Tuesday, November 01, 2005

dem senators toy with the country..

it looks like the games are on... harry reid called the senate in to a closed session to discuss the intelligence used in the lead up to the war in iraq.. this is frankly nothing more than political hackery to try to capitalize on the scooter libby indictment. the wilson report has been debunked and the basis for this closed door session is nothing but the lashing out of the people in charge of the last days of the democratic party..

the democrats know that they cannot win in the marketplace of ideas.. they have been voted out of office en masse and they are now on the brink of losing their hold on the judiciary.. you are witnessing the desperate actions of people without souls.

we are witnessing the leaders in the minority party outwardly work to create further danger for our troops in combat. they are grasping for anything to damage the administration, break the countries will to see the war on terrorism out all for their own political gain.

honestly, this is a uniqe point in history - we are watching a party turn on the country. they are in a full panic and they have gone to the only thing they have - bad news for America is good news for the democratic party.

two years of investigations in the plame case has resulted in all of the people they have gone after remaining unscathed. they have pushed a phony indictment of tom delay.. they have an originalist nominated for the court.. we have had 2 successful elections in iraq.. the democrats are running scared..

while this is funny to a degree for us on the right, it is sad for our country. it is also DANGEROUS for our country. these folks, in a grab for power, are willing to send the country down a perilous path.. almost gleefully.

EU's decision on Christ

the EU has decided that Christ should be spelled with a lower case 'c' starting in august of next year.. please be sure to make this adjustment in your communications with folks in the EU. you won't want to be brought in front of the hague to be tried for improper use of 'c'

European Unionlowercases 'Christ'

Brussels' grammar rule says title to be spelled with small 'c' in future
Posted: November 1, 20052:12 p.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
A new grammar rule devised by the European Union in Brussels stipulates the word "Christ" shall be spelled with a lowercase "c."
The rule was part of an orthography reform published in October, reported Canada Free Press.
The paper cites a German newssite, Kath.net, in reporting that the new guidelines also indicate the Dutch word for "Jews" (Joden) is to be spelled with a capital "J" when referring to nationality and with a lower-case "j" when referring to the religion.

The EU changes become mandatory next August. There are no penalties set out for those who insist on continuing to spell Christ with a capital "C."
Canada Free Press noted the title of Javier Solana, secretary general of the EU, was still to be spelled with capital letters.
Many Europeans have long discarded belief in God and in fact believe more deeply in ghosts than in a deity.
A new poll finds two-thirds of Britons said they believe in the existence of ghosts and spirits, but only 55 percent said they believe in the existence of God.
Meanwhile, 26 percent believe in UFOs, 19 percent in reincarnation and 4 percent in the Loch Ness Monster, Ananova reported.

this shouldn't be overly surprising.. the enlightened europeans have been godless for some time.. frankly, religion is a troublesome for these folks.. you have the Christians with all of these rules, muslims with all of these bombs and riots and scarves and jews stealing everyones money.. the euro's have very little need for it all.. man is god for these folks. the simpletons of this world just won't understand until they (the eu) has the power to dictate it all to them.. the infallibility of man is the core of their belief system.. i suppose we'll all see just how fallible man is afterall.

why did geena davis nominate alito ??

A great article from the Washington Times..

The left gets what it asked for
November 1, 2005
LOS ANGELES. California is as far from the reality where the rest of us live as you can get and still keep your feet dry. Californians think Geena Davis, the star of the new television fantasy "Commander in Chief," really is the commander in chief. So when the ground shifted yesterday with the nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court -- a solid 7 on the Richter scale -- nearly everyone here wondered why that nice, sensible President Davis would have done something like that. But even here attention shifted from the headaches of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to the looming Armageddon on the distant other shore. The Terminator's four ballot initiatives to make California more governable are by all accounts becalmed in a sea of indifference, anyway. The early action in Washington is media skirmishing, as the players jostle and jiggle for position against the day when it will be time to lock and load. The high priests of secularism are desperate to protect the rite of abortion, which is to the noisily devout of the left what the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is to orthodox Christianity. Hysteria and hyperbole are the reigning emotions of the holy high rollers. "Abortion will be the first item Judge Alito and I will discuss," says Sen. Arlen Specter, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who never misses a chance to shoot at his friends. Kate Michelman, the past president of NARAL-Pro-Choice America, detected something shiny and significant at her feet, and to her chagrin, it was not a suction pump. "Now the gauntlet has been, I think, thrown down." Barbara Boxer, the senator from California who knows something about appeasing red-hots on her flanks, says, "This nomination is aimed at appeasing the most right-wing elements of the president's political base." Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, eager to provoke, calls the nomination a "needless provocation." Teddy Kennedy, the Massachusetts answer to the prayer of every young woman in distress, describes Samuel Alito as a risk to fundamental American freedoms. (Impeachment to follow?) The curious Democratic reaction to the nomination of Harriet Miers is rendered transparent by the nomination of Judge Alito. The nice things Democratic senators said about her, which stank of mendacity to anyone trying to get a deep breath at the time, were calculated as harmless enough because the Democrats were confident the conservatives would force the president to withdraw a nominee no one wanted. They're continuing to say harmless and insincere nice things about her to demonstrate what reasonable, mellow fellows they were. The usual echoes in the media are contributing the bass (and base) notes to the angry chorus. John Roberts, the CBS correspondent who once imagined himself big enough to fill Dan Rather's BVDs, couldn't get his mind out of his pants yesterday and used a vulgar sexual allusion to demand of the president's press spokesman whether the choice of Judge Alito was merely the president trying to find satisfaction with "sloppy seconds." Ron Fournier rose to the defense of Miss Miers in an Associated Press dispatch, chiding Republicans for demanding that Judge Alito "get a vote in the Senate -- something they denied [Miss] Miers." The first volley at Samuel Alito is that he dissented when his colleagues of the 3rd Circuit declined to evict the nannies of Planned Parenthood from the bedrooms of strangers, ruling that a wife doesn't have to tell her husband when she aborts their child. A generation ago, cries that the Democratic Party had become the party of "abortion, acid and amnesty" sank George McGovern and set up decades of Republican dominance. Acid and amnesty are but dim echoes of that vanished era, but "abortion" is the rallying cry that unites what's left of the party of FDR, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy. It doesn't work. The Democrats tried to cast the '04 presidential campaign as a referendum on "abortion rights," and now we see how risky such a strategy can be. John Kerry, like Al Gore before him, warned that if George W. Bush was elected, he would appoint conservative men and women to the Supreme Court. How right they were. The Democrats got a president, but only in Hollywood and only for an hour once a week.

Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Times.

Monday, October 31, 2005

it's all about the o

it's all about the o.. sometimes, it's about the office, other times it's about books and the home.. and sometimes it's all about the gold..

sorry, i got carried away.. but this week's letter to study is 'O' - as in ORIGINALIST !!

in this article, edward whelan brings up some great points - of which, this is one:

The term "originalism" identifies the traditional, common-sense principle that the meaning of various provisions of the Constitution (and of other laws) is to be determined in accordance with the meaning they bore at the time they were promulgated. The status of originalism as the only legitimate method (or class of methods) of constitutional interpretation inheres in the very nature of the Constitution as law. As Chief Justice Marshall explained in his landmark 1803 opinion in Marbury v. Madison, the Constitution is "committed to writing" so that its "limits may not be mistaken or forgotten." To disregard its limits is to "reduce to nothing what we have deemed the greatest improvement on political institutions — a written constitution."

It is significant that the term "originalism" appears to be of relatively recent vintage. The reason for this is not that there is anything novel about originalism. Precisely the opposite. Until recent years, originalism had been so unchallenged as constitutional orthodoxy that there was no reason to develop a term that would distinguish it from any rival. As Justice Scalia has put it, "in the past, nonoriginalist opinions have almost always had the decency to lie, or at least to dissemble, about what they were doing." But the rise of the "living Constitution" — the Orwellian euphemism that liberal activists have used to pretend that the Constitution has somehow "grown" to entrench forever their own policy preferences — made necessary a label for what everyone had previously recognized as elementary.

In these days of judicial nominees, i think that it's important to point out what we need on the court. This is very well written.

the lies of joe wilson..

in these days of charges and counter charges concerning the 'outing of valerie plame,' i think it's important to really point out who is doing the lying here. now, scooter looks to have fallen in to the martha stewart trap of not telling the whole truth.. but lets look at who is really not telling the truth around here...

Wilson Insisted That The Vice President’s Office Sent Him To Niger:
Wilson Said He Traveled To Niger At CIA Request To Help Provide Response To Vice President’s Office. “In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney’s office had questions about a particular intelligence report. … The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office.” (Joseph C. Wilson, Op-Ed, “What I Didn’t Find In Africa,” The New York Times, 7/6/03)

Lie. Joe's wife sent him. Additionally, let's make sure it is noted that he went live with this in an op-ed before his wife was 'outed' - obviously a major concern on his part that the wife that sent him would not be found out. yawn.

Wilson Claimed His Wife Did Not Suggest He Travel To Niger To Investigate Reports Of Uranium Deal; Instead, Wilson Claims It Came Out Of Meeting With CIA. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “Among other things, you had always said, always maintained, still maintain your wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA officer, had nothing to do with the decision to send to you Niger to inspect reports that uranium might be sold from Niger to Iraq. … Did Valerie Plame, your wife, come up with the idea to send you to Niger?” Joe Wilson: “No. My wife served as a conduit, as I put in my book. When her supervisors asked her to contact me for the purposes of coming into the CIA to discuss all the issues surrounding this allegation of Niger selling uranium to Iraq.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 7/18/04)

More lies.. proof:

But Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Received Not Only Testimony But Actual Documentation Indicating Wilson’s Wife Proposed Him For Trip. “Some CPD, [CIA Counterproliferation Division] officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee staff that the former ambassador’s wife ‘offered up his name’ and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador’s wife says, ‘my husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.’” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

A Month Before The Bob Novak And Matthew Cooper Articles Ever Came Out, Wilson Told The Washington Post That Previous Intelligence Reports About Niger Were Based On Forged Documents:
In June Of 2003, Wilson Told The Washington Post “The Niger Intelligence Was Based On Documents That Had Clearly Been Forged Because ‘The Dates Were Wrong And The Names Were Wrong.’” (Susan Schmidt, “Plame’s Input Is Cited On Niger Mission,” The Washington Post, 7/10/04)

However, “The [Senate Select Committee On Intelligence] Report … Said Wilson Provided Misleading Information To The Washington Post Last June [12th, 2003].” (Susan Schmidt, “Plame’s Input Is Cited On Niger Mission,” The Washington Post, 7/10/04)
Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Unanimous Report: “The Former Ambassador Said That He May Have ‘Misspoken’ To The Reporter When He Said He Concluded The Documents Were ‘Forged.’” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq,” 7/7/04)

This is just a small sampling of the lies that wilson has gone forward with. He is a well documented partisan: (even though he verbally claims differently)

Joe Wilson Is A Registered Democrat. (District Of Columbia Voter Registrations, Accessed 7/14/05)
Joseph Wilson Has Donated Over $8,000 To Democrats Including $2,000 To John Kerry For President In 2003, $1,000 To Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) HILLPAC In 2002 And $3,000 To Al Gore In 1999. (The Center For Responsive Politics Website, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 7/12/05)
Wilson Endorsed John Kerry For President In October 2003 And Advised The Kerry Campaign. (David Tirrell-Wysocki, “Former Ambassador Wilson Endorses Kerry In Presidential Race,” The Associated Press, 10/23/03)
“[Wilson] Admits ‘It Will Be A Cold Day In Hell Before I Vote For A Republican, Even For Dog Catcher.’” (Scott Shane, “Private Spy And Public Spouse Live At Center Of Leak Case,” The New York Times, 7/5/05)

obviously, these things are not covered in the press.. nor is the fact that his report was not considered to be factual or worthwhile..

Wilson Claims His Trip Proved There Was Nothing To The Uranium “Allegations.” “I knew that [Dr. Rice] had fundamentally misstated the facts. In fact, she had lied about it. I had gone out and I had undertaken this study. I had come back and said that this was not feasible. … This government knew that there was nothing to these allegations.” (NBC’s, “Meet The Press,” 5/2/04)


CIA Said Wilson’s Findings Did Not Resolve The Issue.Because [Wilson’s] report, in our view, did not resolve whether Iraq was or was not seeking uranium from abroad, it was given a normal and wide distribution, but we did not brief it to the president, vice president or other senior administration officials. We also had to consider that the former Nigerien officials knew that what they were saying would reach the U.S. government and that this might have influenced what they said.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release 7/11/03)


The Butler Report Claimed That The President’s State Of the Union Statement On Uranium From Africa, “Was Well-Founded.” “We conclude that, on the basis of the intelligence assessments at the time, covering both Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government’s dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that: ‘The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.’ was well-founded.” (The Rt. Hon. The Lord Butler Of Brockwell, “Review Of Intelligence, On Weapons Of Mass Destruction,” 7/14/04)

make up your own mind.. the mainstream press is not covering the lack of veracity on joe wilson's part.. facts speak for themselves.

it's alito !!

the white house apparently received the message.. let's do this thing right. let's stop playing around, trying to make nice with the other side of the aisle. lets take the mandate provided us and make our mark... after a series of missteps, the administration is turning the boat back toward the right. first came the comments on the border situation.. then came the miers withdrawal. now, we have a certified judicial conservative nominated for the supreme court.

alito's record and skills are beyond reproach. we are going to see the democrats crank up the smear machine to new highs, however. alito has ruled in cases concerning husband notification of abortion in pa. he ruled in a dissenting opinion that husbands should be notified prior to their wifes getting an abortion. mind you, this isn't an approval from the husband, but just notification. scalia quoted alito in his dissent when this case was decided at the supreme court. now, i'm not sure about you, but i that when you consider things like parental and spouse notification on abortion, it makes far more common sense than the on-demand ability to rip a baby apart in the womb at any part of the pregnancy.

i think we will see further alienation of the liberal left and democratic party when we start to see the confirmation process unfold. in the marketplace of ideas, the dems lose every time. this nominee will force them to pull their masks off and expose their absence of conscience. this country has grown weary of trying to understand people who abuse children and murder neighbors while protecting the right to kill unborn babies. the rights of the guilty far outweigh the rights of the innocent in some peoples mind.. unborn children are viewed as 'inconvenient' and same sex marriage is a violation of civil rights.. their views are indefensible for the moral, educated citizen... and once again, they will lose in the public arena.

bush has taken some major strides in bringing back the folks who have supported him up to this point.. lets all get ready for the fight.