Follow by Email

Monday, July 31, 2006

The NYT, Lieberman, Lamont.

Hey folks,

Happy Monday morning. May I remind you,

89. Journalists do not take part in politics. While staff members are entitled to vote and to register in party primaries, they must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of our news operations. In particular, they may not campaign for, demonstrate for, or endorse candidates, ballot causes or efforts to enact legislation. They may not wear campaign buttons or themselves display any other insignia of partisan politics. NYT ethics policy.

Even though they have this "ethics" policy, and truly want you to believe that they are neutral and independent, they show their true selves on a daily bases. This Sunday is no different. Yesterday, the NYT said,

"If Mr. Lieberman had once stood up and taken the lead in saying that there were some places a president had no right to take his country even during a time of war, neither he nor this page would be where we are today. But by suggesting that there is no principled space for that kind of opposition, he has forfeited his role as a conscience of his party, and has forfeited our support."

They also said that, Lieberman's efforts "to appear above the partisan fray" have turned him into one of the administration's most useful allies. They are supporting Lamont who the most recent Quinnipiac Poll this month shows him with a slight lead over Lieberman, 51 to 47 percent among likely voters in the Aug. 8 primary. The survey's sampling error margin is plus or minus 4 percentage points, so still anyone’s game.

LOL, we know you can’t have that, can you? You cannot agree with this President and expect that the NTY will back you. That just will not happen. But others ARE endorsing Lieberman, even those that usually do not endorse anyone. Could it be they want to distance themselves as far from the NYT as they can?

The Hartford Courant, who said that it does not usually endorse candidates in primaries, but did so now because the race has drawn national attention and is a "defining moment" in the debate about the war on terrorism. Of course they also do not want to be seen as the NYT. They wrote,

"Mr. Lieberman's history of enthusiasm for military interventions overseas is an anomaly in a man famous for mediating among warring factions in Washington. But to dismiss this moderate, a vanishing breed in a Congress sundered by extremism on both sides, for dissenting on a single issue would be a terrible waste. And a mistake."

The Connecticut Post on Sunday also backed Lieberman. It wrote,

"There have been many times when we've disagreed with the senator, but his overall record is commendable and the record of a fighter who has been there for Connecticut in the areas of defense contracts, the environment, education, health care, civil rights and transportation."

So you see, even though the Currant and the Post are Liberal papers, they are not members of the LWL. The NYTs on the other hand, spend a lot of time and money to try to convince you that they are not what they show themselves to be on a daily bases, a member and tool of the Left Wing Looneys.

I have talked about this before. This is absolutely amazing to me that the LWL and the NYT would throw a die-hard party member like Lieberman under the bus, just because he agreed with the President on ONE issue.

I like Lieberman, I do not always agree with him, but I like him. All this stuff going on? It all may be good for him in the end. He may truly be one who could rise up and get more votes as an Independent, and may actually win. This would be a positive move for those who hate party politics, and are looking for something new. It could also be a sign to both parties, STOP PLAYING GAMES...

Sunday, July 30, 2006

IWA for Sunday, 30th 2006,

Hey folks,

As you know the Last week winner of the IWA, actually turn out to be a nice guy, just doing what he was asked to do my his mother. He came on and gave his side of the story. This convinced me that the facts as reported were not complete, nor were the telling the whole story, so I retracted the IWA and I did and do wish Mr. Lehto well. I forwent the Saturday Daily Article because I wanted all to see the retration.

This week’s winner? One the recipient actually AGREES he is an idiot. This weeks winner is,,, Mel Gibson who issued a lengthy statement Saturday apologizing for his drunk driving arrest and saying he has battled alcoholism throughout his life.

So he is intoxicated and going 87 mph in a 45 mph zone, at 2:36am on Friday, when this annoying and insignificant peon Police Officer had to bother him. According to many sources, including Mel himself,

"I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested,"

He was telling the officer that he would ruin him {The officer} because he {Mel} "Owned Malibu". He is reported as saying that Jews star wars, and asked the officer if he was a jew. Among much more.

Mel said,

"The arresting officer was just doing his job and I feel fortunate that I was apprehended before I caused injury to any other person. I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested and said things that I do not believe to be true and which are despicable."

Now do not misunderstand. I like Mel. I love the Mad Max, Lethal Weapon movies, "What Women Want" {Well, ok, I love Helen Hunt} and "Ransom" I love his movies I like him. Here is a little trivia fact for you. Do you know where Mel was born and spend the first 12 years of his life? Salisbury Mills NY. That’s right, MY old stopping grounds.

But what he did was stupid. First he put other peoples lives in danger by getting behind the wheel intoxicated, then he acted "belligerent" and even threatened the officer. I truly hope in this case, that he is treated just like you or I would be if it were us. I’m so tired of these actors, stars, and politicians, getting treated differently just because of their money and fame. He did apologize, but he needs to pay the price.

Congratulations Mel, because of your actions on Friday, you are the Idiot of the week.

Saturday, July 29, 2006

First Time EVER, Retraction of An IWA

Hey folks,

That's correct. For the first time ever, I will be retracting and rescinding the Idiot of the Week Award, and apologizing to the winner. On the 23rd of July, I posted the winner as Mr. Neil Lehto. you know, the one that gave the $100.00 reward to the homelessman for finding reportedly, $21,000 in bonds? Well, Mr Lehto came on the comment section, of the article, and gave his side of the story. After hearing his story, I DO retract, rescind, and apologize. Here is what he posted,

Neil J. Lehto said...

"My late father, Ernest E. Lehto, was a parcel post supervisor who worked the night shift at the Main Post Office on Jefferson along the Detroit River. He was a quiet, caring man, who was born in a Finnish UP farming town in 1925 and spoke no English until he came to the city in 1930. Nonetheless, he graduated at the top of his high school class, tried to enlist and failed, moved back to the UP, tried again and succeeded. He fought behind General Patton in the battles across France and into Germany that ended World War II, working as a scout and chaplain's assistant.

Only in the few years before his death on May 23, 2004, did he tell me some enthralling stories of exploits and miracles he thought occurred while he fought with the greatest generation overseas. Ernie went to work for Dodge Main, applied and entered the postal service. He despaired over the riots of 1976 and was ever troubled by the problems of racial division and the impact of poverty on the community he loved.

He told a great story about going through the cupboards of an abandoned farmhouse in southern France when his platoon sergeant appeared at the back door and asked if the cellar had been searched and secured. "Not yet," Dad replied. The sergeant stepped downstairs cautiously. A few moments later, up the stairs marched 11 unarmed German soldiers followed by the sergeant. "I was looking for bottles of wine," Dad explained.

On Saturday, July 22, 2006, The Detroit News front page reported another story in which my father played a key role. Three weeks ago a homeless man, 59-year-old Charles Moore, searching for returnable bottles in a dumpster at the downtown Fort Street Presbyterian Church found a light jacket, which emptied out 31 saving bonds. He turned them into a 24-hour homeless shelter and the staff sought out the owner.

It was Ernie.

Friday I went to pick them up. The Detroit News. This story went across country and across the world to more than 330 newspapers and TV stations -- Iraq, London, Alabama, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Florida and more. The headline writers distorted what really happened in a way which I need to explain. Here is the whole story, some very important details of which were left-out by the six newspaper, radio and television interviewers I spoke to over the next several days and never made it to the news wire services.

Following his death, we bundled up many plastic bags of his old clothes and went through his papers, finding many saving bonds, stuffed here and there. My mother was flabbergasted. That others may have eluded us is just the beginning. The old clothes were picked by the Salvation Army. Mom administered and closed his estate about a year ago.

When a shelter worker called my mother on Thursday or Friday, July 6 or 7, if I recall correctly, she told a vague story. Mom referred her to me. I got few details -- no names, location of the shelter or even who had possession of the savings bonds she said totaled at $9,000, which would belong entirely to my mother, an 82-year-old widow and a retired teacher. That description of my mother may well fit the stereotype but is not the whole picture. She also went to law school and knew exactly what her rights and responsibilities were.

My mother said that I could offer a reward of $100 upon their return. Mom thought it might be a scam and warned me not to visit the shelter without a police escort. Also, what if my Dad had already reported them stolen, lost and cashed them in? The shelter worker could neither accept nor refuse my mother's offer but said she would call me back when they checked with the homeless man who found them and an agency supervisor. When nobody called back as promised, my mother assumed the man never returned and on Thursday, July 20, she filed by mail all of the necessary paperwork to have any of Ernie's uncashed savings bonds re-issued by the U.S. Bureau of Public Debt. Savings Bonds aren't transferable and their ownership is determined by the names on the bonds, not by who physically holds them.

The bonds that Mr. Moore found may, for example, have already been replaced following a report by Ernie years ago owner that they were missing. Their home was broken into and this important detail, which I told The Detroit News reporter, is missing from what she wrote. In that case, the bonds Mr. Moore found would be worthless and belong to the U.S. Government, which is very careful not to pay for the same bonds twice. Even if they were stolen or lost and Ernie never filed a claim, they still belong to my mother as POD beneficiary. If anyone finds savings bonds that belong to someone else, they should be sent to the U.S. Government, which would hold them pending a claim from the owner. My mother did so on Thursday, July 20.

Meanwhile, the homeless shelter, which apparently had possession of the bonds, contacted a reporter at The Detroit News, who called me the next day, early Friday morning, July 21. I suggested that the reporter call my mother. The shelter called me some 30 to 60 minutes later and said it was arranging a meeting for 3:30 at which I could personally thank Mr. Moore and deliver my mother's reward. I was a newspaper reporter for six years or so and I knew this was a set-up for a great human interest story by a well-deserving non-profit agency, the Neighborhood Services Organization ("NSO"), doing a very hard job. From what I saw when I was there, they are doing it as well as can be expected. I respect and understand their decision to do what they did. They wanted their piece of the story. I also knew that the newspaper already had its piece, too. Where was it going to end?

Knowing as I did what was going to happen under the circumstances -- a likely front page newspaper story featuring an honest homeless man returning $9,000 in saving bonds was certain to generate a big positive reaction among readers -- I went to the meeting knowing that Mr. Moore and the shelter would be much rewarded by the community's reaction to his honesty. Little did I know.

If I had not gone the story might have dropped off the front page but featured instead an honest homeless man, my apparently ungrateful 82-year old mother and her possible recovery of $9,000 in savings bonds because I told The Detroit New reporter that my mother had already filed a claim for any missing savings bonds. That I considered unacceptable because it would leave her exposed to further calls from the newspapers, radio and television stations that, instead, I alone received. Did I do the right thing? Some friends and family think not because of the stress it has caused me and them, too. I disagree because here is what I knew would happen and did. Rewards swell to $4,000 for Homeless Man.

After talking to the agency supervisor, I called by mother and told her that I wanted to go meet the homeless man who found the bonds and express her appreciation personally. She agreed and I called the agency back. Arrangements were made and I drove down and met the supervisor at the NSO office on Bagley and followed him one and half-mile north to the shelter. This 24-hour shelter is in one Detroit's most devastated areas, between Cass and Third south of Wayne State University. It would be a frightening trip for anyone. I lived and grew up in suburban Pleasant Ridge but attended Wayne State University and the Detroit College of Law in the 1960s and 70s when their surrounding neighborhoods were deteriorating. When I arrived, people lingered on the curbs as the supervisor drove his car in ahead of me and parked in a broken-glass strewn parking lot. Wrecked furniture, tattered lawn chairs, blankets, towels, bottles, cans, paper and stray possessions spread across the vacant lots to the north, south, east and west.

People were streaming in and out through the metal detector screening machine set up at the entry way but not Mr. Moore. I was expecting him there by what I was told. If they made any effort, I don't know but, having visited earlier in the day, The Detroit News got his photograph and talked with him. This part of the set-up conjured-up by the NSO and the newspaper is particularly upsetting to me because they never told me before I saw his picture on the front page of the next day's newspaper. I asked the reporter why and she answered, "Well, you know, that's what we do."

I delivered the token reward of five $20 bills and picked up 31 bonds issued from 1980 to 1986 with a face value of $8,900 with the two newspaper reporters/photographers gathered around. If the bonds were found in a dumpster as he reported, it was probably hours or days away from being hauled to a landfill to be buried. The reporter told me that she had calculated their current value with interest at $21,000. The coincidence of his finding and his returning them is a truly remarkable story but what the reporter wrote was personally devastating -- West Bloomfield lawyer Neil J. Lehto is $21,000 richer by the honesty of a homeless man who would get from him no more than a $100 reward.

Not only is that completely untrue -- all 31 of the savings bonds designate my mother as the sole POD beneficiary and they may be worthless -- but it's the worst kind sensational journalism serving up stereotype and formula writing to readers. Regardless, I don't disagree that $100 was a mere token. However, offering any bigger amount did not make any sense at the time. Without quibbling, I do hope for my mother that they are worth $21,000 but nobody yet knows and Mr. Moore's actions are as admirable as he is needy.That part of the story is yet to be finished. Suggestions in the press and letter columns that my mother or I or my brothers, should have paid 10 percent or more for the return of possibly worthless bonds is absurd. What my mother will do later awaits verification that these saving bonds have any value and the protection of her privacy.

There is also a deeply instructive civics lesson in this because what the headline writers and some readers saw as a windfall received without adequate gratitude by way of an honest homeless man, was for my mother, at least, and many of my parent's generation, nothing more than an entitlement recovered by the demands of moral, social and legal justice. Moreover, for her and many of them, $100 was not a token amount under these circumstances.

Furthermore, the plight of homeless men and women and the struggling agencies that serve some of their needs highlighted by this story is a community responsibility.People criticizing the $100 reward offered to a homeless man for returning $21,000 in bonds need to remember that doing the right thing should come without any payback. It's nice people have raised more money. But where were they before the money was turned in? There are lots of homeless in need. Let's rally to help before, not after the fact. I did my part by showing up and unwittingly giving this story its special sizzle.

My reward? The Detroit News is running letters from readers under the headline Homeless Man Gets Cheated on Finder's Fee. Accusing me in print of cheating Mr. Moore is mean and defamatory. And what's this misleading reference to a finder's fee? I know there are websites and so-called finders that search for lost or missing stocks, commercial and municipal bonds and some will charge a fee to check for savings bonds, too. However, the Bureau of Public Debt makes doing so easy and free for anybody! In fact, my mother had already filed the paperwork before I even heard back from the homeless shelter that it had Ernie's bonds.

An unreported part of this human interest story is about me and my father because the last wedding I went to for a daughter, Amanda, was when Ernie died the night before at 2 o'clock in the morning. I was there when he finally succumbed to a massive stroke. The next wedding I went to was Saturday night, July 22, to celebrate the marriage of my youngest brother's step-daughter, Jamie. I think Ernie is determined to make an unmistakable and powerful mark on his sons and grandchildren. Certainly, the timing of these events is exquisitely poignant.

That's the true story. If the shelter agency had responded days earlier, if any reasonable effort had been made for me to meet Mr. Moore -- he comes there every morning for breakfast, they said later -- it could also have been different. Another story in there is about a social service system that looks awful shabby in its sorting and re-distribution of donated clothing. I don’t think that a homeless man looking for returnable bottles was also trying on old jackets that hot summer day but, instead, going through pockets looking for spare change. It seems obvious that this particular bag was never inspected before being discarded more than two years later.

To the 100 or so readers of the The Detroit News and other media from across the country -- who left me a series of anonymous telephone messages all night Saturday and throughout the day, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday or sent another 100 rude and vulgar or more e-mail messages asking why I was such a cheap bastard, etc., I ask what is the big difference between this story and Homeless Man Finds $68,000 Savings Bonds? Do you suppose the elderly woman there might not have had a son who happened to practice law she asked to deliver her $100 reward into a trap set-up by the local press?

I also respond with what Ernie, who had a wry sense of humor, would have said to me if I could have asked him:

"Do what your mother tells you to do!"

Thank you Mr. Lehto for taking time to give your side of the story. Best wishes to you and your Mom. I do hope they turn out to be real.

Friday, July 28, 2006

Why Are We Still Listening To These People?

Hey folks,

The UN has spoken. That’s right, The U.N. Human Rights Committee told Washington it should immediately shut all "secret detention" facilities. I do not remember any evidence brought forth that confirm any of these exist. So far it has been accusations, theories, and unfounded rumors. They also want to give the International Committee of the Red Cross access to anybody held in armed conflict.

Proof of these places? The committee said it had "credible and uncontested," information that they exist. That would be? Also that the United States had detained people "secretly and in secret places for months and years." Again, that proof would be what?

You folks ever read the "Left Behind" series? Did you ever see some of the movies out there that depict the end of the world in one fashion or the other. Interestingly enough, in a lot of these scenarios, a one world government or a new world order, is in place. All sovereignty of all countries are turned over to one organization. In the "Left Behind" series, the President turns our sovereignty over to the UN. Who led the UN? The anti-Christ.

We know this will never happen with Bush as President. We know that if we had another like him, this would not happen. Are you willing to "bet" on a LWL member as President, standing up to this anti-Semitism filled, hateful, terrorist helping, America hating, insane organization known as the UN? Or do you think that we would just bow down to them in the name of our "need" of world acceptance?

With 102 days to go to the midterms, you MAY want to think about that. As for the UN. Why are there still some, albeit very few, that still believe we should listen to them? They are a joke, hate us, do not have our interests in mind, and want our money. They hate us, we should just wave them off as what they are, a waste of time.

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Chicago, Greed, Wal-Mart.

Hey folks,

Will Wal-Mart be leaving Chicago? I would. That’s right, if I were the owner and operator of the largest retail chain in the World, I would be hanging the sign on the doors that reads,

"To our most valued customers. We thank you for your years of service. We are sorry to inform you that due to the greed of a small few, we have been left with a choice. We could either pay an unfair, and unearned, wage in the city of Chicago, or go elsewhere. We have decided to close our doors to protect the rest of our customers from being affected in the need to increase our prices. Again, thank you. Sincerely Wal-Mart mgt."

According to the AP Article

The ordinance, which passed 35-14 Wednesday after three hours of impassioned debate, requires mega-retailers to pay wages of at least $10 an hour plus $3 in fringe benefits by mid-2010. It would only apply to companies with more than $1 billion in annual sales and stores of at least 90,000 square feet.

The City Council calls this a living wage. I call this ridiculous. Whatever happened to going to work for a company, AGREEING to the salary they were offering, working hard and working your way up through the company? You KNOW what they are offering when you CHOSE to accept the job. You have a "right" to work there or not. You can work somewhere else because they pay more, and if enough people do that, then Wal-Mart would be forced to raise their salary even higher to attract workers. But to DEMAND that they pay $10 an hour plus $3 in fringe benefits by mid-2010?

This is not an earned salary. No employee has to work hard and work their way up. This is greed. Plain an simple. Someone, somewhere, sat back and looked at the money that Wal-Mart deals with and said, I want some of that. Of course the employees do not mind. Then you have the general public thinking to themselves, hey, the biggest retailer in the world can afford it. Who cares?

Well, I’m here to tell you that YOU should care. Why? If they choose to stay in Chicago, YOU, the consumer, will be paying this outrageous, and unfair salary for their employees to stock the selves and check you out. Picture this, according to the Chicago City Counsel, the guy pushing carts outside, may be making more money than some of the shoppers that go there.

Do you think, as Mayor Richard M. Daley warned, that the living wage proposal would drive jobs and desperately needed development from some of the city's poorest neighborhoods and lead giants like Wal-Mart to abandon the city.?

Listen to what Michael Lewis, Wal-Mart's senior vice president of store operations, said in a statement,

"This imposes special interest mandates that will unfairly deny savings and job opportunities to those who need them most. It's wrong for the City Council to tell the people of Chicago where to shop and to make it harder for inner-city residents to find jobs."

Yes folks, I do not really care all that much for Wal-Mart, but I do understand that this is an insane decision on the City’s part, that could very well destroy their economy. I also understand that this is yet another example of people wanting to be given everything, and do nothing. Greed will drive Wal-Mart out, and keep others from coming in. I would hope that Mayor Daley will veto this, but time will tell.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Teen Abortion Bill Passes,,

Hey folks,

I am VERY happy to report that the Senate passed the Parental Notification bill. Late last night, Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, saw a 65-35 vote to pass the bill. It should now be negotiated to bridge the differences with the House version. Then to the White House where President Bush WILL sign it into law.

Here’s the breakdown. Fourteen Democrats and 51 Republicans voted for the bill. There were four Republicans who voted against it. Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., was absent.

Now the Senate bill would protect the girl and her parents from prosecution, as well as provide an exception for anyone who helps a girl end her pregnancy when the pregnancy poses a threat to the mother's life. It also contains a way for girls with abusive parents to ask a court to allow the abortion without her parents' notification. This we all can agree on.

That is if Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. fails to block it. He used a procedural motion to halt its progress right after the vote. Sad, but normal for the LWL who do not get their way. Put it for a vote. People vote against the LWL. The LWL do everything in their power to fight it anyway. No matter how stupid or out there, their position is, even if they have NO chance at winning

What Sen. Dick Durbin did was object on the negotiations, on the grounds that the bill had not been considered by a committee, and that negotiations were premature. This move prevented Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., from appointing Senate negotiators.

Sen. Majority Leader Frist, said,

"I hope this is not a sign that they're going to try to obstruct this bill,"

Of course they are Senator. They are like little children that do not get their way, they whine and cry, and throw a tantrum. This is their way.

Now as we already discussed, polls show there is widespread public backing for the bill, with almost three quarters of respondents saying a parent has the right to give consent before a child under 18 has an abortion. Three quarters folks.

Six states that a child could be taken to are Connecticut, Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia who have no parental consent or notification laws. Legal challenges have blocked such laws in nine other states, which are Alaska, California, Idaho, Illinois, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey and New Mexico.

This would not be the case, if there is, as I predict there WILL be, a federal law that makes this illegal. This is a move on the Left to say, that they had done all they could, but they were just out numbered. But even fourteen Democrats do not agree with the LWL. Fourteen Democrats see how looney this concept of fighting this is. Yet, they have to be them. They cannot help themselves.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Kieth Olbermann, A Little Man Who Just Don't Get It.

Hey folks,

It’s Tuesday, another day closer to the weekend. Four more days of O'Reilly, Shepard Smith, Greta Van Susteren, Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes, and Neil Cavuto, of Fox News driving the MMD {Mass Media Drones} crazy. Actually, that would be everyday.

But it’s not just Fox News. It’s the Bloggers, radio, online news. It is the "New Media". I know people that have all but stopped watch the big networks all together, other than perhaps a show, be it a comedy, drama, etc. But for news? They go elsewhere.

The MMD just do not get it. They are trailing and losing views fast. They have tried everything and nothing seems to be working. They cannot understand what is wrong. Why is Fox News number one when you have the likes of Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and the rest? How is it, that the President of the United States of America picked a Fox News anchor to go to work for him?

Fox News has only been around for ten years, bloggers, and internet news outlets shorter than that. So why is it that they, the "established media" is losing out so badly? The reason is simple. People are starting to not trust them. People are tire of the MMD continuously telling you what you SHOULD think, instead of reporting facts, and letting you decide. They are tire of all the negatives of this President and administration, the war, and anything deemed remotely religious. People are tired of agenda driven reporting.

Now of course Fox News leans to the Right. But if you look at the numbers, apparently, so does the majority of America. Despite all the efforts of those on the Left, this number seems to be growing. So what is their response? They attack. They attack Fox, the bloggers, independent writers, etc. Instead of looking at themselves and asking, "What are we doing wrong?" they ask you, "What’s wrong with you? Why are you following these people?"

Now with Fox, you have to realize that you also have the other dynamic at play here. That is the same dynamic as all the attacks on Walmart. When you are number one, their will always be those that want you to fall. But the latest attack on Fox New is unbelievable. And people wonder why I call it like I see it...

MSNBC’s "Countdown" host Kieth Olbermann is a Looney. He is a card carring member of the LWL and the Bushwhacker clubs. During his "Countdown" show on MSNBC, Olbermann regularly criticizes O'Reilly and "The Factor". He has named O'Reilly his "Worst Person in the World" at least 15 times. The nightly "award" is Olbermann's way of criticizing what he deems bad behavior.

His latest attack, is what shows him for what he truly is, just plain nuts. This weekend, Mr. Olbermann whipped out a mask of O'Reilly and gave a Nazi salute at the gathering. You know, I saw this during a discussion this weekend. I thought the picture was fake. I thought it was doctored as a joke. I actually laughed. But Now I find out it is true?

Look, this guy has no viewers. His numbers are tanked, he has no following to speak of, he is nothing more than a little man, so he attacks Fox News and Bill O’Reilly thinking that this is how the majority feels. That is lunacy at it’s finest. Instead of trying to vainly attack Bill Mr. Olbermann, why not try to improve YOUR show. Oh yeah, I’m sorry, I forgot, that would go against the agenda..

Monday, July 24, 2006

Why Is This So Hard To Understand?

Hey folks,

Yesterday, Saudi King Abdullah beseeched Bush to intervene in Israel's military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal told reporters,

"We requested a cease-fire to allow for a cessation of hostilities. I have brought a letter from the Saudi king to stop the bleeding in Lebanon, and there has been an agreement to save Lebanese lives, Lebanese properties and what the Lebanese have built, and to save this country from the ordeal it is facing,

There is only one problem in this crisis: It is Lebanon, and the inability of Lebanon to exercise its sovereignty over its territory. Everybody who needs to help, who must help, should help."

President Bush and the administration remains unchanged in their position. That is that Israel was attacked, continues to be attacked, they are defending themselves. Why is this so hard to understand. Do you really think we would show restraint, if say California, was being attacked by rockets EVERY DAY? Innocent lives being taken EVERY DAY? No. Just like 9-11, we would stand united and call for the utter destruction of those who were attacking us. I bet you that even those that are anti-war, would be hard pressed to argue against it. We would be one, they would be gone. But Israel? Uh, no we can’t have that.

In recent weeks, the Bush administration has blamed Syria, along with Iran, for stoking the recent violence by encouraging Hezbollah to attack northern Israel. I agree that this makes a lot of sense. You have also had many people trying to humanize Hezbollah to make them sound unlike what they are. That is a terrorist organization that want Israel wiped off the face of the planet.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said,

"The problem isn't that people haven't talked to the Syrians. It's that the Syrians haven't acted. It's not as if we don't have diplomatic relations. We do."

But of course Hezbollah is not who the critics, nor the Saudis are talking about in this call for a cease fire. They want Israel to stop defending herself. They want you to believe that Israel is conducting a collective punishment of the Lebanese and Palestinian people. That they are attacking innocent lives and destroying Privet homes, {which just happen to have launched a rocket from}, but a privet home non-the-less.

All a cease fire would do, is allow Hezbollah to regroup, re-plan, and re-attack. It would do nothing for "peace".

Sunday, July 23, 2006

IWA July 23, 2006,

Hey folks,

It’s Sunday, time for the Idiot of the Week Award. This week you may agree or disagree. You may understand why this recipient deserves it, you may not. I truly feel that this is one of the things that are wrong about America.

Charles Moore, 59, is a homeless man. He is the type you see walking on the street. Sitting on the corner. Asking for your loose change. The kind of person that is invisible to so many people that just pass by.

The kind of person that, for reasons unknown to us all, has either removed himself, or been removed from society. Some see him as a lazy, alcoholic, drug addicted, disease infected, waste of life, others as a hardship case in need of rescuing, and yet others see him as fortunate. Why fortunate? Because they no longer live in the system. They are above the system. Time no longer matters. No schedules to keep. No bosses to please. No responsibilities. The only thing they MUST do is eat. Truth is, some of these, out of the kindness of others, make more money panhandling than you do working 9-5 in a job you do not like.

This is not always the case, but there truly is no way of knowing each individual’s situation. But here is a true story of Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore just going about his day, searching for returnable bottles in a trash bin, when he finds a bag of cloths. That is not all he found. Also in the cloths, Mr. Moore found 31 U.S. savings bonds worth nearly $21,000.

What did he do? He took the bonds to a 24 hour walk in homeless shelter, where a staffer tracked down the family of the man whose name was on the bonds. They belonged to Ernest Lehto. Now there is a mystery as to how the bonds and bag ended up in that bin, since the family gave the cloths away in 2004. But there they were non-the-less. Mr. Moore told The Detroit News,

"They belong to him. I did the right thing."

And he did. So what did Mr. Lehto’s Son, Neil Lehto do when he arrived to pick up the bonds? He said,

"What a good Samaritan."

Then he gave Mr. Moore $100.00, and left.

$100.00? Thanks to Mr. Moore, who is homeless, YOU Mr. Lehto, got your Father’s $21,000.00 worth of bonds. But I know, since Mr. Moore is homeless, $100.00 must be a lot of money to him. Right. Yeah, toss him a hundred and move on with your life, Mr. Moore is not worth your time.

Congratulations Mr. Lehto, you are the Idiot of the week. I wonder what your Father would have done, had he been alive.

Saturday, July 22, 2006

Senate Revisiting Teen Abortion / Parental Rights,

Hey folks,

Happy Saturday to you. It IS an election year, and it IS only 109 days from the mid term elections. So the Senate is visiting all those "hot button" topics and issues that they feel you, the voter, feels strongly about. This time around it is abortion. But this issue that they are debating I DO agree with. I know most of you do as well.

What they are debating it a bill that would make it illegal, a federal crime, to take a teenager across state lines to end a pregnancy without a parent's knowledge. As I said the last time they debated this, what’s the problem? Why do we NEED a law stating this. OH yeah, we need this law to counter the insane idea that this would be OK.

Opponents say the bill would make criminals of well meaning confidants, such as relatives and clergy members, who might help a pregnant teen whose parents are abusive. They also argue that we have to protect these women from pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. So let the Loonies speak. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who is managing opposition to the bill during floor debate, said,

"Instead of doing something to improve the health of women and girls, the Republican leadership is spending precious time on a bill that protects incest predators, throws grandmothers in jail and violates our Constitution."

NOW’s Vice President Melody Drnach, said,

"It's very dangerous to young women. The most vulnerable young women it leaves out are those who are victims of incest and abuse within their own family and their own network of adults. And it is not going to help grandmothers and aunts and sisters who want to help out in a time of crisis."

If you go to A Statement by the Planned Parenthood Clergy Advisory Board you will see the PPH is trying everything that they can to convince the general public that their opposition to this bill is not only right, but moral. Part of what the "clergy" say in this statement is,

"But, as pastoral counselors, we also know that not every family functions well. Alcoholism, domestic violence, and neglect are but some of the sad realities that many young people live with. In such families, a teen who becomes pregnant is unlikely to tell her parents and run the risk of their wrath. In other families, a teen may wish to spare her parents the pain she believes her unplanned pregnancy might cause them. In at least one case in a state where mandatory parental notification is the law, a teen's concern for her parents cost her life. Knowing that she could not go to a reputable provider who would be obligated to notify her parents, she became the victim of illegal abortion. Access to confidential and competent health care could have preserved her life.

Mandatory parental notification and/or consent laws can increase the risk to the health of pregnant teens. Such laws, despite their intentions to the contrary, are far more likely to encourage a teen to delay speaking with her parents and, thereby, cause her to delay seeking the medical services and emotional counseling she requires. In turn, these delays increase the risk and the cost of any procedure she may undergo."

Now I understand in the RARE cases that abusive parents are either neglecting or abusing their children, the children need to be protected. But we already have laws to do this. If the parents or other families members are having incestuous relations with them, we have laws that take care of that situation. If the children are being mentally or physical abused, we have laws for that. Of course we have laws for rape. This law does not override these laws, nor put the child more at risk of these already present harmful situations.

Then to state that the law will be far more likely to encourage a teen to delay speaking with her parents and, thereby, cause her to delay seeking the medical services and emotional counseling she requires, is just idiotic.

The proponents of the bill, those with sane rational, say that those girls that are taken across state line, often occur when a girl, or the man involved, wants to evade home state parental consent laws. In other words, they get the girl pregnant, and avoid any consequences.

OK, say I, in my single days, did something stupid. For those of you who may remember my story of the two girls, one 12 or13, and the other 14 years old that showed up at my house, one wearing a see through top with no bra, and daisy duke shorts, and the other in a thong string bikini, asking me if "there was anything they could do for me to get money to go to the store", you may understand what I mean.

What if, I said yeah? They come into my house and something happened? I get one of them pregnant. If the LWL {Left Wing Looneys} or those that truly believe in this "right" of a CHILD to be taken across state lines and given an abortion WITHOUT the parents even knowing anything about it, had their way, I could do exactly that. I would continue on with my life and await my next victim, without any repercussions for my rape and abuse of this young girl. The parents would not even know about it. Noone would.

As the bill's Senate sponsor, John Ensign, R-Nev. asked,

"How would you feel as a parent in a situation like that?"

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. said,

"Those who would object to it have a high burden to show what is unreasonable about the legislation,"

The only explanation that I can come up with or that I’ve been told is this, some feel, strongly I might add, that ANY bill or legislation that hinders ANY form of abortion in any way, is an attempt to reverse the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. But, under this bill, anyone who helps a pregnant minor cross state lines to obtain an abortion without parental knowledge could be punished by fines and up to a year in prison. The girl and her parents would not be vulnerable to criminal penalties. The measure contains an exception for those who help underage girls get such abortions to avoid life threatening conditions. So this is really not the case.

I asked a Liberal friend of mine who is a single parent of a 14 year old daughter, how she could possible and truly believe that this is alright? That it is OK for someone to take her daughter across state lines, get her an abortion, and not be at all informed of the situation? After a brief hesitation, she said,

"This is just a move by the Religious Far Right Wackos to take away a woman’s right to chose." After asking her if she TRULY believes that, even if it was her daughter? After her even longer hesitation, she said, "Yes".

I love her to death. I really do. But I just am completely stupefied at this concept. That her normal, and fully intact, motherly instinctive child protection process is completely interdicted by her political view of the Liberal Looney agenda. She would be calling for the head of any male that took her daughter across state line without her permission or knowledge for any other reason, and the male could be arrested for kidnaping, but in this case, it’s OK.

This is the same person that told me that she "owns" her daughter until she goes off on her own as an adult. Isn’t that the way it SHOULD be? When did this concept that kids having rights come about anyway. Truthfully, the parent is the parent and need to make sure that the child is the child. Believe it of not, the parent knows what is best for their child more than the child does.

Let’s leave aside all the other Looney and ever changing arguments for abortion itself for a second. Like first trimester, second, no wait third. In the case of rape or incestuous pregnancies, which is only like 6% of abortions. By the way, did you know that one study of 1,900 abortion clients in 1987, found only one woman claimed to be the victim of rape or incest. (Torres and Forrest, "Why Do Women Have Abortions?"Family Planning Perspectives, July/August 1988, 20:4, pp. 169-176.) Or the contradiction of if a woman decides to end the pregnancy, it is a medical procedure, yet if she is murdered and her child dies, then the murderer can be charged with two counts of murder. Let’s talk about this one scenario. As Ensign and Sessions noted that a child needs parental permission to receive aspirin at school and to go on a field trip, but no parental consent is required for an abortion.

More than 30 states have parental involvement laws, but there is no federal policy requiring other states to honor them when girls cross jurisdictions secretly to obtain abortions. Democrats will try to amend the bill but predict it would be approved considering the Republicans' 55-44-1 majority.

Thankfully most polls taken in this country suggest there is widespread public backing for the bill supporter’s sentiments about a parent's right to know about a child's actions regarding abortion. In polls, almost three quarters say they think a parent has the right to give consent before a child under 18 has an abortion. Even more indicate they feel that it is important for the parents at least being informed. I’m glad to see that MOST Americans have it right.

Friday, July 21, 2006

It Is Amazing, The Guru Is Busy

Hey folks,

One day I will discover the identity of the Wonderful Wizard of MMD. The one sitting behind the curtain, telling the Mass Media Drones and in turn, the LWL what to say on a daily bases. Yesterday, I told you about "Katrina". Today, the magic guru words for everyone were "collective punishment". Talking about the "disproportionate response", another guru phrase of the day, in reference to Israel’s response to being attacked on a daily bases and THEIR innocent civilians killed. They are defending themselves, and they are the one’s being called wrong. I love the STUPIDITY of these people saying this.

Let’s see, the guru spoke, and you got,

HEUVAL: What Israel is doing today with a collective punishment of the Lebanese and Palestinian people...
YOUNIS: The Palestinian people who have received a collective punishment.
BUCHANAN: This is collective punishment of an entire people for the sins of terrorists that they did not commit.
ATWAN: There is a collective punishments practiced by the Israelis against, uhhh, a peaceful country like Lebanon.
HELEN THOMAS: ...a collective punishment against all of Lebanon and Palestine.

Thank you Rush.

There are many other examples of this if you look, listen, and open your eyes. So why is this? Why are so many LWL and the MMD attacking Israel? Israel has done EVERYTHING the world asked them to do. "Land of peace" is a perfect example. But they continued to do everything the world asked, until THEY were attacked.

"Yes we understand this, but it is a disproportionate response, and a collective punishment against all of Lebanon and Palestine."

Wrong. You see folks, what the MMD and the LWL do NOT want you to know is that Hezbollah is storing WMDs and launching rockets from privet civilian homes in Lebanon. Israel sent out a message to all, if you are, we will take you and your "privet civilian home" out. PERIOD.

Could anti-Semitism be part of this? You know as well as I do that the UN does NOT like Israel. They cannot control them, just like the USA folks. But I see no real answer here as to why so many people are speaking out against a SMALL country that has done EVERYTHING the world asked of them, and then got attacked by people who want NOTHING besides their completely and utter destruction, they are defending themselves. What is the answer other then that they are Jews? I cannot for the life of me figure it out. Just more examples of the lunacies of some who feel they know what is best for us and the world.

What might the guru say today?

Thursday, July 20, 2006

From the Evacuations to NAACP,

Hey folks,

The Mass Media Drones {MMD} Guru has spoken again. He said, "Katrina". That’s right, Hurricane Katrina. All throughout the day yesterday, ANY news agency you tuned into to, and a lot of print media all sounded the same. Even one of the evacuees on board a ship leaving the mid east, who sounded EXTREMELY prompted, repeated the Katrina reference. It is also the standard as of late that, that if you listen, you will discover that the media and the far left fringe sounded like they were reading from the same script. But I’ve pointed out this "phenomena" before.

The word of the day? Katrina. All these people saying that the government was slow to respond to the evacuations in getting Americans out of the east in this dangerous time of war. "Just like Katrina".

OK first, the government did not send these people there. Second, it is NOT the government’s responsibility to get them out. Third, even though those in Louisiana had AMPLE warning to leave, they CHOSE to stay, a hurricane and a war are two completely different things.

Dealing with those who CHOSE to go to Lebanon. You CHOSE to go there by your own means. You KNEW it was a dangerous place and that we are in a time of war. It IS your responsibility to get out. I do not know when it happened, but it is NOT the government's fault you are there, nor is it their job to fix your poor choices. It never has been.

But the media must have gotten a sign of a response they wanted because it is now using "Katrina" AGAIN today. They are talking about President Bush visiting the NAACP meeting. One such example is the AP that says, after being posed the question by an MMD member, Snow denied claims that this was Bush's way of atoning for the government's slow response to Hurricane Katrina.

Come on folks, Yes President Bush has declined invitations to address the annual NAACP convention, for the past five years. This year, with the Senate poised to renew the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and it is an election year, of course President Bush will be there. I like what Sen Clinton said about it, She said,

"He could sign it right here on this stage."

Of course he will sign it. I do not know if it will be there on stage, even if he does, the MMD will spin it,,no, scratch that, it IS a political move. But do you really think that there ever was a possibility that he would not? Of course he is going to sign it.

But the Guru has spoken, he wants images of suffering of Blacks brought to the forefront of the minds of voters during this election year. Notice the timing? NAACP having their meeting, and all these references to Katrina? There are still some though, that cannot not see this for what it is. Amazing..

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Could it be Politics?

Hey folks,

I will most likely be out of the office tomorrow 7-19-06 My Son's first Birthday. Party this weekend, but things to do tomorrow. So, how about a two for Tuesday..

Yet another day passed and yet even more talk of WWIII. Newt making his rounds. Everyone from AM to Rush, and Hannity, were throwing the WWIII around yesterday. Rush said it started on 9/11. They are all making valid points and even yours truly JUST wrote about it in yesterday's daily article.

But for some reason, around 4:10 pm, it hit me hard. Now I KNOW I’m about to get slammed by some on the Right for this one, and I do not want you to think for one nanosecond that I do not truly believe that this is a possibility. But what if the sudden proliferation of the phrase WWIII, or WW3 for those who need special help in understanding, has got another agenda.

Hear me out on this one. Let’s see,

Ronald Reagan = STRONG on military. Trust worthy and strong on national defense.
George Bush Sr = STRONG on military. Trust worthy and strong on national defense.
Bill Clinton = WEAK on military. Weak on national defense.
President Bush= STRONG on military. Trust worthy and strong on national defense.

Throughout recent history the Right have been strong on military, strong on national defense. Those on the Left have presented a do not get involved, cut and run, and make nice with those who want to kill Americans attitude. You may agree with this or not, but why do you think President Bush got re-elected with more votes in history? We are in a time of WAR..

Now the elections are coming up. First of course the mid term, that the Left is trying to do everything and anything in their power to take over the House or Senate, then the Presidency. What if all this talk about WWIII is a move on those on the Right to implant a fear in Americans with this very REAL possibility.

Logic would then dictate, that the government, all branches, need to be strong on military and national defense. It would also indicate that the next President also needs these qualities. So far, those on the Left have done NOTHING about national security. They almost all, as if following a script, say that they will bring our troops home, consult the UN and make nice with those who want us dead. The Right on the other hand?

It is seeming more and more that Newt may just make a run for it. He will have A LOT of backing and A LOT of people would LOVE to vote for him. It is at least within the realm of possibility that this could be a start of the laying of a foundation and platform.

I hope that no matter what politics play into all this, that we do not lose sight that WWIII is a very real possibility. We must come together and find a way to stop it. If this is merely a political move on the Rights part, it is brilliant, but we need more than politics at this time. We need solid answers.
NAACP. A Time Past,

Hey folks,

That’s right the NAACP is at it again. They are calling for boycotts on Target and other business, because of their failing to complete the NAACP survey.

The President of NAACP, Bruce S. Gordon said,

"They didn't even care to respond to our survey. Stay out of their stores."

Why did Target not respond? A Target spokeswoman said that the company chose not to participate in the survey "because Target views diversity as being inclusive of all people from all different backgrounds, not just one group." The NAACP survey asks only about blacks. She also said that minorities make up 40 percent of Target employees and 23 percent of all officials and managers.

Other companies that chose not to participate were Dillard's Inc., Kohl's Corp., Sears, and Excel, a telecommunications company. All were given Fs for not answering.

So since these companies are already doing the right thing, they chose not to be bothered by a group that is out of date, and only serves to further divide, NOT unite the races. The NAACP is a joke. Only four thousand people are attending the 97th annual meeting of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which runs through Thursday.

Four thousand people. Some highschool sports have more than that in attendance. The time has past for the NAACP. They are nothing more now than a black version of the KKK. They hate everyone except themselves. They feel that everyone owes them something. But even Gordon sees them fading away. He said,

"We may not have all the power that we want, but we have all the power that we need. All we have to do is believe it and use it."

Yes, power and money. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson along with Gordon, have made quite a bit of money dividing the races, keeping the black man down {So they have a victim}, and creating racism in some area’s that it does not even exist.

I applaud these stores and businesses that did not participate. They are doing the right thing, they do not have to answer to a hate group. Plain and simple. Also plain and simple is this, they know as well as you do, noone is going to boycott these stores. Not even all those four thousand that are in attendance.

Monday, July 17, 2006

World War 3

Hey folks,

You know, sometimes I HATE being right. I hope that I’m still proven wrong on this one. Sorry to start your week off on this note, but it is something we need to watch carefully.

Back on Saturday, April 22, 2006, at 7:24am, I posted the article Antepenultimate Power / Utter Destruction. In this article I talked about President Bush, with the Republican run everything, has antepenultimate power. I pointed out the different situations going on in the world. I said,

"As we speak, we are moving ever so closer to Iran. Now even Sen. Joseph Lieberman says he would back a U.S. air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities if diplomatic options fail, becoming the first Democrat to announce his support for such a move. He said, "I think the only justifiable use of military power would be an attempt to deter the development of their nuclear program if we felt there was no other way to do it," He indicated that such an attack would be to "delay" Iran's nuclear program, saying that he was hoping that "by the time they catch up back to where they were, there's been a change in the government. That's the limited objective that I would see." This is in response to Iranian President Mamoud Ahmadinejad, threatened just last week to "annihilate" Israel. The movement is growing.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, we have Russia supplying Iran with materials, the North Korea situation, China and Taiwan situation, and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Wednesday again raised the specter of U.S. designs to oust him and promised that his government will blow up his country's oil fields if the United States should ever attack.. Couple this all together with a President with a Cowboy, renegade attitude, with a free pass to do whatever he wants, you have a VERY dangerous situation. Are we heading to WW3?"

I tried to explain one of the things I thought may slow this down. I said,

"The only way to stop this, or at least slow it down, is to bring balance back to the government. With only 199 days left to the election, and two and halve years til 2008, the left is running out of time. They NEED to stop playing the stupid games. They NEED to forget Bush. Get in there and change the things you do not like. With the House, Senate, and even Supreme Court all controlled by one party, the party has antepenultimate power. I would feel this way no matter which party is in this situation. There must be a balance. In nearly every case, ultimate power leads to ultimate destruction. But the Left is NOT going to get there with "Hate Bush". They are not going to get there with "Impeach Bush". They are not going to get there without a plan.

If it seems I’m being too critical of the Left from time to time, it is because I AM. As an Independent, I am not bound by political parties. Nor am I a sheep that will jump aboard a bandwagon. You need to talk TO me and tell me what you can do to make this country better. So far, NOTHING. Time is ticking, in more ways than one."

Well, today, the concept is being tossed around by talk shows, from Hannity, "The Factor", and others, along with Neut Ginrich, who reiterated these sentiments on "Meet the Press" Sunday morning. He said that if you connect the dots between the threats and conflicts in Iraq, Lebanon, North Korea, etc., it looks like World War III has already begun.

Now it is time to stop playing politics. It is time to figure out what to do about this very dangerous time in which we live. Oil is blowing past all time highs, because we ARE heading down a very dangerous road. All the countries around the world seem to be getting their military ready. We here, in this country, NOW, need to stop looking at this one situation politically. We need to come together. We need to fix it. Before we arrive at a destination where we do NOT want to be..

Sunday, July 16, 2006

IWA Sunday July 16th, 2006

Hey folks,

You know, people tell me all the time, one of the things that is great about this country, is that in some ways you can get rich without really working for it. You can also get want you want. How? Sue.

From the lady who sued McDonald’s for coffee burns. To all those that sue someone or organizations, or even this country, just because they are "offended" at something, our courts system is so bogged down by stupidity , that for someone who is truly harmed or done wrong by someone, it takes years to get justice. But that’s America.

The latest person to add to the already busting at the seams stuffed court system is former bodybuilder Mark DelCore. His complaint? He is suing for the right to bask naked with his rat terrier, "Cheekies", at his side.

That’s right, he wants the "right" to sunbath nude with his dog. He says sunbathing is a balm for a skin condition he developed after exposure to World Trade Center toxins while leaving a lower Manhattan gym. He says his dog's healing presence qualifies him as a "service dog."

Are you kidding me? The beach in question, a "clothing optional" beach near Kismet, on Fire Island, does not allow pets with the exemption of service animals. So he claims that "Cheekies" is a service animal.

I’m sorry, but this guy just sounds nuts. And to clog up the court system even more for this, makes him the award winning, Idiot of the Week.
The Mancow Syndrom

Hey folks,

I have a new disorder to report. The Mancow Syndrom, or TMS. TMS can effect you, your family, your job, just about every aspect of your life. That’s right, once you get TMS, you WILL have problems. There is only one cure.

For those of you who do not know who Mancow is, he is a radio DJ on Chicago’s q101. An alterative music station and one of the highest rated and most profitable morning shows in the country. He got high praise from his bosses and some of his listeners when he ran naked down the street, and did all kinds of wild thing on air. But this is not when it became as successful as it is today. He got a lot of praise for his antics, got raises, got freedom, until,,,,,

What made the show EXPLODE to the position it is now? What made the offers to go national come to be? What made it as profitable as it is today? The same thing that is making him and q101 part ways. He got morals.

That’s right folks. He started talking about the things he WANTED to. He talked about his kids. The Bosses didn’t like that. He appeared on Fox New’s "Fox and Friends." The Bosses didn’t like that. He announced he is a Christian. That the Bosses HATED. The Bosses decided they did NOT want Mancow to go national, talking morals, definitely NOT talking about his faith, so what did Mancow do? He is leaving. He knows, and they should also, that with his new found popularity, he will have NO problem going national and getting even more popular.

This is the type of thing that drives me crazy. I liked him before. The Wild and crazy Mancow. I like him even more now. His show was popular before, NOW it has exploded. Yet NOW, instead of riding the ride and profiting GREATLY, q101 wants to silence and control him. They want him talking about their very narrow view of their formatted music. They were fine with him before, but now, with his new found morals, they want him silenced at any cost to them.

TMS is very real. I have even started feeling some of the symptoms from time to time myself. I’m "a likeable guy", I’m "a honest and trustworthy person", I "know what I’m talking about and always back up with facts", until I talk about things that some do not agree with. Then, I am "Wingnut", "Right Wing Radical" "Racist" "Hatemonger" "Jesus Freak" etc. But if I post an article that some of those same people agree with, then I’m back to being a likable, huggable, harmless, little teddy bear.

There is two avenues you can you can take if you think you are starting to get TMS. One, forfeit your true beliefs and continue to do or say whatever they want. Or two, realize you are not the one who is diseased, it is those who have labeled you, and continuing to do what you do. If you go with option one, you may feel better for a bit, but you will no longer be your TRUE self. Option two, you will only get better. You may also come to realize, there are a lot more people that appreciate, honest, truthful, and moral based you, than there were those who attack you. You may even find yourself helping some along the way.
This is WHY He Could Win,

Hey folks,

There is an interesting article at the Hartford Courant / site. It is an "Evaluation" of Lieberman’s true party affiliation. It questions if he is a true Democrat. The whole bases of the article seems to "prove" that he is not. It is extremely negative toward Sen. Lieberman. At least in the point of view of the LWL. But what would you expect from the Mass Media Drones. But it is the two comments by Sen. Lieberman himself and the reaction of the LWL that may very well get him the win.

According to the article,

"He votes with Democratic colleagues almost all the time. His record gets him high marks from interest groups close to the party, from the AFL-CIO to the NAACP."


"On paper, Lieberman's voting record would seem to end any suggestion that he's not true to the party. Pick almost any ranking, and he's in the same league as most of his Democratic colleagues in the Senate.

The liberal Americans for Democratic Action found him voting its way 80 percent of the time last year. The NAACP gave him an 85 percent mark, the Children's Defense Fund 89 percent, the AFL-CIO 92 percent.

Overall, Lieberman voted with Democrats 90 percent of the time last year, close to Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd's 94 percent, according to Congressional Quarterly's study of key votes."

but, peppered throughout the article, is the underlining negativity and true reason for the article itself, to discredit him and stir up a negative view of him by voters.

The article points out what it thinks is proof that he is NOT a Democrat. It highlights what the Left Wing Looneys think will rile up the voters. Along with the fact that they do not like the fact that he "just this week the senator launched his own political party so he can still run in November even if Democratic voters rebuff him in the Aug. 8 primary." so he doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care what you poor Democratic voters think. It says,

"But dig beneath the votes and there's plenty of ammunition for critics - including primary challenger Ned Lamont - who say Lieberman has a habit of straying from the party when it suits him.

He broke with the region's Democratic senators on a key energy vote last year. He has embraced a position on Iraq that few Democrats share. He has questioned bedrock Democrat-backed programs such as affirmative action and Social Security. He voted against a filibuster that could have blocked the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr."

It goes on for two pages. But truth is, not all see this as fact. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill said "A lot of people disagree with Joe on Iraq. But the notion that, that view doesn't make him a true Democrat is a mistake."

John Hibbing, professor of political science and congressional expert at the University of Nebraska said,

"To me, Lieberman is a Democrat. Perhaps a little less so than most of his colleagues, but he is definitely a Democrat"

So what did Lieberman say?

"When I disagree with my colleagues, I have the courage of my convictions to say so," he said in an interview Wednesday. And, he added, "If you wait to get 100 percent of what you want around here, you'll never get anything."


"I'm a Democrat, and I will remain a Democrat until death do us part,"

In this new world of absolutes and win at any cost political games, you have a guy that is NOT Bush, NOT Republican, and NOT LWL. This could very well be a winning combination.

Saturday, July 15, 2006

Why I AM The Way I Am,

Hey folks,

Happy Saturday to you. I love the weekends. Gives me so much more time than I normally have to do what I do. Talk to you. Here, atNewtimesLIVE, at Ethepeople , and possibly {since some are URGING me to get one}, a My Space. Haven’t looked in that one yet, but possibly coming soon.

I wanted to take some of this time to try to explain why I AM the way I am. First I want to say this, I in no way started out with this site, thinking that it would be a political site. If you and those that have, known me since I’ve been posting anywhere for the pass nearly 10 years, you know that I love to discuss all topics. I’ve debated everything and talked about everything. Politics was a small part of it. Now, looking back at these article here, I see that my friend who pointed it out, is right. This Is a political site. I’m telling you the truth, it was not intended to be this way. It has evolved that way on it’s own. I first looked at it as the fact that is what is primarily in the news, and since that is what I do, share and analyze the news, then the things I’m discussing is what is dominating the news itself, politics. But honestly, there is more to it than that.

Since this site, and for a while, anytime I say anything positive about President Bush, the administration, the war, religion, God, Jesus, etc. I’m labeled a Right Wing Radicle {RWR}, a Zealot, a Religious Fanatic, Racist, Hatemonger, Bigot, etc. I’m told I’m close minded, narrow thinking, arrogant, and wrong. Now I have had my share of attacks by those on the Right as well, anytime I say I do not believe in organized religion, Bush is wrong about this or that, and that I do not believe EXACTLY the way they do on certain topics. But I want to try to explain why I truly believe that I AM the way I am, as far as leaning Right.

I AM completely sick and tired of some in this country attacking this country and it’s leaders. I AM tired of some who want to change the laws, popular opinion, history, traditions, and freedoms, the very foundation of this country, just to accommodate a small minority. I AM tired of people thinking that they have a "right" to be offended. I AM tired of those who do not know that right is right, and wrong is wrong. I AM tired of "Political Correctness". I AM tired of those who truly believe "anything goes". I AM tired of those who do not want to play by the rules. I AM tired of cry babies. I AM tired of laziness. People that want things made easier for them, who want the "American Dream", but do not want to work for it. I AM tired of being told that I am wrong when I tell the TRUTH, and back it with FACTS. I AM tired of the "Not my fault" crowd, excuse makers, who see self responsibly as bad. I AM tired of insanity on both sides. I AM tired of not being able to have an intelligent debate with someone who knows NOTHING but what the Mass Media or the Far Left Fringe tell them. Who cannot think for themselves.

You see folks, I seem to lean right, because I better associate with the core beliefs of the Right. If you look at just about any poll in the past 12 years or so, even further back than that, you will see that the vast MAJORITY in this country do as well. I agree with SOME of the ORIGINAL core beliefs of the Left. But here is the problem. I see the left being completely taking over by those with completely idiotic and looney ideals. As of late, the FAR LEFT Fringe, the LWL, is no longer the far left fringe. It is becoming the entire party. What the Democrats USE to stand for, what they truly believed has been reduced to "Hate Bush", "Hate the War" and get into power at any cost. If you do anything even remotely against them, they want you destroyed. Ask Lieberman. They are allowing themselves to be taken over by the LWL, and the LWL WANT to change this country, and not for the better.

I’m sorry folks, I have some intelligence, morals, and firm beliefs. I cannot nor will I EVER agree that it’s OK for those with Looney ideas, {Too Numerous to list here} to take over this country. So if this means that I am a "Wingnut", I love that name by the way, then a "Wingnut" I am.

It really is just this simple. I will continue to do what I do, the way I do it, and call what is, what is. I will continue to point out the stupidity on both sides, and call wrong, wrong, and right, right. You will either agree or disagree. Depending on the topic, you may do both.

Friday, July 14, 2006

The Republicans to Lose, AP Poll

Hey folks,

If you believe everything you read in the mass media, then you believe the new Associated Press poll. According to the AP poll, if the elections were held today, it is the Democrats taking control. But the article is interesting. You have to fully understand how the wording is here, but you can clearly see that this is a MMD article.

First the AP starts by saying,

Republicans are in jeopardy of losing their grip on Congress in November. With less than four months to the midterm elections, the latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that Americans by an almost 3-to-1 margin hold the GOP-controlled Congress in low regard and profess a desire to see Democrats wrest control after a dozen years of Republican rule.

Then continues saying,

The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,000 adults conducted Monday through Wednesday,,

A little further down, they say,

The AP-Ipsos survey asked 789 registered voters if the election for the House were held today, would they vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in their district. Democrats were favored 51 percent to 40 percent.

So the figure the 3-1 against the 1000, which would indicate that if there were 1000, then 211 are not registered voters. Or they just exaggerated the numbers. But notice that they do not say of whom those partaking in the poll were. Polls can and will say what you want them too, depending on who, and the wording of the questions.

So I guess that’s it folks. The AP have spoken. The Republicans are out and the Democrats take over. It is all but a done deal. Do not worry about it. The LWL will come in and fix everything starting with the impeachment of the President.

To bad this is NOT reality. The truth is that they have a lot of work to do. They could start by getting cohesive, and creating a plan, instead of playing the games they play and eating their own. But what have I been saying for the past few years?

I’m not really all that ready to jump on the, done deal bandwagon. They have a LONG and hard road ahead of them.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy. LWL?

Hey folks,

"You Don’t Need Papers To Vote" Remember that statement by Democrat Francine Busby? Well they really do not need papers in Georgia. The same federal judge, U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy, who threw out Georgia's voter ID law last year blocked the state yesterday from enforcing its revised law during this year's elections.

Now this happened just two hours after the Georgia Supreme Court denied the State's emergency request to overrule a State court order that blocked enforcement of the new photo ID law during next week's primary elections and any runoffs.

His reasoning? He claims that the law requiring voter photo IDs discriminated against people who don't have driver's licenses, passports or other government IDs. He said in the past that it amounted to an unconstitutional poll tax because of the fees associated with getting the required ID. This version made it FREE. Yet he still blocked enforcement.

People are wondering why he ruled this way. Here is the answer folks, Murphy, 78, obtained his law degree from he University of Georgia in 1949. A highly regarded trial lawyer, Murphy also served in the state Legislature from 1951 to 1961 as a Democrat. He is a cousin of former House Speaker Tom Murphy (D-Bremen).

This is something that the MMD {Mass Media Drones} do not want to tell you. They know that if you KNEW these facts, you would have to at least entertain the idea, that his insane ruling and reason is to HELP the LWL {Left Wing Looneys} in Georgia, and in turn, the country.

This is a move to help the Left get back in power. Plain and simple. But the problem with that is, right now, the Left is being completely taking over by the LWL. Win at any cost. Get in power no matter what.

It’s really simple. If you need an ID to board an airplane, to write a check or to rent a movie, why would you NOT need one to vote? Well, I guess you do need an ID if you are alive, and legal citizen. Yes, we can not discriminate against those dead or illegal from voting, can we? That would be wrong.

But it’s ok. If the LWL loses in Georgia, they can always do what the always do.

1- Say they won.
2- Say the election was stolen.
3- Sue.

What ever happen to those on the Left that were sane? Oh yeah, they get kicked out. Ask Lieberman.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Well, This is Interesting.

Hey folks,

How would you like a foreseer of future things to become President? One that "knows" exactly what is going to happen. One that has no problem telling other countries that may not cooperate, "Your Fired". That’s right "The Don".

In an interview with NewsMax, Donald Trump just went on a tirade about Iraq. He said we need to get out {Can you say cut and run?} "as soon as practicable." He said, "We're stuck there. We can't just leave. But I would leave pretty quickly."

Decisive.{Smile} He seems to think that we are wasting our time on one hand yet says we cannot leave on the other. He told NewsMax,

"I would get out of Iraq as soon as possible consistent with the practicalities of a bad situation. I think the war was a mistake. They did not have weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was not the prettiest leader, but I never felt they were the problem in the world."

When asked if he thought this would create a civil war he said,

"The same thing that is going to happen if we leave later. They are going to govern anyway with people who would make Saddam Hussein look like a nice guy."

Well, I’m glad he knows what will happen. Of course he doesn’t like Bush’s plans, He said,

"It's being held together by sugar candy. No matter what happens, I believe Iraq will fall again. I think when we leave, the country will be in chaos, and the modern day version of Saddam Hussein will take over again. We're in a war we shouldn't be in. We have bigger fish to fry.{North Korea}"

If only he were President. If he was,

"If I were president, I would be fighting hard to stop raising interest rates because eventually the economy will be killed. I would fight hard to reduce oil prices. There's no doubt in my mind that the right chief executive could have a substantial impact on oil prices by telling the oil-producing states that it's time to start cutting [prices] or else. They're making more money than any country has ever made in the history of the world."

Ah yes "The Don" has spoken.

Do you think that he would run? I don’t. I think that this is just another moment in the spotlight that he likes so well. Besides that, I do not believe he really thinks he would have a chance. Just another card carrying Bushwhacker celeb. adding their voice to the LWL cause.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Here Is How You Do It

Hey folks,

The NYT should take lessons from Reuters, and their reporter Alan Elsner. In his piece this morning, White House kept "major program" secret he reported "facts" without violating the programs. In other words, he told the world that the Big Bad Bush administration is not playing nice with Congress, without putting American's saftey and security at risk.

According to the article, the Bush administration was running several intelligence programs, including one major activity, that it kept secret from Congress until whistle-blowers told the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, the committee's chairman said on Sunday.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, said on Fox News Sunday he had written a four-page to President George W. Bush in May warning him that the failure to disclose the intelligence activities to Congress may be a violation of the law.

That is all they {LWL} will need to continue to attach the President, "Violation of law" those magical terms that may or may not be true. I can hear some of them now, "How can we determine if you and your administration broke the law, if we do not know what you are doing Mr. President? We need to know what these programs are. Tell the American people how you are further stripping away their rights. Bla bla bla"

But the article itself is a clear example of how a major news agency, can and does break stories without destroying top secret information, putting America’s security at risk, and telling the enemy what we are doing. You read the whole article and it talks about the "Major Program", it tells you how Rep. Pete Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, was upset that the White house did not inform them of a "major Program" According to Reuters, Pete Hoeksta said,

"This is actually a case where the whistle-blower process was working appropriately and people within the intelligence community brought to my attention some programs that they believed we had not been briefed on. They were right," said Hoekstra, a close ally of Bush.

"We asked by code name about some of these programs. We have now been briefed on those programs but I wanted to reinforce to the president and to the executive branch and the intelligence community how important by law is the requirement that they keep the legislative branch informed of what they are doing," Hoekstra said.

You see folks, you CAN do it. You can print a story without treason. You can tell the facts, without leaking sensitive information. It can be done.

Monday, July 10, 2006

2008 Just Got More Interesting

Hey folks,

I just heard while I was responding to Sam Spade in the comment section, that it has been confirmed that Giuliani is most definitely running for President. I have not confirmed this as an absolute fact yet, but if it is, I cannot wait to see what happens. I’ll let you know.

This however I can confirm. Sen. Joe Lieberman filed papers Monday 10th of July, that will allow him to petition his way onto the November ballot as an Independent if he loses the primary election. He also filed papers Monday to create a new party called Connecticut for Lieberman. A group of 25 people who are helping him form the party will oversee the petition drive, said Marion Steinfels, campaign spokeswoman.

I just told you Friday that this was on the horizon. The Left have been nearly completely taking over by the far Left Wing Looney fridge. They went from being a legitimate alternative political party for the people, believing in big government, charity for those in need, minorities, etc., to completely reducing their party to the war, and getting Bush. They have allowed the LWL crowd to take over. Now you are either with them, or they want you gone.

They have no message. When they give one, say just about anything, they come across completely insane. They cater to the LWL blogaphire, even when to support them during a rally. They cater to the leaders of the LWL. They have completely lost touch with reality.

Like I said on Friday, we talked about some on the left urging Hillary not to run. We’ve talked about the fact that they attacked their own in various situations. Now they are running away from Lieberman and making it COMPLETELY clear that they will not support him. Why? ONE reason. Lieberman has never been an independent, or moderate. He has towed the party line more than "confused" Hillary, or flip flop Kerry, voting 90% with the Left. But he made a fatal error. He had the intelligence to support the war, and our troops. That’s it. That’s all he did.

Now the LWL is attacking him. They are publically saying, and I love this one, "if you win the primary, we will support you, but if you do not , we will not." This is not hard to understand. They care about NOTHING but getting back in power. Now I know that both sides want to be in power. It’s politics. But I have NEVER seen a more power hungry filled movement. They do not care about the war. They do not care about the country. They do not care about you. All they care about is bringing down Bush and getting power. That’s it.

What did Senator Lieberman say then? If he loses the Primary, he’ll run as an Independent. Now today, we find he is a man of his word. If his own party rejects him due to his one fatal mistake, supporting President Bush on ANYTHING, then he’ll do it himself. That’s a true American trying to make a difference.

08 just got real interesting if we end up with Clinton, Giuliani, Lieberman. Even more so if you have just Lieberman vs Giuliani. Two politicians that are too moderate for their own parties. But I bet it would be an extremely close race. Not to mention, I could not even tell you at this point who I would vote for. They may be too moderate for their parties, but NOT for America.
What Is Going On?

Hey folks,

Happy Monday to you. I cannot help but wonder what is going on with our troops. Now, four more U.S. soldiers have been charged with rape and murder and a fifth with dereliction of duty in the alleged rape and murder of a young Iraqi woman and the murder of her relatives in Mahmoudiya.

In this case, those charged are two sergeants, two privates first-class and one specialist. The names have not been released yet due to an on going investigation. According to the report, the five soldiers still on active duty will face an Article 32 investigation, similar to a grand jury hearing in civilian law. The Article 32 proceeding will determine whether there is enough evidence to place them on trial.

I’m sorry, but if you charge someone, you better put them on trial. If you charge someone, there better be enough evidence to at least remove any possibility they can do more harm. These soldiers should NOT still be on active duty.

Now according to our reports from the FBI in the Steven Green’s case, one of the girls that was also murdered was as young as five. Iraqi authorities identified as Abeer Qassim Hamza, the girl who was raped, and the other victims were her father, Qassim Hamza; her mother, Fikhriya Taha; and her sister, Hadeel Qassim Hamza.

Now instead for turning these innocent lives into a political movement, we need to find out what is going on. Why do a VERY FEW soldiers feel they can get away with this type of behavior. I say if these soldiers are found guilty, they should pay the price.

You know this is going to be all over the LWL and MMD outlets today. It will even be said to be President Bush’s fault in some stretched, warped, spin. This will not help relations with us and the new Iraqi government. We must do all we can do to make sure that this type of abuse does not happen. But we also can not allow what happened, being less than ten soldiers out of hundreds of thousands serving, hinder all the progress we are making and over shadow the good that is being done in Iraq.

In any large group, you have a potential of a small few being bad. This is reality. Those caught, need to face major punishment. Those found innocent, need to be fully pardoned and apologized to. And those doing a good job in Iraq, need to be praised. Too many times, a situation like this will dominate the news, fill the blogs, and be turned political over shadowing everything else.

This is NOT President Bush’s fault. This is NOT the entire military. This is NOT a normal occurrence. This is bad, those that did it need to pay, and we need to move on with the big picture.

Sunday, July 09, 2006

IWA for July 9th, 2006

Hey folks,

It’s Sunday the 9th of July, 2006, time for the IWA. This week is a no brainer. Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del. Of course though, you'd never know it if your relied on the New York Times, Washington Post, or the rest of the MMD. They seem to be busy betraying America's secrets to our enemies. That and he is one of THEM. They do not want you to know that he said,

"In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian-Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking."

He’s not joking folks. He said it and meant it.

The MMD ALSO do not want you to know that the Indian American Republican Council (IARC) in Washington D.C. is furious about this, and the fact it is NOT being reported. Their President, Dr. Raghavendra Vijayanagar, known in the Indian-American community as "Dr. Vijay," said,

"Joe Biden has a history of making insensitive and inappropriate remarks. In 2004, Sen. John Kerry referred to Sikhs as terrorists and Sen. Hillary Clinton jokingly referred to Mahatma Gandhi as a gas station owner. A clear double-standard in the mainstream media will likely ensure Sen. Biden gets a pass over these comments that would get a Republican in deep trouble if he ever made a similar statement."

How very true Dr. Vijay.

Biden spokeswoman Margaret Aiken attempted to spin Senator's remarks saying,

"The point Senator Biden was making is that there has been a vibrant Indian-American community in Delaware for decades. It has primarily been made up of engineers, scientists and physicians, but more recently, middle-class families are moving into Delaware and purchasing family-run small businesses"

Nice try, but that is not the spirit in which it was intended and you know it.

Congratulations Senator Biden, you are the Idiot of the week.

Saturday, July 08, 2006

Al Gore and Wal-Mart

Hey folks,

That’s right. Al Gore is heading to Wal-Mart. He is going there to convince the retailer giant to be even more environmentally friendly than they have thus far.

Now some of you may remember that Wal-Mart has began to have "green Roofs". This means, for those of you who do not know, that the roofs of some of the Wal-Marts around the country will have living roofs. Plants, trees, etc. I believe they already have many if not the majority of the stores with "Solar lights." Which is basically sky lights.

But Al Gore will be going to talk to them about "global warming". He will be speaking at Wal-Mart headquarters to executives seeking to make the world's largest retailer more environmentally friendly, according to a company spokesman on Friday. He will talk to a quarterly conference of Wal-Mart managers working on ways to implement Chief Executive Lee Scott's plans to make the retailer a leader in cutting emissions, energy use and solid waste and selling more environmentally friendly products.

He will be one of the "experts" to talk at the daylong meeting on Wednesday at Wal-Mart's Home Office in Bentonville, Ark. Each of the 14 individual groups works on specific areas, such as logistics or food, to put into practice a broad environmental initiative launched by Scott last October.

Just recently, Wal-Mart has taken steps including doubling the number of organic food items in its stores, reducing fuel consumption by its fleet of 7,000 trucks and installing energy saving light bulbs for the early morning and evening and over night hours in their stores.

Wal-Mart is having quite a few problems as of late. From hiring illegals, to complaints of how they treat their employees. No lunches, pay difference between store levels and Distribution Centers, not to mention Management, and health benefits. They have decided to get behind this "global warming" thing early.

Let’s face it folks. You can like or dis-like Wal-Mart. You can shop there for convenience and price, or you can shop elsewhere. But you have to understand that them being the largest company in the world and most successful retailer in the world, you have a BIG target painted right on your chest.

The problem I have with this whole thing is this. One, I wonder if Al Gore is doing this for free. I doubt it. His movie tanked. His slide show that has been around for 15-20 years says we have ten years before encountering MAJOR problems in the environment. Not to mention there are new reports out that says that the average global temperature has actually DECREASED a 10th of a degree in the last ten years. A lot of very predominate scientists are saying that there is NO SUCH THING as global warming. There is such a thing as cycles.

But you cannot blame Gore. He has found his niche and is settling in. He is having fun. If there is an audience out there for him, which there is, and he can continue to make the insane money he is making from all this, why not? At least, the Left may have to find a new face..

Friday, July 07, 2006

They Even Eat Their Own.

Hey folks,

I have been talking about the lack of the ability for the Left to get it together and come up with and clear and obtainable plan to win elections and get into a place that would bring balance to the government. I have taken heat of course, as you would expect, from some on the Left who do not like me pointed out the TRUTH.

What I find interesting also is that I take some heat from the Right as well. I’ve been told things from I’m making a mistake, that the Right is just fine, and I should leave the Left alone and watch them implode, to being compared to a "Jedi Master". What do I mean? They told me, and I love the analogy, that it was a theme in the first "Star Wars" episodes I - III that the Jedi saw "Anakin Skywalker" as the chosen one, to bring balance to the Force. Well, he did. There was a lack of darkness. He brought evil to balance out the good. In other words folks, be careful what you wish for.

I am starting to firmly believe that the Left have been hijacked by the LWL. I really am. I truly believe that the Left Wing Looney fringe has nearly taken over the party. They are continuing to attack President Bush, the war, anything Christian, and now even their own, if you do not subscribe to their insanity.

We talked about some on the left urging Hillary not to run. We’ve talked about the fact that they attacked their own in various situations. Now they are running away from Lieberman and making it COMPLETELY clear that they will not support him. Why? ONE reason. Lieberman has never been an independent, or moderate. He has towed the party line more than "confused" Hillary, or flip flop Kerry, voting 90% with the Left. But he made a fatal error. He had the intelligence to support the war, and our troops. That’s it. That’s all he did.

Now the LWL is attacking him. They are publically saying, and I love this one, "if you win the primary, we will support you, but if you do not , we will not." This is not hard to understand. They care about NOTHING but getting back in power. Now I know that both sides want to be in power. It’s politics. But I have NEVER seen a more power hungry filled movement. They do not care about the war. They do not care about the country. They do not care about you. All they care about is bringing down Bush and getting power. That’s it.

I love Lieberman. He says, if he loses the Democratic primary, he’ll run as and Independent. He actually might just be one that could WIN as an Independent. He has a lot going for him. One, he is not part of the Far Right, and the LWL hate him. He has a likable personality, and the voters could very well see him as a good alternative to either far fringe.

But his opponent seems to be taken the hard LWL tactical approach. Ned Lamont, the founder of a cable television company, has gained in statewide polls by accusing Lieberman of straying from his Democratic roots. He has dumped more than $1.5 million of his own money into the race. He has said he is prepared to invest up to $1 million more. His main attack against Lieberman? His agreeing with President Bush on the war.

"And Senator Lieberman, if you won't challenge President Bush and his failed agenda, I will," he said.

Lieberman’s response?

"I know George Bush. I've worked against George Bush. I've even ran against George Bush. But Ned, I'm not George Bush," Lieberman said during the debate, televised by MSNBC and C-SPAN. "So why don't you stop running against him and have the courage and honesty to run against me and the facts of my record."

LOL. How true, how true. Why not STOP attacking Bush? It has worked so well so far.

One thing you can be sure of though. If they continue with the game plan they have been using, they will guarantee the Right stays in power for a long time.