. They hope to establish a violent political utopia across the Middle East, which they call a "Caliphate" -- where all would be ruled according to their hateful ideology. Osama bin Laden has called the 9/11 attacks -- in his words -- "a great step towards the unity of Muslims and establishing the Righteous… [Caliphate]."
During the last five years we've learned a lot about this enemy. We've learned that they're cunning and sophisticated. We've witnessed their ability to change their methods and their tactics with deadly speed -- even as their murderous obsessions remain unchanging. We've seen that it's the terrorists who have declared war on Muslims, slaughtering huge numbers of innocent Muslim men and women around the world.
Now, I know some of our country hear the terrorists' words, and hope that they will not, or cannot, do what they say. History teaches that underestimating the words of evil and ambitious men is a terrible mistake. In the early 1900s, an exiled lawyer in Europe published a pamphlet called "What Is To Be Done?" -- in which he laid out his plan to launch a communist revolution in Russia. The world did not heed Lenin's words, and paid a terrible price. The Soviet Empire he established killed tens of millions, and brought the world to the brink of thermonuclear war. In the 1920s, a failed Austrian painter published a book in which he explained his intention to build an Aryan super-state in Germany and take revenge on Europe and eradicate the Jews. The world ignored Hitler's words, and paid a terrible price. His Nazi regime killed millions in the gas chambers, and set the world aflame in war, before it was finally defeated at a terrible cost in lives.
Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. The question is: Will we listen? Will we pay attention to what these evil men say? America and our coalition partners have made our choice. We're taking the words of the enemy seriously. We're on the offensive, and we will not rest, we will not retreat, and we will not withdraw from the fight, until this threat to civilization has been removed. (Applause.)
We know what the terrorists believe, we know what they have done, and we know what they intend to do. And now the world's free nations must summon the will to meet this great challenge. The road ahead is going to be difficult, and it will require more sacrifice. Yet we can have confidence in the outcome, because we've seen freedom conquer tyranny and terror before. In the 20th century, free nations confronted and defeated Nazi Germany. During the Cold War, we confronted Soviet communism, and today Europe is whole, free and at peace.
And now, freedom is once again contending with the forces of darkness and tyranny. This time, the battle is unfolding in a new region -- the broader Middle East. This time, we're not waiting for our enemies to gather in strength. This time, we're confronting them before they gain the capacity to inflict unspeakable damage on the world, and we're confronting their hateful ideology before it fully takes root.
We see a day when people across the Middle East have governments that honor their dignity, and unleash their creativity, and count their votes. We see a day when across this region citizens are allowed to express themselves freely, women have full rights, and children are educated and given the tools necessary to succeed in life. And we see a day when all the nations of the Middle East are allies in the cause of peace.
We fight for this day, because the security of our own citizens depends on it. This is the great ideological struggle of the 21st century -- and it is the calling of our generation. All civilized nations are bound together in this struggle between moderation and extremism. By coming together, we will roll back this grave threat to our way of life. We will help the people of the Middle East claim their freedom, and we will leave a safer and more hopeful world for our children and grandchildren.
Next week, America will mark the fifth anniversary of September the 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks. As this day approaches, it brings with it a flood of painful memories. We remember the horror of watching planes fly into the World Trade Center, and seeing the towers collapse before our eyes. We remember the sight of the Pentagon, broken and in flames. We remember the rescue workers who rushed into burning buildings to save lives, knowing they might never emerge again. We remember the brave passengers who charged the cockpit of their hijacked plane, and stopped the terrorists from reaching their target and killing more innocent civilians. We remember the cold brutality of the enemy who inflicted this harm on our country -- an enemy whose leader, Osama bin Laden, declared the massacre of nearly 3,000 people that day -- I quote -- "an unparalleled and magnificent feat of valor, unmatched by any in humankind before them." Five years after our nation was attacked, the terrorist danger remains. We're a nation at war -- and America and her allies are fighting this war with relentless determination.
Media Obsession: Sunny Election Forecast for Liberals
Someone take a message to the mainstream media: Election Day is November 7, 2006. CNN and MSNBC have been relishing in celebrating an election victory with their buddies in the liberal party all afternoon. The apparent template today calls for a dismal view of the republican chances this fall. Their misleading stories, “push media” tactics, and classically biased coverage would have you believe that there isn’t any need to count votes on November 7: the democrats have already won. How quickly things change: remember their November 2000 slogan: “count every vote.” Al Gore and Joe Lieberman wanted to count every vote twice if it meant that they would win.
Clearly, the horizon looks strongly liberal for November 7. All the experts believe that history will repeat itself and the democrats will pick up seats in this election. There is a long history of the party out of power picking up many seats in the sixth year of a presidency. The drive-by media has taken their cue from the democrat national committee, and in their customary style, have invented their own self-serving plotline. The conclusion of their fantasy plot has the democrats celebrating well into the night on November 7 as they take over both houses of congress. Only time will tell.
It may be possible that democrats peaked too early, or are over-reading their tea leaves. There’s a long way until November 7.
• President Bush and other nationally known leaders of the Republican Party have only started to truly engage the campaign.
• Voter turn-out efforts, a highly successful technique in 2002 and 2004 for the Republicans, is not considered in the many faulty polls being touted in the mainstream media.
• The campaign could be permanently altered with dramatically and rapidly changing international or domestic events.
While democrats see their fortunes dwindling slightly, expectations for the Republicans are very low. Regardless of reality, the media have developed their template for the Fall season, and they are sticking to it. I hope that conservatives can break though the ludicrous cacophony of out of tune anti-republican voices that are sounding off daily and amplified by the liberal media.
Before Republicans and conservatives get too discouraged, just remember the trademark inaccuracies of the mainstream media. Exit polls, largely regarded by professional pollsters as the most reliable and accurate of all polls proved to be very fallible and were incorrectly reported in 2000, 2002, and 2004. The unison forecast for the elections this autumn may prove to be more off the mark than the forecasts for this year’s hurricane season.
You'll want to read this article at the American Spectator
Clearly, the horizon looks strongly liberal for November 7. All the experts believe that history will repeat itself and the democrats will pick up seats in this election. There is a long history of the party out of power picking up many seats in the sixth year of a presidency. The drive-by media has taken their cue from the democrat national committee, and in their customary style, have invented their own self-serving plotline. The conclusion of their fantasy plot has the democrats celebrating well into the night on November 7 as they take over both houses of congress. Only time will tell.
It may be possible that democrats peaked too early, or are over-reading their tea leaves. There’s a long way until November 7.
• President Bush and other nationally known leaders of the Republican Party have only started to truly engage the campaign.
• Voter turn-out efforts, a highly successful technique in 2002 and 2004 for the Republicans, is not considered in the many faulty polls being touted in the mainstream media.
• The campaign could be permanently altered with dramatically and rapidly changing international or domestic events.
While democrats see their fortunes dwindling slightly, expectations for the Republicans are very low. Regardless of reality, the media have developed their template for the Fall season, and they are sticking to it. I hope that conservatives can break though the ludicrous cacophony of out of tune anti-republican voices that are sounding off daily and amplified by the liberal media.
Before Republicans and conservatives get too discouraged, just remember the trademark inaccuracies of the mainstream media. Exit polls, largely regarded by professional pollsters as the most reliable and accurate of all polls proved to be very fallible and were incorrectly reported in 2000, 2002, and 2004. The unison forecast for the elections this autumn may prove to be more off the mark than the forecasts for this year’s hurricane season.
You'll want to read this article at the American Spectator
Monday, September 04, 2006
Thespis Journal: Celebrating One Year
Exactly one year ago today, September 5, 2005, I wrote this post to begin the adventure known as Thespis Journal. The mainstream media outlets were in various stages of hystronics over Hurricane Katrina. The coverage of the aftermath of Katrina was abhorent and absurd. I had been thinking of starting a blog for a long time. I was irate, and looking for an outlet. My best friend, Kevin, and my brother, Kevin had encouraged me for a long time to find a forum for my writing, and begin sharing my own brand of punditry.
Although this is the one year blogiversary, I have only blogged for eight months. I did not blog at all during February, March, April, and May due to work demands. I did not blog regularly in June either. I now have 305 posts on the blog, and I am ramping up to unveil Thespis Journal 2.0. Opening night for the new blog should be in the next few weeks.
Thespis Journal has had in excess of 20,000 unique visitors, and over 40,000 page loads. This is very small time in the world of blogging, but I am satisfied that someone is reading our material.
Special Thanks to the following blogs for being loyal friends and throughout the first year.
George at Stuck on Stupid
All our friends at TMH's Bacon Bits
Seth at Hard Astarboard
MsUnderestimated
Gull at Perish The Thought
Bryan of Hot Air and the JunkYard Blog
Ian at Hot Air
Our friends the EdWonks
Scott at Get on the Bus
Basil at Basil's Blog
Although this is the one year blogiversary, I have only blogged for eight months. I did not blog at all during February, March, April, and May due to work demands. I did not blog regularly in June either. I now have 305 posts on the blog, and I am ramping up to unveil Thespis Journal 2.0. Opening night for the new blog should be in the next few weeks.
Thespis Journal has had in excess of 20,000 unique visitors, and over 40,000 page loads. This is very small time in the world of blogging, but I am satisfied that someone is reading our material.
Special Thanks to the following blogs for being loyal friends and throughout the first year.
George at Stuck on Stupid
All our friends at TMH's Bacon Bits
Seth at Hard Astarboard
MsUnderestimated
Gull at Perish The Thought
Bryan of Hot Air and the JunkYard Blog
Ian at Hot Air
Our friends the EdWonks
Scott at Get on the Bus
Basil at Basil's Blog
Jay at Stop The ACLU
This is the 100th post on Thespis Journal. It has some interesting information from November, 2005.
Please leave a comment today to help celebrate this milestone. Here's looking forward to another great year, or in our case, another great eight months of writing during a 12 month period!
This is the 100th post on Thespis Journal. It has some interesting information from November, 2005.
Please leave a comment today to help celebrate this milestone. Here's looking forward to another great year, or in our case, another great eight months of writing during a 12 month period!
Pulling Back the Curtain on Modern Marxists
The time has come for a new American emancipation--a great national drive to tear down economic barriers and liberate the spirit of enterprise in the most distressed areas of our country. My friends, together we can do this, and do it we must, so help me God.
From new freedom will spring new opportunities for growth, a more productive, fulfilled and united people, and a stronger America--an America that will lead the technological revolution, and also open its mind and heart and soul to the treasures of literature, music, and poetry, and the values of faith, courage, and love.
At the heart of our efforts is one idea vindicated by 25 straight months of economic growth: Freedom and incentives unleash the drive and entrepreneurial genius that are the core of human progress. We have begun to increase the rewards for work, savings, and investment; reduce the increase in the cost and size of government and its interference in people's lives.
President Ronald Reagan, January 21, 1985
Second Inaugural Address
The dramatic vision outlined so eloquently by President Reagan almost twenty three years ago has manifested itself bountifully in contemporary American life. Reagan’s policies that were maligned by Uncle Teddy Kennedy, Walter Mondale, and other liberal icons, have wrought an unprecedented period of sustained economic growth. Yet another economic renaissance has been underway since 2003. Even in the face of the most vicious and fatal attack in American history and a raging war on Islamic-fascists, the American economy flourishes and is the envy of the world. In fact the success of the American economy is likely causing the rise of terrorists if you follow the logic of Jack Murtha, and there is no doubt that radical Islamists despise American capitalism.
When it comes to the American economy, the liberals find themselves on the same side as the terrorists. In fact, these liberal democrats appear to have the same level of discontent with our American, capitalist way of life.
The present pace of the United States economy and the current level of economic growth are not satisfactory to the liberals and their leaders. Economic conditions that are repetitively demanded by socialist, liberal democrats have never been more elusive. It seems that these leftists can not be appeased on the economy.
In a dinner conversation the other night, some liberal friends expressed sincere doubt regarding the state of today’s economy. Historical perspective seemed to have no meaning. The unprecedented growth, level of employment, and other significant economic signals have no relevance when a discussion turns to bashing Wal-Mart or other broad unsubstantiated claims of economic despair throughout the United States.
A snapshot of current economic news should include the following.
• The economy is averaging 4% growth for this year.
• Excluding transportation, new orders for durable goods are up 9.6% at an annual rate in the first five months of 2006 while unfilled orders are up 12.8%.
• U.S. sales of domestically produced cars and trucks rose to 13 million in July, 4.5% above the second-quarter average. This provides a strong start to the third quarter's GDP
• The Institute for Supply Management manufacturing index rose to 54.7 in July, which the ISM estimates is associated with a 4.4% real GDP growth rate.
• Pending sales of existing homes rose 0.4% in July, going against expectations of a decline.
• Federal tax receipts rose approximately 13% year over year in July. For fiscal year 2007 the deficit looks like it might fall to $200 billion due to burgeoning tax receipts.
• The current unemployment rate 4.6% is very low, and is a figure that represents full employment as it is understood and theorized by many economists. 1.7 million new jobs have been created over the past year;
Even in the midst of all of these strong economic indicators, the Marxist socialists (the modern left wing of the democrat party) are never satisfied. Like some of my dinner guests, they decry our system by saying that Americans are forced to live below the poverty line, and that the minimum wage needs to be raised. These hysterics use snapshots of evolving data to claim that millions of Americans live without health insurance, or that most Americans can not afford a trip to the Emergency room.
At The American Spectator, Lisa Fabrizio makes a compelling indictment of these modern day socialist democrats.
Fabrizio addresses one of the leading tenants of the democrats fall campaign: their anti Wal-Mart crusade that makes little sense to average common sense Americans.
I have one wish for the fall campaign: The liberal democrats will run as the socialist/Marxist/party of Europe that they have become.
From new freedom will spring new opportunities for growth, a more productive, fulfilled and united people, and a stronger America--an America that will lead the technological revolution, and also open its mind and heart and soul to the treasures of literature, music, and poetry, and the values of faith, courage, and love.
At the heart of our efforts is one idea vindicated by 25 straight months of economic growth: Freedom and incentives unleash the drive and entrepreneurial genius that are the core of human progress. We have begun to increase the rewards for work, savings, and investment; reduce the increase in the cost and size of government and its interference in people's lives.
President Ronald Reagan, January 21, 1985
Second Inaugural Address
The dramatic vision outlined so eloquently by President Reagan almost twenty three years ago has manifested itself bountifully in contemporary American life. Reagan’s policies that were maligned by Uncle Teddy Kennedy, Walter Mondale, and other liberal icons, have wrought an unprecedented period of sustained economic growth. Yet another economic renaissance has been underway since 2003. Even in the face of the most vicious and fatal attack in American history and a raging war on Islamic-fascists, the American economy flourishes and is the envy of the world. In fact the success of the American economy is likely causing the rise of terrorists if you follow the logic of Jack Murtha, and there is no doubt that radical Islamists despise American capitalism.
When it comes to the American economy, the liberals find themselves on the same side as the terrorists. In fact, these liberal democrats appear to have the same level of discontent with our American, capitalist way of life.
The present pace of the United States economy and the current level of economic growth are not satisfactory to the liberals and their leaders. Economic conditions that are repetitively demanded by socialist, liberal democrats have never been more elusive. It seems that these leftists can not be appeased on the economy.
In a dinner conversation the other night, some liberal friends expressed sincere doubt regarding the state of today’s economy. Historical perspective seemed to have no meaning. The unprecedented growth, level of employment, and other significant economic signals have no relevance when a discussion turns to bashing Wal-Mart or other broad unsubstantiated claims of economic despair throughout the United States.
A snapshot of current economic news should include the following.
• The economy is averaging 4% growth for this year.
• Excluding transportation, new orders for durable goods are up 9.6% at an annual rate in the first five months of 2006 while unfilled orders are up 12.8%.
• U.S. sales of domestically produced cars and trucks rose to 13 million in July, 4.5% above the second-quarter average. This provides a strong start to the third quarter's GDP
• The Institute for Supply Management manufacturing index rose to 54.7 in July, which the ISM estimates is associated with a 4.4% real GDP growth rate.
• Pending sales of existing homes rose 0.4% in July, going against expectations of a decline.
• Federal tax receipts rose approximately 13% year over year in July. For fiscal year 2007 the deficit looks like it might fall to $200 billion due to burgeoning tax receipts.
• The current unemployment rate 4.6% is very low, and is a figure that represents full employment as it is understood and theorized by many economists. 1.7 million new jobs have been created over the past year;
- Employment has increased in 48 of the 50 states;
- Manufacturing output is at an all-time high and production employment in manufacturing has increased by 117,000 over the past year -- the largest annual increase in over 8 years;
- The economy has grown at 3.5% over the past year, while productivity has grown at 2.4%
- Real per capita disposable income has risen 9.2% since 2001
- Real compensation has risen 1.7%.
Even in the midst of all of these strong economic indicators, the Marxist socialists (the modern left wing of the democrat party) are never satisfied. Like some of my dinner guests, they decry our system by saying that Americans are forced to live below the poverty line, and that the minimum wage needs to be raised. These hysterics use snapshots of evolving data to claim that millions of Americans live without health insurance, or that most Americans can not afford a trip to the Emergency room.
At The American Spectator, Lisa Fabrizio makes a compelling indictment of these modern day socialist democrats.
Democrats often portray themselves as a beacon to the poor and especially protectors of the sacred American middle class. They are prone at almost any time to break into song over the way Republicans "cater to the rich" by cutting taxes and "balance the budget on the backs of the poor."
The ultra-liberal wing of the Democratic Party, which has now become its dominant voice, is essentially made up of socialists, or those who endorse one of their main tenets: state-controlled distribution of wealth. They might couch these ideas in wholly American terms like workers' rights, or claim that it's really only "for the children," but make no mistake about it; they endorse the mantra of Papa Karl Marx.
Fabrizio addresses one of the leading tenants of the democrats fall campaign: their anti Wal-Mart crusade that makes little sense to average common sense Americans.
And the sad part of this tale is that liberal hatred of companies like Wal-Mart keeps them from opening stores in inner city neighborhoods which would be most likely to benefit from their presence. Those of us who grew up in the days when most teenagers had part-time jobs know that working in a retail store is usually only a stepping-off point, yet more than three quarters of Wal-Mart managers joined the company as hourly employees.
Add to these job opportunities for under-educated or retired people, the lower prices which are said to free up $2,300 per average household per year -- possibly for investment or education -- and you can see why liberals quail at the mere mention of the W-word. It's hard to sustain an atmosphere of class warfare when one of the sides is in danger of disappearing.
Contrary to the way liberals treat them, more and more minority Americans refuse to be used as fodder in that war. They want and desire their share of the American dream, and if a job at Wal-Mart or the savings gained by shopping there will enable them to attain it, they will not be denied.
From all indications, liberals will continue to encourage their minority base to remain uneducated, abort their children, deny their religion and wallow in poverty. The more they do, the quicker those good people will assume their rightful place in American society -- a classless one.
I have one wish for the fall campaign: The liberal democrats will run as the socialist/Marxist/party of Europe that they have become.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Huber Heights Final: Kick Kirby to the Curb
The contract settlement which brought closure to the Huber Heights teacher’s strike sounds like a big win for the Huber Heights Education Association. From the perspective of outside observers, it’s a little difficult to believe that Superintendent Kirby and the board permitted the situation to spiral out of control. When the heat kicked up in their self-imposed pressure chamber, Kirby and his board collapsed, and sounded rather off-key with their sour notes in the paper the next day. These off-pitch comments signaled that the teachers got a settlement which met their overall demands. While the HHEA clearly did not get everything that they wanted, they are to be congratulated on using their strength as a professional association to achieve a fair and equitable settlement for their members.
First and foremost, the teachers were able, with relative ease, to close school and bring attention to their plight. From the moment it began, this was a successful strike because Kirby closed school. The natural tension between schools being open with scab teachers means that teachers are loosing their pay for every day on the picket line. In Huber Heights, it is likely that all the school days will be made up, teachers lost no pay, and the teachers spent no days without their health-care. There wasn’t even time to cancel and reinstate the insurance by Friday. Kirby bungled his attempt to scare the teachers back to work. Even precious athletic programs were halted. For those who might be inclined to criticize the teachers in their efforts, one must remember that the Superintendent and the board have the obligation to settle a contract and have employees in place to operate school and all of the extra-curricular programs. Kirby failed in this obligation, and the students and the community suffered the consequences.
The unconfirmed settlement details reported by Scott at Get on the Bus, and sources from within the HHEA, indicate a nice financial deal for the teachers.
Apparently, the teachers will get raises of 3.5%, 3.5%, and 3.0% over the next three years. The teachers have minimal (very minimal) increases in their co-pays for some of the health-care benefits. There is no mention of any increases in their premium contributions. In today’s climate, this is a major win for the HHEA members. The teachers also got some language items that are needed in order for the school environment to remain productive and safe.
All of this leaves the lingering question of what was gained by the hapless Kirby and his board. The board allowed, even encouraged, public perceptions to develop that the Huber Heights schools do not and will not need more money to operate their district in the next few years. By allowing the situation to spiral out of control, Kirby and the ineffectual board brought a level of scrutiny and inquiry upon the board and their every expenditure. The strike highlighted the spectrum of administrative salaries-never a winner for any board. While teacher salaries are the source of public discontent, there is unanimous resentment of administrative salaries. Administrative salaries can provoke a public riot.
Kirby and his board placed their ineptitude from and center under the glare of the public spotlight. As the CEO of the district it is incumbent upon Kirby to have prevented the strike in the first place. Clearly, one day of mediation, and an undercurrent of strenuous public pressure, was enough to settle the issues. Kirby should have had the professionalism and personal integrity to bring closure to the matter in the hours immediately preceding the strike. In the days ahead, Kirby’s lack of good judgment, verbal clumsiness, lack of sophistication and outright intolerance will haunt him and the Huber Heights school district.
Kirby might consider marketing his “skills” in Labor/Management and dispute resolution to another district in the state where they desire an orchestrated public conflict with disastrous results for the school and the community.
On second thought, those skills aren’t really needed in Ohio any more. Huber Heights should kick Kirby to the curb and start over with someone more capable. Only qualified Superintendents with the dexterity, flexibility, and intellectual capacity to work collaboratively with teachers and the community need apply.
First and foremost, the teachers were able, with relative ease, to close school and bring attention to their plight. From the moment it began, this was a successful strike because Kirby closed school. The natural tension between schools being open with scab teachers means that teachers are loosing their pay for every day on the picket line. In Huber Heights, it is likely that all the school days will be made up, teachers lost no pay, and the teachers spent no days without their health-care. There wasn’t even time to cancel and reinstate the insurance by Friday. Kirby bungled his attempt to scare the teachers back to work. Even precious athletic programs were halted. For those who might be inclined to criticize the teachers in their efforts, one must remember that the Superintendent and the board have the obligation to settle a contract and have employees in place to operate school and all of the extra-curricular programs. Kirby failed in this obligation, and the students and the community suffered the consequences.
The unconfirmed settlement details reported by Scott at Get on the Bus, and sources from within the HHEA, indicate a nice financial deal for the teachers.
Apparently, the teachers will get raises of 3.5%, 3.5%, and 3.0% over the next three years. The teachers have minimal (very minimal) increases in their co-pays for some of the health-care benefits. There is no mention of any increases in their premium contributions. In today’s climate, this is a major win for the HHEA members. The teachers also got some language items that are needed in order for the school environment to remain productive and safe.
All of this leaves the lingering question of what was gained by the hapless Kirby and his board. The board allowed, even encouraged, public perceptions to develop that the Huber Heights schools do not and will not need more money to operate their district in the next few years. By allowing the situation to spiral out of control, Kirby and the ineffectual board brought a level of scrutiny and inquiry upon the board and their every expenditure. The strike highlighted the spectrum of administrative salaries-never a winner for any board. While teacher salaries are the source of public discontent, there is unanimous resentment of administrative salaries. Administrative salaries can provoke a public riot.
Kirby and his board placed their ineptitude from and center under the glare of the public spotlight. As the CEO of the district it is incumbent upon Kirby to have prevented the strike in the first place. Clearly, one day of mediation, and an undercurrent of strenuous public pressure, was enough to settle the issues. Kirby should have had the professionalism and personal integrity to bring closure to the matter in the hours immediately preceding the strike. In the days ahead, Kirby’s lack of good judgment, verbal clumsiness, lack of sophistication and outright intolerance will haunt him and the Huber Heights school district.
Kirby might consider marketing his “skills” in Labor/Management and dispute resolution to another district in the state where they desire an orchestrated public conflict with disastrous results for the school and the community.
On second thought, those skills aren’t really needed in Ohio any more. Huber Heights should kick Kirby to the curb and start over with someone more capable. Only qualified Superintendents with the dexterity, flexibility, and intellectual capacity to work collaboratively with teachers and the community need apply.
It's Carnival Time Again
It's time once again for the weekly Carnival of Insanities at Dr. Sanity. This is an opportunity to laugh at some of the insanity we all live with each and every day.
You also still have the chance to look at the 82nd Carnival of Education.
There's a lot of great reading at both of these blogger festivals.
You also still have the chance to look at the 82nd Carnival of Education.
There's a lot of great reading at both of these blogger festivals.
Saturday, September 02, 2006
Nazis/Terrorists; Rhetorically Speaking: The Same Thing
Jeffrey Lord wrote a splendid piece yesterday for the American Spectator. The need to constantly place the current war on Islamo-fascists into a meaningful historical context will never go away with the mainstream media and their radical friends in the democrat party beating the drum to bring the troops home, and allow the word to take care of itself.
Were there no economic and security consequences, the entire nation would like to forget about the terrorists. We never hear any liberal leader or leftist politician expound fully on their theory of leaving Iraq and their vision of the post war global geo-political composition. The dirty little secret is that there is no plan.
If the media were to expose this vast, intellectually vacant philosophy, the democrats would lose in a landslide this November.
Although the liberals are screeching loudly, the lessons of Nazi Germany from World War II are directly applicable to the situation today.
After more than a decade of losing elections to Democrats, after three straight presidential losses to Franklin D. Roosevelt -- the man conservative Republicans loved to hate -- the scent of victory was at last in the air for the GOP.
But there was a problem, and a big one at that. The previous December 7th America had been attacked at Pearl Harbor. The attack was a disaster, killing 2,471 military and civilians and destroying a considerable portion of the U.S. Navy. For the second time in just over twenty years the country was now at war. Not only were we fighting the Japanese but the Germans and the Italians too.
Lord goes on to ask the question, what did the Republicans do?
Savage FDR? Run on a campaign of "Roosevelt lied and people died"? Should they go out and tell the American people just how dangerously incompetent the man was, that the best thing to do was make peace with Hitler and Japan's Hirohito, then elect Republicans who would simply force FDR to bring home the boys and let the rest of the world cope with chaos? After all, a few years earlier FDR himself had turned back an ocean liner filled with 937 Jews escaping the looming Holocaust. The idea of not making Hitler, Hirohito or Mussolini any angrier than they were was certainly one approach.
The Republicans did none of the above. Instead, with the President on the political ropes at last, with a burgeoning team of attractive GOP candidates all over the country they did something else.
They rallied to FDR.
The Republicans won 44 seats in the house that Fall, and supported FDR through to victory in 1945. These Republicans did not commit the heresies against our people and our way of life as the current liberals do.
The disgusting display of political opportunism currently being demonstrated by the elected leadership of the democrat party is treasonous, and should NEVER be rewarded by voters at the polls this November.
Were there no economic and security consequences, the entire nation would like to forget about the terrorists. We never hear any liberal leader or leftist politician expound fully on their theory of leaving Iraq and their vision of the post war global geo-political composition. The dirty little secret is that there is no plan.
If the media were to expose this vast, intellectually vacant philosophy, the democrats would lose in a landslide this November.
Although the liberals are screeching loudly, the lessons of Nazi Germany from World War II are directly applicable to the situation today.
After more than a decade of losing elections to Democrats, after three straight presidential losses to Franklin D. Roosevelt -- the man conservative Republicans loved to hate -- the scent of victory was at last in the air for the GOP.
But there was a problem, and a big one at that. The previous December 7th America had been attacked at Pearl Harbor. The attack was a disaster, killing 2,471 military and civilians and destroying a considerable portion of the U.S. Navy. For the second time in just over twenty years the country was now at war. Not only were we fighting the Japanese but the Germans and the Italians too.
Lord goes on to ask the question, what did the Republicans do?
Savage FDR? Run on a campaign of "Roosevelt lied and people died"? Should they go out and tell the American people just how dangerously incompetent the man was, that the best thing to do was make peace with Hitler and Japan's Hirohito, then elect Republicans who would simply force FDR to bring home the boys and let the rest of the world cope with chaos? After all, a few years earlier FDR himself had turned back an ocean liner filled with 937 Jews escaping the looming Holocaust. The idea of not making Hitler, Hirohito or Mussolini any angrier than they were was certainly one approach.
The Republicans did none of the above. Instead, with the President on the political ropes at last, with a burgeoning team of attractive GOP candidates all over the country they did something else.
They rallied to FDR.
The Republicans won 44 seats in the house that Fall, and supported FDR through to victory in 1945. These Republicans did not commit the heresies against our people and our way of life as the current liberals do.
The disgusting display of political opportunism currently being demonstrated by the elected leadership of the democrat party is treasonous, and should NEVER be rewarded by voters at the polls this November.
Searching for Kaye Saunders-Sloan
Good Morning All:
My great friend Kaye Saunders Sloan tried to contact me recently using the email provided on this blog in my contact information. The email address she used will not permit me to respond. There is something corrupt with the address. Kaye: please contact me again, and yes, it's me. I could easily write an entire post about days at Anderson College, now Anderson University. There is "holy ground" at Anderson University. Any Anderson Alumni reading this post feel free to comment on your days at Anderson. Please join in the dialogue!
Here's hoping that Kasey will try again! And here's to Anderson University.
Here's hoping that Kasey will try again! And here's to Anderson University.
Friday, September 01, 2006
Paul Hackett: Latest Liberal Hatchet Man
Outrageous comments are made daily by news anchors, reporters, and commentators on cable news. Partisan hacks often join in the fun, and it’s a little difficult to keep up with the profuse insanities. Great sites like News Busters, Hot Air, MsUnderestimated, and others have a constant flow of information regarding ridiculous assertions and tainted liberal comments. A few hours of watching the shrill voices of cable news in a week conjures up images of a screeching cat fight on a hot summer night. In the midst of these outrage fests, it is difficult to find the new low, but this week Paul Hackett stopped the show with his mean-spirited, hate-filled comments directed at the dignified and humble Dan Senor during the Bill O’Reilly program.
A critical fact is that Bill wasn’t there that night. John Kasich is a nice guy, and does a fine job most of the time, but Hackett had obviously had his insults prepared and succeeded in shouting down Kasich. I am surprised that any host on Fox News would permit a guest to remain on the air after referring to a noble American as a Nazi. Hackett launched into his prepared insults by referring to Dan Senor as Herr Senor, and then called this former Press Secretary as the Unterfuhrer. Hackett had unleashed his rehearsed his Nazi rhetoric, and caused a sensation in the nutzville blogger community.
The editors at The Unalienable Right tell the story.
Paul Hackett has had his fifteen minutes of fame. MSNBC has tried for eighteen months to make Hackett into a star. The radical left wing loves him. The truth is that liberals think that it’s fine to refer to any conservative as a Nazi, but it is anathema to do not compare our Islamo-fascist enemies to Hitler or Hirohito.
These radical views, embodied so fully by Paul Hackett and others, may make a huge splash in the media, but they certainly do not have the moral weight to win the fundamental debate of our time. A large portion of our citizens have lost focus in the global war on terror. The terrorist threat no longer seems real, and until our nation experiences (God forbid) another massive attack, the radical democrats and their will accomplices in the media will continue their blame America, cut and run scheme as a strategy to appeal to voters. The United States may have to experience the debacle of having the liberals in charge of things to realize that it is time to vote for and demand a responsible government once again.
Others on this topic: Hugh Hewitt, Johnny Dollar's Place, Mark Levin Fan, Round Two at Hot Air, First State Politics.
Check out Stop The ACLU.
A critical fact is that Bill wasn’t there that night. John Kasich is a nice guy, and does a fine job most of the time, but Hackett had obviously had his insults prepared and succeeded in shouting down Kasich. I am surprised that any host on Fox News would permit a guest to remain on the air after referring to a noble American as a Nazi. Hackett launched into his prepared insults by referring to Dan Senor as Herr Senor, and then called this former Press Secretary as the Unterfuhrer. Hackett had unleashed his rehearsed his Nazi rhetoric, and caused a sensation in the nutzville blogger community.
The editors at The Unalienable Right tell the story.
.
Look what Hackett is trying to say there. Some conservatives and members of the Bush administration have been making the comparison of our current terrorist enemies to some of our enemies of the past, such as Nazis, communists and fascists. Hackett is calling a fellow American who served in Iraq (as a civilian) a Nazi. By saying in essence "he started it" Hackett is implying that calling the terrorists fascists and calling his fellow American a Nazi are somehow equivalent, or that the former somehow justifies the latter. In other words, Hackett is asserting some equivalence in "the Nazi dialogue" comparing Osama bin Ladin to the Nazis and Hackett's own words comparing Senor to the Nazis. There also seems to be an implicit objection from the left to calling our Islamofascist enemies "fascists." Not just that it's an inaccurate historical reference, which is debatable, but that it's somehow wrong to call them that.
Or, Hackett is a foul-mouthed, hot-headed, unthinking ignoramus who just plain doesn't know what he's saying. Take your pick.
We caught a few minutes of the Rush Limbaugh show this morning, and he was making a similar observation - liberals/Democrats didn't object much, if at all, when Senator Durbin compared U.S. troops serving at Guantanamo Bay to Nazis and communists, but they are speaking up to object when our radical Islamist enemies are compared to Nazis or fascists. People who are so morally confused simply cannot be trusted with the majority in Congress in 2006 or with the presidency in 2008.
The Democrats think the enemy is the Bush administration. Republicans think the enemy is radical Islamic terrorism. Voters must decide which view they agree with in November
Paul Hackett has had his fifteen minutes of fame. MSNBC has tried for eighteen months to make Hackett into a star. The radical left wing loves him. The truth is that liberals think that it’s fine to refer to any conservative as a Nazi, but it is anathema to do not compare our Islamo-fascist enemies to Hitler or Hirohito.
These radical views, embodied so fully by Paul Hackett and others, may make a huge splash in the media, but they certainly do not have the moral weight to win the fundamental debate of our time. A large portion of our citizens have lost focus in the global war on terror. The terrorist threat no longer seems real, and until our nation experiences (God forbid) another massive attack, the radical democrats and their will accomplices in the media will continue their blame America, cut and run scheme as a strategy to appeal to voters. The United States may have to experience the debacle of having the liberals in charge of things to realize that it is time to vote for and demand a responsible government once again.
Others on this topic: Hugh Hewitt, Johnny Dollar's Place, Mark Levin Fan, Round Two at Hot Air, First State Politics.
Check out Stop The ACLU.
Kirby, Board Fumble Again
While the Huber Heights teachers appear to be thrilled to be returning to their classrooms, and their satisfaction with the settlement is clear, the ineffectual Superintendent Kirby and his board appear to continue with their comedy of errors. At the conclusion of a strike it is customary and expected that both sides will ratify the agreement within twenty-fours of the other party ratifying. Kirby makes apologies for his board, who obviously were not too worried about the situation since some of the members are out of town. Wow! What a board. It’s easy to see why the board hired someone as hapless and misguided as Kirby. One of the board members even had the nerve and lack of graciousness to sound off with sour comments in the Dayton Daily News.
"I'm not happy the leadership of the HHEA led our teachers out on strike," board member Carl Fisher said.
"The deal was more expensive than I feel the community can afford. I'm afraid it will put future funding in jeopardy."
This total lack of class and integrity does not demonstrate a willingness to move forward with a productive attitude on the part of the board. Mr. Fisher must be speaking for the entire board since his comments appear as the exclusive public statement from the Huber Heights board. His lack of competence is further revealed when he blames the leadership of the HHEA. The union was obviously united behind its’ leaders, and for Fisher to blame the leadership for the strike is short-sighted, childish, and just plain wrong. My guess is that the teachers got a deal they deserved, and that Kirby, Fisher, and the rest of this unimpressive cast of characters on the board are unhappy with their loss.
In a teacher’s strike there are no winners. But, there’s nothing worse than a sore loser.
We hope to do a complete wrap-up this weekend, though we are waiting on sources from both sides to confirm details.
"I'm not happy the leadership of the HHEA led our teachers out on strike," board member Carl Fisher said.
"The deal was more expensive than I feel the community can afford. I'm afraid it will put future funding in jeopardy."
This total lack of class and integrity does not demonstrate a willingness to move forward with a productive attitude on the part of the board. Mr. Fisher must be speaking for the entire board since his comments appear as the exclusive public statement from the Huber Heights board. His lack of competence is further revealed when he blames the leadership of the HHEA. The union was obviously united behind its’ leaders, and for Fisher to blame the leadership for the strike is short-sighted, childish, and just plain wrong. My guess is that the teachers got a deal they deserved, and that Kirby, Fisher, and the rest of this unimpressive cast of characters on the board are unhappy with their loss.
In a teacher’s strike there are no winners. But, there’s nothing worse than a sore loser.
We hope to do a complete wrap-up this weekend, though we are waiting on sources from both sides to confirm details.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
