Why CBS Skewed Its Poll Against Bush

Last Night I downloaded the PDF of the new CBS poll that was put out by the TV network yesterday. When I read the very low 34% approval rating of President Bush I automatically knew what was going on. CBS has a tendency to skew its surveys to fit with their general ideology; the ideology of Liberalism and Bush-hating. After reviewing the data it turns out that, like I suspected, CBS had targeted far more democrats in the survey than Republicans. [Dems: 409, Republicans: 272].

You might wonder why CBS would not balance the survey in order to get the most accurate information. Well, the answer is quite simple and involves political calculation. On their website and in their news report they wanted to create an over-dramatized sense of what the UAE port controversy has contributed to Bush’s low numbers. What CBS has realized, like most left-wing political outfits, is that this UAE port controversy is the only issue the Democratic Party can use to make it seem like they are strong on national Defense. So, like any good arm of the Liberal ideology would do, CBS manipulated a poll result in order to aid the Democratic Party’s attempt to move to the right of the President on National Security. It is a very smart move on the part of the the news media. I wonder if this has happened before with CBS News. Maybe, just maybe, using phony National Guard Documents to try and influence the election in favor of John Kerry is another example of how CBS is more of a political activist group rather than a news outlet.

(CBS News) "The latest CBS News poll finds President Bush's approval rating has fallen to an all-time low of 34 percent, while pessimism about the Iraq war has risen to a new high. Americans are also overwhelmingly opposed to the Bush-backed deal giving a Dubai-owned company operational control over six major ports... now it turns out the Coast Guard had concerns about the ports deal, a disclosure that is no doubt troubling to a president who assured Americans there was no security risk from the deal."

This is my favorite line in the CBS article:

“Mr. Bush's overall job rating has fallen to 34 percent, down from 42 percent last month. Fifty-nine percent disapprove of the job the president is doing.” It’s only at 34% because they skewed the poll results to make it look like his rating was at 34 points. Isn't it just wonderful how the unbiased reporting of the main-stream-media has provided us with...ah, never mind. [CBS Poll Report]. Point of Fact: The average approval rating for President Bush in the month of February is 41.1%. The one poll that has Bush at 34% is CBS. –Polling Report-

The New York Times Does It Again

You don’t have to be a spy or part of a covert government agency to understand that exposing truths about secret dealings between two allied countries hurts our future war efforts. You don’t have to be a genius to realize that disclosing vital terrorist-fighting information such as CIA prisons and plane routes seriously hurts our country. But to the New York Times hurting our country is a business. A very disturbing and un-American business I might add. The treasonous undertakings of the far-left newspaper have been adequately explained and are only denied by those who allow hatred to blind sense and reason. The latest report about classified material from the NY Times is their story about how Germany’s BND Intelligence service significantly assisted the US Military prior to the invasion of Iraq. The German Government of course denies this because they, like the US Government, understand what role secrecy plays in GO Politics and war. Not to mention the fact that the anti-war anti-American wings of German politics are demanding an inquiry into the exact role their Intel Agencies played in the Iraq war.

According to the classified study that the Times reported on, Germany’s BND service acquired secret Military plans that outlined Saddam Hussein’s strategy to defend Baghdad. “The report, based on a classified study by the U.S. military, suggests German intelligence officials offered more significant assistance to the United States than their government has publicly acknowledged… According to the New York Times report, the Iraqi defense plan provided the American military an extraordinary window into Iraq's top-level deliberations, including where and how Saddam planned to deploy his most loyal troops. An account of the German role in acquiring a copy of the Iraqi plan is contained in an American military study, which focuses on Iraq's military strategy and was prepared in 2005 by the U.S. Joint Forces Command, the paper said.” [
Reuters Article]

I can understand why Germany wanted this to be secret: A) It involves Intelligence assets in the field. B) The former Schroeder government was vehemently opposed to the war in Iraq and used the Anti-Americanism façade to get elected. And C) Covert Intelligence is by definition COVERT!!!!!!! Maybe I’m just overreacting but in my opinion the more Intel being disclosed by the American media means the less apt our allies are willing to go out on the limb to COVERTLY help us. Is it not a serious hindrance, when our ally's Secret Services know that if they assist us under the radar, their help will be exposed and their premier agents and assets will be compromised?

Vanity Led Representative to Ignore Katrina Victims

In your opinion, what’s more important for a politician to do? A) Vote on a Hurricane Katrina Relief fund or B) get a face-lift because you think you look bad on TV. Well, according to Shelly Berkley, a democrat from Nevada, it is far more important to avoid feeling self-conscious rather then waste your time voting to help out the devastated areas affected by Katrina. This is not a joke- this is true and this is what she said in reference to the plastic surgery she received while disregarding the relief vote. “For the last couple of years whenever I was on TV all I could do was look at my neck…it was driving me crazy, my neck was starting to hang… [now] I have the neck of a 20-year-old and a 50-year-old body.” [Quotes gathered from Drudge Report]

Hey Shelly, you should mention your vanity-influenced missed vote to the victims of Hurricane Katrina? Oh wait, they have no place to live, their family members were killed and their city was destroyed; I doubt they care about your neck flap. People like this Shelly Berkley really epitomizes what’s wrong with politicians; It’s always about them. What type of person would miss a vote to support the victims of one of the worst natural disasters in American history to recover from plastic surgery? Granted what she did was not as bad as what Chuck Schumer did in the direct Aftermath of Katrina but this is still outrages. If you recall, Chuck Schumer was caught red-handed by the AP trying to raise money for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee by exploiting the death and destruction caused by Katrina. The DSCC ran an ad criticizing Michael Brown and then strategically asked for donations be given to the committee he chairs. --Devlin Barrett- “A new Democratic effort to whip up indignation about the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina also tried to raise money for Democratic candidates. After an inquiry from the Associated Press, the DSCC quickly pulled down the page and said they would give the Red Cross any money raised by the anti-FEMA petition,” [
AP Story].

Side Note: I and most likely you have been attacked by many viruses lately. I strongly suggest you get or switch to McAfee computer and online protection. If your computer is sluggish or you wish to avoid the probable infection of your computer, It is definitely worth it.

Gay Marriage: A Front in the Battleground of Ideology

One of the most controversial subjects in American politics today is Gay Marriage. It is a Civil Rights issue as well as a societal issue. With special interest fighting for both sides the American people have been left out of the equation. There is no doubt that most Americans are against Gay marriage but that is not to say the American people know why. A clear view of the reality of this issue is needed in order for America to come to the right decision on where it stands. The extreme nature of the fringe elements whom are pushing this agenda, be it pro or anti-gay marriage, are creating an unnecessary divide among this great country’s citizenry. A consensus among the reasonable is needed for our country’s historic achievements, as well as its traditions, to be upheld in the greatest of honor.

Pro-gay marriage groups argue, quite efficiently, that there is a moral obligation to provide the choice of marriage to same sex couples. This argument is the basis for their cause while simultaneously being the exact reason the opposition is against it. The convoluted reality of this issue is one of the reasons why so many people are unwilling to listen to an opposing view. Many gay activist groups may be considered political tools but that is neither all they contribute nor all they represent. They give a voice to the many gay Americans who feel that marriage is not a privilege but a right. An argument used, on a near daily basis, is that long-term homosexual couples should have certain rights that, at this time, are unavailable to them. Rights including: the right to adopt; the right for a living partner to have open hospital visitations for his/her partner; and the right to be recognized as a legal couple. With these basic desires being pushed for, it is hard to argue against allowing such personal requests.

Anti-gay marriage organizations feel it is their duty, be it right or wrong, to protect what they call the sanctity of marriage. This argument is rooted in religious beliefs that have held marriage for centuries as a union between man and woman. However, this particular viewpoint is not limited to just people of religion but, for the most part, it is thought of in that way. The lobbyists of the anti-gay marriage push can equally be thought of as a political tool but that is neither all they contribute nor all they represent. They represent the many Americans who strongly believe that marriage is defined, not only by fact, but by a deeply held religious belief that states, quite clearly, marriage is between one male and one female. Another argument in favor of banning gay marriage is that it will lead to an America unwanted by the majority of people. This argument is labeled as the slippery-slope.

Given the controversial nature of this issue it is most likely not going to be resolved where either side is completely satisfied. That is why it is important for mainstream Americans to support Civil Union legislation. Connecticut became the first state to legally sanction gay relationships without the involvement of the courts. Connecticut is an example of what needs to happen throughout the country. Only moderates can effectively solve this problem with the well-being of the country in mind. Both sides of this argument are so unwilling to listen or rationally debate one another on the pros and cons of gay marriage that this issue will be used as a political launching ground for attacks on opponents, for or against.

To me, this is not about religion this is about protecting the country from having to give in to political correctness. This is about preventing the so-called slippery slope from beginning. Gay marriage will lead to all forms of alternative marriage including polygamy and group marriage. However, individual homosexuals should be admired for their courage. Too many people hate for no reason and organized religion is, in large part, the genesis of that hatred. There are certain political groups who are well funded and organized to destroy this country's foundation. My position partly comes from fear and partly from the tactics used by these particular groups. The fear is that this country is losing all of its traditions and heritage. Some see that as a good thing but I don't. Gay Marriage is a front on a battleground of ideologies. One can't be moderate when the stakes are so high that the greatness of America is at risk.

The Left Embraces Racial Profiling...Finally!

Dick Morris, the former Clinton Mastermind turned Fox News Political Analyst, has just raised the point that I thought was worth mentioning a few days ago. That point was the hypocrisy on the left in terms of this UAE port controversy. I pointed out that the opposition to this port contract was basically racial profiling and that those on the left who oppose this are engaging in a terrorist fighting method they despise. I wrote [From Putting our Ports at Risk], “This is about the likelihoods as well as racial profiling. That is what we are doing when we demand that the Administration stop this contract deal. We are using our common sense to make judgments about individuals that work for a company in the United Arab Emirates. So, whenever you hear someone on the left attack the Bush Administration over this port issue you are actually seeing something that is rarely a reality; which is they hold a coherent position on something. Although, you are also witnessing what they are best at; which is hypocrisy? They are using the “racist”, common sense approach of racial profiling that they so adamantly oppose.” Dick Morris also pointed out that Bill Clinton has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the UAE for speeches Clinton has given inside the United Arab Emirates. That means, when Hillary Clinton says something like the UAE is untrustworthy or that they are terrorist enablers, you are hearing the truth [for once] but you are also hearing her basically slam her own husband. I would be interested to know what Bill's position on this port deal would be. I have a feeling that he supports Bush on this one.

After gathering more facts about the port deal I have to say that I am still against it. I know that the United States Coast Guard and Homeland Security are still in charge of the actual port. And I know that this contract in no way puts the UAE in charge of our security. This issue has turned into a political football that has players like Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton making moves that are designed to make them look strong on terror. What upsets me the most is the fact that the same people that undermine our war effort are going to be given credibility for actively fighting this port deal. What upsets me slightly less is the port deal itself, which I believe puts our security at an unnecessary risk. Before anyone points out that I said giving Hillary and Schumer credit is worse then this port deal I will explain why. The more credibility the far-left garner from mainstream America the more likely they are to get the White House. The more likely they are to get the White House the easier it will be for them to destroy our country…so yes, that bothers me more then this UAE contract.

Oh, by the way, I have this vague recollection of the media and the left bouncing off the walls of their monkey cages about something…. What was that? I think it had something to do with some type of hunting trip or Dick Cheney. I don’t know…I guess the left stopped crying after their mommy fed them. Oh well, I guess it was a non-story.

Sectarian Violence and the Possible Civil War

When Howard Dean exclaimed that “America could not win the war in Iraq”, who knew that his party at home and the insurgents in Iraq would be doing such an efficient job at trying to make that a reality. Iraq has now been pushed closer to a civil war by a well plotted attack on a Holy Shiite Mosque on Wednesday. Sectarian strife has now hit a high point since the toppling of one of history’s most brutal dictators and the fatalist movement has already jumped all over this opportunity.

I don’t see a civil war taking place but I do see pent up rage being unleashed on bitter religious rivals. I doubt most Iraqis would engage in an all out war with each other because most Iraqis, I think, are tired of oppression and violence. This incident and the following deaths are a direct result of insurgent planning and forethought and that fact should be recognized. As most people know, excluding liberals, this long term war on terror that is centralized in Iraq is a matter of will and commitment. The insurgents have a military objective that includes causing a civil war and then taking over Iraq to use it for their base of operations. I think we should all hope that a civil war does not engulf Iraq but if that does happen, which is unlikely, what should the United States do, what are the options? We can pull out and say good luck. That of course will give Al Qaeda a huge victory and provide them an entire country to use to attack American interests. We could take sides in the religious feud by defending and protecting the Kurds and the Shia but who knows what type of backlash that would cause. We could take no sides and let them fight it out until the Iraqi government can quall the violence and restore order but who knows if the government could make that happen. Although, I don’t give too much credence to the likelihood of an all out civil war breaking out. According to Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary, the bombing was planned by Al Qaeda in Iraq so I’m hoping when that claim gets out it will cause a backlash against the true enemy of Islam, Al Qaeda.



BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gunmen shot dead 47 civilians and left their bodies in a ditch near Baghdad Thursday as militia battles and sectarian reprisals followed the bombing of a sacred Shiite shrine. Sunni Arabs suspended their participation in talks on a new government. At least 111 people were believed killed in two days of rage unleashed by Wednesday's attack on the Askariya shrine in Samarra, a mostly Sunni Arab city 60 miles north of Baghdad.

The hardline Sunni Clerical Association of Muslim Scholars said 168 Sunni mosques had been attacked around the country, 10 imams killed and 15 abducted since the shrine attack. The Interior Ministry said it could only confirm figures for Baghdad, where it had reports of 19 mosques attacked, one cleric killed and one abducted. [ Read Full AP Story at Link Above ]

Hillary Clinton: "A Complete Disappointment"

Pride Agenda, a huge gay rights activist group has called Hillary Clinton "a huge disappointment" and has refused to continue funding her senate re-election campaign because their bribery attempts failed to persuade Clinton into supporting gay-marriage. The so-called “open-minded” gay rights group has proven that they are truly closed-minded to any person’s beliefs if those beliefs do not strictly adhere to their own. This behavior is not new; in fact it is the mainstay of nearly every left-wing activist group. Why is it, that these groups are intolerant to the point to which they are willing to damage a supporter, if that supporter is not 100% in line with their agenda? I don’t know the answer to that question but let me explain something to the Pride Agenda organization. Just because I am for civil unions instead of gay-marriage does not mean I have a problem with homosexuality. Just because Hillary Clinton is against gay-marriage does not mean she dislikes you personally. I know that activist groups like Pride Agenda are intolerant of the first amendment to the constitution. I know they despise people who exercise their freedom of religion or expression, that’s no surprise. However, the least they can do is stop falsely fabricating the constitutionality of gay marriage while completely disregarding well defined constitutional rights such as freedom of religion and expression.


The head of New York State's largest LGBT civil rights organization is calling for an end to financial support by gays of Hillary Rodham Clinton's re-election campaign because of her refusal to support same-sex marriage. "It will send a message to other elected officials that you can be working against us during this critical time and not suffer a negative pushback from the gay community. We have become a community that throws money at politicians, and we demand nothing in return. And that's what we get: nothing. It's the wrong message to send." –PA Memo-

Van Capelle's memo calls the New York senator "a complete disappointment." It cites her support for the Defense of Marriage Act, although she opposes a federal amendment to ban same-sex marriage and has said she supports civil unions.
New York gay Democrats are reportedly contributing heavily to Clinton's war chest as she mulls a potential White House run in 2008. [ Full Story at Link Above ]

Meet the Dark Dems: WMV Vid

Putting Our Ports At Risk

Port security is a main key in the defense of the United States and it seems that this Administration has made a suspect move in attempting to give port contracts to the UAE. The UAE has known terrorists connections and in fact housed some members of the 9-11 hijackings. I have commented on other websites that this contract idea is beyond ridiculous. And we all know that if Jimmy Carter supports President Bush on this contract deal then we better think twice and do the exact opposite. To me, this contract awarding seems to be a behind-the-scenes promise the Administration made to the UAE for assisting our global efforts to combat terrorism. If that is the case then it should be done with contracts that don’t involve the Homeland Security necessity of securing our ports.

Who am I to claim these UAE companies are dangerous, for all I know they are completely on the level. The companies themselves are not the issue. The issue is one person at one time with the access to allow one terrorist group one opportunity to smuggle one Weapon of Mass Destruction into a major U.S. city. This is about the likelihoods as well as racial profiling. That is what we are doing when we demand that the Administration stop this contract deal. We are using our common sense to make judgments about individuals that work for a company in the United Arab Emirates. So, whenever you hear someone on the left attack the Bush Administration over this port issue you are actually seeing something that is rarely a reality; which is they hold a coherent position on something. Although, you are also witnessing what they are best at; which is hypocrisy? They are using the “racist”, common sense approach of racial profiling that they so adamantly oppose.

(
House GOP Leaders Line Up Against UAE Port Deal). “Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Tuesday he will introduce legislation to delay approval of the pending deal between Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. and Dubai Ports World, a United Arab Emirates-owned company set to acquire P&O's contracts to operate at least six major U.S. ports.” Unlike the Democrats we try and block potential terrorists threats not try to block and slander a well-qualified Supreme Court nominee…go figure.

Osama Bin Laden Takes a Page from Liberal America

Ted Kennedy said: “We now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management.”

Osama Bin Laden in new released audio: "The jihad is ongoing despite all the oppressive measures adopted by the U.S. Army and its agents (which has reached) a point where there is no difference between this criminality and Saddam's criminality."

Dick Durbin (Democrat) said: "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime—Pol Pot or others—that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

Need I say more?


OK, maybe a little more. The new propaganda tactic being used by Al Qaeda is an obvious rip-off of the tactics the Democratic Party has used for over a year. This leads me to only one conclusion. Al Qaeda, views the Democratic Party of America, as an “ally” in their holy war. By ally I mean a force that is actively undermining our military and our war effort for political purposes and is doing so with no regard or care for the American military overseas. Al Qaeda obviously sees weakness on the part of liberal America and they see an active effort to surrender our stronghold in Iraq [immediate withdrawal]. It is plain as day and there is no way I will ever forget what a major American political party [Democratic] was willing to do to rally their far-left base. (Watch the 9-11 video below and demand the end of the undermining of this war.)

May Our Resolve Never Fade: We Are At War


“None of us will ever forget this day. Yet we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.” -George W. Bush-


Jealous Much: The Media and the Left Go Ape $#@&

IS a controversy a controversy if it is fabricated for the express purpose of labeling it a controversy?

The Left has claimed Dick Cheney was drunk during the hunting accident [Lie]. The left has claimed there was some kind of conspiracy [lie] on the part of the White House that was meant to hide the story for the grand total of 20 hours. Their conspiratorial rhetoric has made it seem like this was JFK all over again.

Many in the liberal media took pathetic cheap shots at Fox News because Brit Hume had an exclusive interview with Vice-President Dick Cheney. One example is Jack Cafferty of CNN; he called the Fox News Network the “F” word network in a childish attempt to insinuate profanity. He, of course, made these claims without even watching the Hume-Cheney interview. Cafferty said in the audio provided below that, “I obviously didn’t see it [the interview] because it hasn’t been released in its entirety yet… but running over there to the ‘f’ word network-he’s not going to get any high hard ones.” Cafferty, in January as you may remember, implied that George Bush coordinated with Osama Bin Laden to release his latest propaganda tape. (
CNN Implies Bush Put Out Bin Laden Tape) So, it’s not as if this is new for CNN. My advice is to just drop it. I know you hate the Bush Administration and I know your propensity to disclose your unbridled hatred is manifested in your self-professed claim of reporting for the so-called disclosure of truth. We have seen this with the endangering of the military, the CIA, and the American people by the disclosing of vital terrorist fighting information such as CIA prisons, plane routes and the terrorists surveillance program along with the gratuitous Abu Ghraib photos.

When Harry Whittington, the man Cheney accidentally shot, held a news conference I thought to myself… “Well, it looks like the left’s hope for Whittington to die so they could use it against Cheney, is gone.” Anyway John Gibson, of Fox News, demolished Jack Cafferty for his remarks against Fox. Have a listen, it’s funny:
MP3 Audio at Johnny Dollar's Place

Why Bush Should Move Condi to VP

This upcoming Presidential election depends very much on how the war in Iraq shapes itself in early to mid 2008. If Iraq is fairly stable and most US troops are out of Iraq then the Republican Party won’t have too much trouble re-winning the White House. The upcoming Iran military campaign will also play a role in the elections but the role will be a positive one for the Bush Administration and the GOP.

Many Politicos think that America is not yet ready for a female president. I would agree with that sentiment except in the case of one particular woman. She, of course, being the super-smart, super-hawk, Condoleezza Rice. Now, if the Democrats make the huge mistake of nominating Hillary Clinton to be their presidential nominee, whom they probably will, our options for the Republican nominee are wide open. The latest poll numbers show that Hillary Clinton would be soundly rejected by the American people. However, if the Democrats get smart, which is not likely to happen, and choose a moderate strong-on-defense candidate we might have more to worry about. In comes Condi Rice; She has the respect of the entire nation and can easily be seen as the first female President of the United States. Her qualifications are immaculate and her keen foreign policy intellect really can’t be matched by any Democrat. Not to mention she is African-American and when put to mainstream black America she will be able to garner a significant percentage of that voter demographic.

As the Peggy Noonan article points out, the current administration will likely want a candidate that will stick to their policy goals of Middle-East reformation. If the White House decides to replace Dick Cheney as Vice-President, like the Noonan article suggests, then I believe that President Bush will move up Condi Rice to the VP spot. This will be done to position Rice for the frontrunner spot of the 2008 presidential election. This move, if it happened, would automatically give Ms. Rice the edge in the '08 race. She would not only be the first black female Secretary of State but she would be the first black female Vice-President in history. Although, If this move happened, it would bring about the biggest left-wing and MSM attack in history. It would be the dirtiest year of politics ever witnessed by man. Condi Rice would be slandered by, not only the NAACP, but by every race-baiter the Democratic Party employs. She will be called an Aunt Jemima, which she already has been called; she will be labeled a lesbian or "man-hater" by the left because she is not married; she will be slandered yet again as being a house slave and she will be demolished by the anti-Bush media. This inevitable reality is why it's important for the GOP, mainly the White House, to give Condoleezza Rice the element of presidential stature. Once she has that element, the Democrats and the media won’t just be attacking her but they will be attacking the stature of historical African-American progress. They will fall right into the bear trap and that is why the White House should pay attention. -Article by Anthony Tafoya of Opinionnation Times-

Why I Hate The Far-Left

Dianne Feinstein, a senator from California, was trying to bring history to her state with the acquiring of the WWII war ship USS Iowa. She helped to make available $3 million, for the ship that took part in defeating the Japanese, to be docked in San Francisco and be stationed as a monument. A very good thing to do for the city of San Francisco, at least to people with respect for their country and half a brain in their head. There is no city as liberal as SF; so what pray tell came up in acquiring this historic ship as a museum. “Gee, don’t tell me, the crazy left brought up Iraq. No, I don’t believe it Mr. Opinionnation; the left never displays idiocy to the level in which they will deny the importance of winning WW2. I just won’t accept it Mr. Opinionnation, this country is not made up of hypocritical, misguided Liberals who hate their country, that can never be.”

Well son, unfortunately that’s the type of ilk we deal with on a daily basis here in the great US of A. So, what happened to this floating monument to American Sacrifice and courage? Well, it was voted down 8-3 by the city supervisors. For what reason…The war in Iraq and the military stance on gays. “If I was going to commit any money in recognition of war, then it should be toward peace, given what are war is in Iraq now.” Supervisor Ross Mirkirami said.

That’s what he actually said. If any money should go toward war it should go to peace. I don’t know what exactly that means but I guess that it means Bush is evil. I don’t think the left understands that, in most cases, war brings peace. I honestly believe they have lost all sense of reality. OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD BE ASHAMED. Please visit this link to understand just how historic this ship is. USS Iowa. Feinstein, to her credit, called it a very “Petty decision. “This isn’t the San Francisco I know and love,” she said.



Some extreme Liberals want to fight terrorism by abolishing our military. A partial transcript of Gerardo Sandoval, another of the San Francisco Supervisors that voted against honoring the USS Iowa, on Hannity&Colmes. Watch the video here: Expose the Left

Sean Hannity: you said to me you don’t want a symbol of war in the harbor.
Crazy Liberal Gerardo Sandoval: That’s Right.
SH: I guess this is just a difference of philosophy. That symbol of war that beat back the forces of fascism and imperial Japan and Nazism; that’s really a symbol of peace. Why would you see it as a symbol of war when it defended liberty and freedom?
CL: well, it did do that but it also is a warship. Its got guns on it and it fires things…SF is where we signed the UN charter; created the UN; there are many ways to honor veterans and their sacrifices.

SH: “Do you think America should unilaterally disarm, should we give up our tools of war?”
CL: “I would say yes, we should. We should invest our money in something else-”
Alan Colmes: Let me ask you a question: should we not have a military?
CL: I don’t think we should have a military…what good has it done us in the last five years.
AC: …But to say we should not have a military; it’s absolutely absurd; it’s incredible!
CL: Welcome to San Francisco.
AC: What do you want us to defend ourselves with?
CL:
Well, you got cops; you got the coast guard there’s lots of different things.

Bryant Gumbel Uses Olympics to attack the GOP

Bryant Gumbel, on Real Sports, tries to bring racism into the Olympics. First, he mocks the athletes in the winter games saying, “try not to laugh when someone says these are the world’s greatest athletes” and then he goes right into the typical liberal propaganda of Republicans hate black people. This is what the whitest black man on the planet had to say, “…despite a paucity of blacks that makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention.” [Scroll Down to Watch or Listen to tape]

Yeah, I had to look up paucity too, it means scarcity. Someone needs to remind Gumbel, who can’t even get out of bed without pulling a muscle, that these Olympic athletes are in peak physical condition. And someone let Bryant Gumbel know that George Bush has placed more African-Americans in high ranking positions than any other president in history. Then, someone let Bryant know that when black Republicans run for office, Democrats, mostly black, throw Oreos and call the candidate an Uncle Tom or Aunt Jemima. Yes, the so-called “open-minded” left not only physically attacks black republicans but they slander and denounce their candidacy and they truly do treat black Republicans as second-class citizens. Yep, I said it, democrats treat black republicans like second-class citizens. Is anyone else tired of liberals always playing the race card to advance themselves?

MP3 Version
Windows Media Video
Real Player Video

The Smoking Gun: Saddam's WMD

(CNSNews.com) - Reportedly armed with 12 hours of Saddam Hussein's audio recordings, the organizers of an upcoming "Intelligence Summit" are describing the tapes as the "smoking gun evidence" that the Iraqi dictator possessed weapons of mass destruction in the period leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

The U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which according to the New York Sun has already authenticated the Saddam tapes, has reopened its investigation into the possible existence and location of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Secret audiotapes of Saddam Hussein discussing ways to attack America with weapons of mass destruction will be the subject of an ABC "Nightline" program Wednesday night, a former federal prosecutor told Cybercast News Service.

The panel's chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), declined to give the Sun details of the content or context of the recordings, saying only that they were provided to his committee by former federal prosecutor John Loftus. Loftus has been tight-lipped about the tapes, telling the Sun only that he received them from a "former American military intelligence analyst." However, on Wednesday he told Cybercast News Service, "Saddam's tapes confirm he had active CW [chemical weapons] and BW [biological weapons] programs that were hidden from the UN."


Saddam Hussein is said to be, in these new tapes, strategizing WMD attacks on Washington DC and other major cities. Tonight on ABC, be sure to watch the report on this breaking news. The official Intelligence report is going to be released on Saturday so be sure to be on the look out for that as well. What makes this breaking news so interesting is that it has the possibility to reshape the current political debate on Iraq and its supposed WMD program. These new revelations also coincide with the release of General Sada’s new book, “Saddam’s Secrets”. In this book the Iraqi General details his alleged account of how Saddam Hussein hid and then transported his WMD stocks into Syria via Boeing plane and a contingent of huge trucks. This new revelation also coincides with recent reports by the Weekly Standard of Saddam Hussein’s terrorist training camps. All of these stories should make the country and the world better aware of the truth about Iraq’s WMD program and weaponry.

I doubt these new facts will change the far-left and their constant anti-war mindset but it will provide ammunition for those of us who supported the removal of the brutal dictator and enemy of the United States. In fact I think the far-left will fall back into the denial that allows them to propagate their ignorance to the world. We'll See!

Democrats "Betray" Their Iraq War Vet Candidate

Paul Hackett, an Iraq war vet and a democrat, was going to be a rising star for the democrats but has quit and accused Dems of “betraying” him. Rolling Stone Article

Paul Hackett, an Iraq war Veteran was double-crossed by the party that convinced him to run for an Ohio Senate seat. He has said that he will no longer be involved in politics because he was “betrayed” by leading Democrats, Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer. The Iraq war critic was recruited by the left because they felt, that if they can find at least a few people that fought in Iraq to denounce the war effort, they could use that to score political points in upcoming elections. However, what Mr. Hackett didn’t realize at the time and only has now come to realize, is that the Democratic Party was only interested in him because he could be used to attack President Bush. It is reported that top Democrats strong armed him out of the Ohio race and refused to fund his campaign as promised. That led Mr. Hackett to withdrawal his name and to drop out of politics all together.

This is what
Gary Hart, a former Democratic presidential frontrunner and senator, had to say about the Democrats betraying Paul Hackett. Some of the things he writes about this situation are very similar to what I always say about the Democrats… needless to say, I enjoyed it:

“…the pressure brought on Paul Hackett, the bold Iraqi veteran, to abandon his campaign for the U.S. Senate from Ohio is deplorable. This is simply old politics at its worst.” This “is a party which hand-picks its candidates, decides who can and cannot run, directs money to the favorite candidate, and dictate terms. Telling Paul Hackett that he cannot run for the Senate, and purportedly calling contributors to dry up his funds, is the worse kind of old politics. It will drive voters away from the supposedly “open" party, the Democrats, and further add to public cynicism about how politics in America is played in the early 21st century.” -Gary Hart-

Corrupt UN calls for Gitmo Closure

Guardian Unlimited
A UN inquiry into conditions at Guantánamo Bay has called on Washington to shut down the prison, and says treatment of detainees in some cases amounts to torture, UN officials said yesterday.

The report also disputes the Bush administration's legal arguments for the prison, which was sited at the navy base in Cuba with the purpose of remaining outside the purview of the US courts, and says there has been insufficient legal process to decide whether detainees continued to pose a threat to the US.

During an 18-month investigation, the envoys interviewed freed prisoners, lawyers and doctors to collect information on the detainees, who have been held for the last four years without access to US judicial oversight. The envoys did not have access to the 500 prisoners who are still being held at the detention centre. [They did have access but chose not to see prisoners, so they lied]

Opinionnation

Fact: UN Human Rights has never been inside Guantanamo Bay. [so why is their report legitimate…right, it’s not]

Fact: Al Qaeda’s handbook specifically instructs terrorists to claim torture because it aids their propaganda

Fact: Libya was the head of the UN’s Human Rights Commission. [Libya for you liberals is a major human rights violator]

Fact: This investigation was based on former detainee accounts…Hell, O.J. Simpson says he’s innocent, I guess we should take his word for it. Robert Blake and Scott Peterson both said they were innocent so I assume since they claim that to be true we should all believe it like the morons we are. --That’s just like liberals to side with terrorist detainees rather then protect their country. They [HRC] are even upset at the U.S. for force-fedding detatinees that refuse to eat. "Those evil Americans and their saving of terrorist lives, those monsters!" Personally, I think we should let the detatinees that are on a huunger strike starve to death...It's one less to worry about.

Wake me up when the UN is not anti-American, anti-Semitic and systematically corrupt…then maybe, if they actually visit the site they are investigating, I will take their phony report seriously.

The more the UN and far-left groups complain about something, the more we know how necessary and important it is. The more the HRC and MoveOn whine the more I want Guantanamo to stay active.

AL Gore Slanders the U.S. on what he calls "Abuse"

Before I get into AL Gore slandering the United States I thought a Quick Review would be in order. Let’s review: The left wants weakened visa laws; an end to the terrorists surveillance program; A weakened Patriot Act; they want to shut down terrorist prisons such as Guantanamo Bay; They don’t want to kill terrorists if there is a chance of collateral damage; they cheer the illegal disclosure of secret CIA Plane routes; they cheer the illegal disclosure of secret terrorist prisons; they refused to condemn Democrats who compared the US military to Nazis; They continue to lie about the run up to the war in Iraq; They are against coercive interrogation to extract vital information from terrorist detainees; they want illegal enemy combatants to have Geneva protections; they want the US to adhere to the wishes of the corrupt UN; They use funerals to slander the current president of the United States; They miss Saddam Hussein and wish he were still in power; and they base their political positions on hatred not the best interest of the country.


Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed "terrible abuses" against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Gore said Arabs had been "indiscriminately rounded up" and held in "unforgivable" conditions and that the Bush administration was playing into al-Qaida's hands by routinely blocking Saudi visa applications. "The thoughtless way in which visas are now handled, that is a mistake," Gore said during the Jiddah Economic Forum. "The worst thing we can possibly do is to cut off the channels of friendship and mutual understanding between Saudi Arabia and the United States."

Gore told the largely Saudi audience that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable." [click on AP link for full story]


Opinionnation
Al Gore, once again, is trying to aid our enemy by espousing ridiculous claims. In the beginning of the Iraq war Al Gore claimed George Bush betrayed his country and was a liar. He also pushed the theory that Bush knew about 9-11 prior to the attacks. He has done it again so I need to get this recent speech straight. Al Gore wants us to weaken visa laws to allow any person, terrorist or not, to have access to our country because he feels the “channels of friendship” is important. WOW! And the left wonders why the American people know they are weak on terror. He thinks, that making it more difficult for people from Saudi Arabia, [most 9-11 hijacker were Saudi] to enter the U.S. is somehow playing into AL Qaeda’s hands. Let me tell you something Al Gore; slandering your country and undermining the war on terror, as you do, is what really plays into the hands of Al Qaeda. And you being upset at the government for rounding up illegal aliens from terrorists sponsoring countries is what makes you a liberal. The left just can't seem to control itself.

A Lesson in Liberal Hypocrisy

CNN and the New York Times, two left-wing powerhouses that claim they are for free speech, have refused to publish the Muhammad cartoons. CNN has stated that “It is not showing this because of the negative caricatures of the likeness of the prophet Mohammad because the network believes its role is to cover the events surrounding the publication of the cartoons while not unnecessarily adding fuel to the controversy itself.” The above statement is the official stance of CNN on the cartoons.

Is that right CNN! Then why was it that during the Abu Graihb scandal, which enraged many Islamic Radicals, did you continually show the pictures of terrorist detainees being mistreated? You purposely added fuel to the controversy with total disregard of the safety of US marines and soldiers! You published and republished those pictures everyday in an attempt to damage the administration. I don’t want to hear your BS about how you don’t want to upset the Muslim people by posting these cartoons. I want to hear an apology and I want to hear you admit your hypocrisy for purposely aiding in enraging Islamic Extremists in the Abu Graihb case but refusing to print these perfectly fair but politically incorrect cartoons.

Also, I want to know why it was perfectly fine to publish a seven year old picture of the Virgin Mary with elephant excrement all over her, while at the same time, claiming to be protecting Muslim sensibilities in the cartoon controversy. Recently, the New York Times has also refused to print the Muhammad cartoons while gleefully printing the
Holy Virgin Mary covered in elephant dung. The Times also over-hyped the Abu Graihb story and ran the pictures for months. 59 front page stories about Abu Graihb and Guantanamo Bay which, of course, fueled the hatred of America and contributed in the deaths of Americans. Not to mention the phony Newsweek story about flushing the Koran down the toilet which caused riots that resulted in the deaths of, I believe, 16 people. Yeah, the NY Times ran that story as well.

There you have it folks; the willingness by the left to endanger our military and our country but the unwillingness to print cartoons that Muslims find offensive. Their hypocrisy truly knows no bounds.

What Happened to the Democrats

I was surfing the web and I happened upon this video: Download Video WMV. It was posted by Rightwinged.com and I have to say, it is quite funny. Oh, how they have changed from JFK to todays Democratic "leaders".

Remember when the Democrats were not habitual liars and anti-American? How sweet those days were. Now the Democratic Party is defined by Bush-Hatred, Terrorist enabling and a cold-blooded desperation for power. They are the worst types of hypocrites known to man; With Shillary, Scream-Machine Dean, Harry can’t Reid, Ted Drunken-Man Kennedy, and Jimmy Worst-Prez-Ever Carter. Oh well enjoy the video!

Hillary Claims Republicans are Playing the 'Fear Card'


Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday accused Republicans of "playing the fear card" of terrorism to win elections and said Democrats cannot keep quiet if they want to win in November.

The New York Democrat, facing re-election this year and considered a potential White House candidate in 2008, said Republicans won the past two elections on the issue of national security and "they're doing it to us again." Breitbart.COM

Opinionnation-
Hillary says the Republican Party is playing the Fear card in terms of National Defense. This new campaign talking point from Clinton only proves her real feelings. It is a statement meant to diminish the actually threat the United States faces from Islamic Extremists. Not only is it a slap in the face of those people who died as a result of this “fear card” as Clinton describes it, but I think it is offensive to the families who have been affected by the murder of their loved ones on 9-11. Unlike Clinton, most people understand the reality in which we live. Furthermore, the Democratic Party has engaged in their own fear campaign trying to scare the American people into believing that the “evil” Bush administration is wiretapping little old ladies from Wisconsin.

All of this she said while Jimmy Carter used the honorable Coretta Scott King's funeral as a forum to attack President Bush for tracking terrorist chatter via NSA wiretaps. She said all of this while the New York Times is outraged at the Democratic Party for not “exploiting” the so-called Republican vulnerabilities. She has said this after key leaders of the Democratic Party tried and failed to obstruct the nomination of a well-qualified Supreme Court nominee. She said this after people like Ted Kennedy lied in an attempt to slander the character of Judge Samuel Alito by falsely painting him as a bigot and a racist

The Crazy Left Strikes Again

Democratic Congressmen Maurice Hinchey has accused the President of the United States of allowing Osama Bin Laden to escape in Tora Bora for the express purpose of going to war in Iraq. Yes, an elected official has actually said that President Bush refused to capture or kill Bin Laden in order to somehow use that to justify a war in Iraq.

“When the US didn’t capture Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, it wasn’t by mistake. The only logical answer that comes to mind is they didn’t want to capture Bin Laden because if they captured Bin Laden and wiped out the Taliban, which they could have done at that moment, there would have been no justification for going to war in Iraq, and they wanted to use that as a justification for attacking Iraq.” -Maurice Hinchey-

This guy is now officially crazier than Howard “scream-machine” Dean. My favorite phrase of his quote is, “the only logical answer that comes to mind…” What?!? The only logical answer is that Bush said, forget about the Taliban and Osama, I want me oil, Yeeeeeeeehah! This guy must be the American version of George Galloway with insane rhetoric like that. Maybe in a year Hinchey will pretend to be a cat like Goerge Galloway on "Big Brother." Remember This: Galloway Pretends to be a Cat

Compromising the Security of the American People

Thanks to Cox and Forkum for putting me on their blogroll. Much appreciated!
Before I write anything else I just want to point out another example of how the far-left has aided and abetted terrorism. It turns out that our enemy is now using the political charade that is the NSA surveillance controversy as a means to try to get their terrorist clients released. Lawyers are arguing, for their clients, that the NSA extracted information illegally via wiretaps and surveillance. Story

General Hayden, the former head of the NSA and the current deputy Director of the Department of National Intelligence, said last week that the leak of the super-secret NSA terrorist surveillance program has really hurt national security. Today, Alberto Gonzales testified on the legality of this formerly secret program saying, "Congress and the American people are interested in two fundamental questions: Is this program necessary and is it lawful. The answer to both questions is 'yes.' The question of necessity rightly falls to our nation's military leaders, because the terrorist surveillance program is an essential element of our military campaign against Al Qaeda." He argued that the inherent powers of the President and the congressional approved Patriot Act, among other more complicated legal arguments, provide the President with powers allowing him to conduct this INTERNATIONAL spy program.

Gonzales also pointed out the fundamental mis-perception that the media and the left have disregarded in their public tirades.

"I think people who call this a 'domestic' surveillance program is doing a great disservice to this country." [
Gonzales means that this program intercepts international calls whether originating in the US or from a foreign country. It is not a domestic spy program.]

"In confronting this new and deadly enemy, President Bush promised that '[w]e will direct every resource at our command — every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every tool of law enforcement, every financial influence and every weapon of war — to the disruption of and to the defeat of the global terror network.' ...The terrorist surveillance program described by the president is one such tool and one indispensable aspect of this defense of our nation."


"Our enemy is listening and I can't help but think they're shaking their heads in amazement" that details of the secret program were leaked in the first place, he continued, and that people would actually be calling for disarmament of a program that has helped thwart attacks on U.S. soil. [Let me let you in on something Mr. Gonzales. The Democratic Party really doesn’t care about thwarting attacks nor do they care about protecting the country when it comes to an opportunity to damage the Bush Administration.] -quotes from FNC-

Muhammad Cartoon Causes Outrage

Danish Cartoon of Muhammad



Well, in the Liberal spirit of America-blaming, I blame Europe for creating far more terrorists than the U.S. in a single week than in the entire Iraq war. lol There has been widespread protests and violence over a Danish cartoon of Muhammad wearing a bomb for a turban. The cartoon has been reprinted dozens of times throughout Europe only fueling the flames of hatred. In Indonesia the Danish Embassy was raided by upset Muslims. People in the streets are calling for the "death of their enemies"; the Arab sport of flag-burning has hit an all time high and the widespread hatred of the European "infidels" has grown nearly to the breaking point.

Oh, man this is funny!

US Airman Shot by Police Officer

Breaking News. July 2, 2007: The Asshole officer who clearly tried to murder Airman Carrion was acquitted of all charges.

Warning. Video may be too graphic for some



Update:
March 7, 2006.
The police officer in this video has now been charged with attempted voluntary manslaughter. If you ask me it should be attempted murder. I will post a new entry later today so press the Home button at the top of the right sidebar to view that. It will be up around 4pm Mountain time. ]


A senior US airman, Elio Carrion, who just returned from Iraq, was shot in cold blood by a police officer in California. The officer commanded the airman to stand up and then for no reason shot him three times. I have watched the video and I have come to the conclusion that the Officer, who is now being investigated, purposely told Carrion to stand up simply to have an excuse to shoot him.

All I have to say is thank God someone was filming this because without the film this cop probably would get away with this attempted murder.

Weeeee, I'm Famous

As you may have heard Cindy Sheehan was invited to the State of the Union address by Rep. Lyn Woolsey a democrat. I would have figured given that Cindy just a week ago praised the dictator Hugo Chavez and in the past has said the terrorists in Iraq [the same that killed her son] are “freedom-fighters,” that no person in their right mind would invite this person to be seated with them. Luckily she was escorted out before the address started because she would have probably interrupted the event.

Obviously, most of us, understand how nutty Mrs. Sheehan comments are but I’m assuming the Democrats don’t. What was Lyn Woolsey trying to prove by bringing this woman to the State of The Union? It must have been a pressure job by Code Pink or some other anti-war group. This reminds me of when the Democrats invited the propagandists Michael Moore to sit next to Jimmy Carter at their 2004 convention. It seems the Dems are constantly associating themselves with anti-American Bush-haters. They definitely do not condemn these types of people; in fact as you have seen, they invite them to be their guests at political events.

Oh, she also said the George Bush is worse than Osama Bin Laden…Hey, I guess the Democrats agree if they refuse to condemn and actually invite her to big events.

"George Bush, a few weeks ago, said “oh I don’t know, 30,000”, innocent Iraqis. Well, even if we take his estimation into consideration and say “ok, it was 30,000” ... On September 11, one of the most tragic days in American history that we will all never forget, 3,000 Americans were killed, so does that make George Bush ten times a bigger terrorist than Osama bin Laden?" -Cindy Sheehan-

The ongoing attacks against the Iraqis accounts for the thousands of people killed. It is the Islamic-Extremists or "freedom fighters" as she has described them that are killing people in Iraq. George Bush isn’t responsible for terrorism or the fact the terrorists are killing Iraqis. Once again, the far-left refuses to blame the acts of terrorism on the insurgency; instead they choose to blame President Bush.