This is no joke! Essentially, Oklahoma just voted to secede from the Union! The Oklahome State House of Representatives voted 73-22 to override Gov. Brad Henry's veto of the resolution and now the State Senate is expected to pass it as well.

From NewsOK:

"We’re going to get it done one way or the other,” said the resolutions’ author, Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City. "I think our governor is out of step.” House Democrats objected, saying the issue already had been taken up and had been vetoed, but House Speaker Pro Tempore Kris Steele, R-Shawnee, ruled the veto is not final action. Key said he expects HCR 1028 will pass in the Senate. HJR 1003 earlier passed the House 83-18 and won approval in the Senate 29-18. Henry vetoed HJR 1003 because he said it suggested, among other things, that Oklahoma should return federal tax dollars. Key said HCR 1028, which, if passed, would be sent to Democratic President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, would not jeopardize federal funds but would tell Congress to "get back into their proper constitutional role.” The resolution states the federal government should "cease and desist” mandates that are beyond the scope of its powers.

Will Oklahoma be the only one? Or will Oklahoma simply be the first?

This is the first time since 1861 that any state has made any attempt at dissolving the Federal Union.

It will be interesting to see how Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress reacts.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

House Bypasses Governor’s Veto To Claim Oklahoma’s Sovereignty
Michael McNutt
NewsOK.com
May 6, 2009

Care to guess what word they used?

Take a look at this picture:



Now, if you were a Democrat, would you want fellow your Democrats talking about your wife, daughter or mother that way?

This irrational hatred of Sarah Palin has taken the Women's movement back several steps. It used to be that all those "tolerant" people on the left would accuse Conservatives of promoting negative images of women or of judging according to sex rather than ability.

Well, today the Democrats are blatently doing exactly what they've accused the Republicans of for the past 30 years. I guess that means the Democrats are saying it's okay to use derogatory terms to refer to women. At least, I have yet to hear about or read anything from the DNC or the Obama Campaign condemning such behavior.

There is a word for the actions of Democrats like Steve Sims, Kristy Benjamin, Lindsey Hager, Drew Forni, and Lindsay Woods (the five pictured in the above image): chutzpuh.

I don't ever again want to hear one little peep from any Democrat accusing me of being any kind of sexist ever again!

The members of the House GOP have already rejected this proposal but it would be a good idea to look into it to see exactly what motivated House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to try this.

From an article by Josiah Ryan at CNS:

Pelosi said she has a “comprehensive plan” for energy, which includes releasing oil from the 700 million barrel federal Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), creating a federal Renewable Electricity Standard that would require oil companies to pay billions of dollars to invest in clean energy resources – and allowing limited offshore drilling.

First off, those "billions of dollars" are going to come from what we consumers will be paying at the gas pump. In other words, Speaker Pelosi's proposal will result in even higher gas prices.

Second, that part about "invest in clean energy resourses." Would that happen to include the CLNE Wind Farms that Speaker Pelosi owns so much stock in?

The main reason that the GOP is rejecting this proposal is because it did not come through a committee to the House floor. Instead, it is a back-room, closed-door deal that has some very sinister undertones for Speaker Pelosi. If this particular bill went through, Pelosi would stand to makes hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit from her investments in CLNE.

GOP Prepared To Cut Oil Drilling Deal With Pelosi
Josiah Ryan
CNSNews.com
August 18, 2008

This is unbelieveable! How can the Bush Administration allow this to happen? This is a disaster waiting to happen and the President is inviting it in!

From NBCSanDiego.com:

The Teamsters Union said it has been told by officials in the Transportation Department's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration that the first Mexican trucks will be coming across the border on Saturday. The union said Wednesday it would ask a federal appeals courts to block the Bush administration's plan to begin allowing Mexican trucks to carry cargo anywhere in the United States. Teamsters leaders said they planned to seek an emergency injunction Wednesday from the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco. "What a slap in the face to American workers, opening the highways to dangerous trucks on Labor Day weekend, one of the busiest driving weekends of the year," said Teamsters President Jim Hoffa. Joining the Teamsters in seeking the emergency stay were the Sierra Club and Public Citizen. "Before providing unconditional access throughout the country to tens of thousands of big rigs we know little to nothing about, we must insure they meet safety and environmental standards," Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope said.

Not to mention the fact that groups like Al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad and many others would love to use this particular avenue of approach to smuggle in terrorists, high explosives, chemical weapons or maybe even a nuke!

Here's hoping that the injunction goes through and we'll have some time to spread the word to concerned citizens about this security nightmare and bring it to a halt.

But until then, tell everyone you know about it and do everything you can think of to get the word out that our border security is being completely compromised. Call your Congressional Respresentatives and ask them to do something to put a stop to this lunatic idiocy!

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Union: Mexican Trucks Begin Crossing Border Saturday
NBCSanDiego.com with AP
August 29, 2007

So, who exactly is Doug Feith? Read this excerpt from Flopping Aces to bring yourself up to speed:

The Department of Defense had been asked by Democrats in Congress to see if Feith and/or his office had done anything illegal in their investigation and reports regarding the depth of ties between Al Queda and Saddam Hussein’s regime. The Department of Defense’s interim Inspector General said essentially that Feith and his office had acted inappropriately by giving the impression that they were an intelligence agency, but that they had not acted illegally. He was innocent of the charges made by Congressional Democrats and opponents of the war in Iraq. Both groups of accusers had claimed that Feith and his office had manipulated, cherry-picked, and otherwise distorted real intelligence reports to form conclusions that were not real, and that those conclusions were then used to mislead the Bush Administration and/or Congress via claims from the Bush Administration.

And both groups of accusers were wrong. Moreover, both groups did what they accused Doug Feith of doing and they had help from the left-leaning media:

After jumping to the conclusions sections, Congressional Democrats cherry-pick the conclusions to form political talking points. Opponents of the war always distort the findings to make argumentative claims that the war in Iraq wasn’t necessary and/or that if the US just leaves things will be better than they are today. Lastly, members of the media have jobs to do, and since scandal sells they tend to write articles that sound more scandalous than they really are, and the investigation into Feith is perhaps the greatest example of lazy, uninformed, faux journalism around. Congressional Democrats are politicians, and almost always lawyers. That alone is not a resume´ that compels trust, yet they get it when they demand and demand and demand investigations. Opponents of the war who distort the findings of these investigations for mere argumentative sake are simply fools who are often too lazy to read the investigation in their full and cannot stomach the tragedy with which they reveal. We expect such things from those who clearly have agendas to serve by distortion, but shouldn’t we expect more from news media?

Yes, we should. That is why people like me serve to bring people like you an undistorted view of reality and more importantly, show you sides of the stories that the leftist media and liberal Dems will not show. Like the following:

This week, Senator Levin who had claimed Feith and his office acted illegally finally released a censored version of the Inspector General’s investigation into Feith and his office-the investigation that determined claims made by Senator Levin, other Congressional Democrats, and opponents of the war in Iraq were all incorrect and without merit. The following day, several reporters skimmed the report. Some just jumped to the conclusions sections. Then they wrote their articles-not opinion editorials, but articles reporting on the findings of the investigation. Did they report that Feith was not found guilty of committing a crime? No. Did they report that the claims made against him and his office were found to be without merit, or that the demands for investigation were based more on political distraction than reality? No. Instead, respected publications chose not to point out that there was no criminal wrong-doing, and we were given headlines like: “Pentagon probe fills in blanks on Iraq war groundwork” By Peter Spiegel, Times Staff Writer “Hussein's Prewar Ties To Al-Qaeda Discounted” By R. Jeffrey Smith Washington Post “Pentagon report debunks prewar Iraq-Al Qaeda connection” By Jesse Nunes | csmonitor.com “Hussein-Qaeda Link ‘Inappropriate,’ Report Says “ By BLOOMBERG NEWS In all these cases, the headlines suggest that there’s been an investigation to determine the depth of the relationship between Saddam’s regime and Al Queda, and that this fictional investigation has determined there was no relationship at all. That’s not what the Feith investigation was about. In fact, most of the things that Feith and his office claimed later turned out to be true.

There are two reports on the Internet about this case. You can access them here:

Review Of The Pre-Iraqi War Activities Of The Office Of the Under Secretary Of Defense for Policy
Deputy Inspector General For Intelligence
via Federation of American Scientists
February 9, 2007

Independent Rebuttal Report Regarding The SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ON POSTWAR FINDINGS ABOUT IRAQ’S WMD PROGRAMS AND LINKS TO TERRORISM AND HOW THEY COMPARE WITH PREWAR ASSESSMENTS
Compiled by Scott Malensek
ScottMalensek.com

And you can access the blog entry from Flopping Aces here:

Doug Feith Found INNOCENT-Pentagon Inspector General
Scott Malensek
Flopping Aces
April 7, 2007

---

The Democrats now control Congress. So, what will it mean for the next two years? It will mean that Pelosi and Reid will try to force a socialist agenda on the United States, mostly within the first 100 hours of the legislative session.

In earlier blog posts, I wrote about the Dem plans for America and their alliance with the European socialists.

Michael Reagan, writing for Human Events Online, notes the following:

Madame Pelosi promises to push forward legislation that would “make our country safer; make our economy fair; make college more affordable; health care more accessible; move toward energy independence.” She is also reported to be planning to introduce legislation that would muzzle conservative opposition. That’s scary, and indicative of the Marxian mindset of Pelosi and her far-left colleagues now controlling the House of Representatives. The legislative initiatives included in Pelosi’s first-hundred-hours program, however, are just plain demagoguery – proposals that sound good but are riddled with problems and what Heritage scholars call “unintended consequences.” Take the pledge to increase the minimum wage. Sounds good – after all, who wants people to be denied a living wage? It raises up images in the public’s mind of employees struggling to exist on a pittance. It also ignores some very inconvenient facts Heritage scholars exposed: • It is an extremely ineffective anti-poverty measure. It does not help the poor, low-income workers. Most minimum wage workers do not need government assistance. Less than one in five live below the poverty line, and the average family income of a minimum wage earner is almost $50,000 a year. The majority of minimum wage workers are between the ages of 16 and 24, and over three-fifths work part time. • Many will lose their jobs because as it gets more become more expensive to hire workers, companies hire fewer of them. The bulk of research on the minimum wage confirms that the minimum wage costs jobs. Some workers may get a raise while others lose everything.

And this is just the minimum wage issue of which I have a previous blog entry here.

The Dems are also set to vote more money for stem-cell research. But what they are not saying is that it will be embryonic stem cell research rather than adult stem-cell research. You see, the leftist media and the Dems do not want you to know that the only branch of stem-cell research that has ever cured a patient is the adult stem-cell branch. Every time embryonic stem-cells have been injected into test rats, the rats developed tumors (embryonic carcinoma, the same disease that killed Chicago Bears running back Brian Piccolo).

So, if it is adult stem-cell research that has actually been curing patients and embryonic stem-cell research has been killing rats, why fund the embryonic branch? Because it pushes a pro-abortion agenda and gives the Dems an excuse to abort more babies. Even doctors are hard pressed to give any other reason why.

You can access Michael Reagan's column on-line here:

Wrong Answers
Michael Reagan
Human Events Online
January 5, 2007

---

And we have Ann Coulter's latest column about the Dems and their efforts over the past few decades to ensure that the United States loses any and all wars. Usually her columns are funny and witty, but this one hits the truth so hard that it is scary rather than humorous.

From her column:

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war. They insisted on calling the Soviet-backed Vietcong "the National Liberation Front of Vietnam," just as they call Islamic fascists killing Americans in Iraq "insurgents." Ho Chi Minh was hailed as a "Jeffersonian Democrat," just as Michael Moore compares the Islamic fascists in Iraq to the Minute Men. ... Just one month after the Watergate Congress was elected, North Vietnam attacked the South. Even milquetoast, pro-abortion, detente-loving Gerald R. Ford knew America had to defend South Vietnam or America's word would be worth nothing. As Ford said, "American unwillingness to provide adequate assistance to allies fighting for their lives could seriously affect our credibility throughout the world as an ally." He pleaded repeatedly with the Democratic Congress simply to authorize aid to South Vietnam—no troops, just money. But the Democrats turned their backs on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally and trashed America's word. Within a month of Ford's last appeal to Congress to help South Vietnam, Saigon fell. The entire world watched as American personnel desperately scrambled into helicopters from embassy rooftops in Saigon while beating back our own allies, to whom we could offer no means of escape.

Right now, the Dems are trying to force a similar circumstance on President Bush. It turns out that the only similarity between Iraq and Vietnam is the Dem insistence that we lose the war and tarnish our international image.

The biggest advantage the terrorists currently have over us is the Democratic Party and all of its silly, left-wing socialist ideas. It is no wonder that the Islamo-fascists cheered the loudest when the dems took over Congress.

Ann's parting shot:

In addition to being wrong about Ford's pardon of Nixon, liberals were wrong about a few other things from that era. Democrats haven't admitted error in rejecting Ford's pleas on behalf of South Vietnam because there are still dangerous foreigners trying to kill Americans. Nixon is safely interred in the ground, but the enemies of America continue to need the Democrats' help.

You can access Ann's complete column on-line here:

The Democratic Party: A Vast Sleeper Cell
Ann Coulter
Human Events Online
January 3, 2007

---

Okay, how many of you reading this think this is any kind of surprise at all? After all of the campaign promises to build "bipartisanship" and getting input from Republicans, the Dems have decided they are simply going to push forward and force the Republicans to the sidelines.

Think this is an over-reaction to the impending disaster Pelosi is brewing for us? Read what the Washington Post (that's right, the Washington Post) has to say:

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories. Nancy Pelosi, the Californian who will become House speaker, and Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, who will become majority leader, finalized the strategy over the holiday recess in a flurry of conference calls and meetings with other party leaders. A few Democrats, worried that the party would be criticized for reneging on an important pledge, argued unsuccessfully that they should grant the Republicans greater latitude when the Congress convenes on Thursday.

Just as the Dems are breaking their promise to confront corruption (e.g. John Conyers not being held the least bit accountable for his transgressions), they are now breaking their promise of bipartisanship. And they haven't even started the session yet!

It has become clear that only the most naive and gullible will believe anything Pelosi and company promise.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Democrats To Start Without GOP Input
Lyndsey Layton and Juliet Eilperin
WashingtonPost.com
January 2, 2007

---

And here is a prime example of why you, as a parent, must play an active role in your children's lives. Writing for the New York Times (yes, the New York Times), Lawrence Downes notes:

They writhe and strut, shake their bottoms, splay their legs, thrust their chests out and in and out again. Some straddle empty chairs, like lap dancers without laps. They don’t smile much. Their faces are locked from grim exertion, from all that leaping up and lying down without poles to hold onto. “Don’t stop don’t stop,” sings Janet Jackson, all whispery. “Jerk it like you’re making it choke. ...Ohh. I’m so stimulated. Feel so X-rated.” The girls spend a lot of time lying on the floor. They are in the sixth, seventh and eighth grades. As each routine ends, parents and siblings cheer, whistle and applaud. I just sit there, not fully comprehending. It’s my first suburban Long Island middle school talent show. I’m with my daughter, who is 10 and hadn’t warned me. I’m not sure what I had expected, but it wasn’t this. It was something different. Something younger. Something that didn’t make the girls look so ... one-dimensional. It would be easy to chalk it up to adolescent rebellion, an ancient and necessary phenomenon, except these girls were barely adolescents and they had nothing to rebel against. This was an official function at a public school, a milieu that in another time or universe might have seen children singing folk ballads, say, or reciting the Gettysburg Address.

It would be easy to blame stuff like this on people like Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton and all of the skanky, slutty public displays they've put on. It would even be easy to blame stuff like this:

But the truth is in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the above quote. It is the family. You, as adults, must take a stand with your children. You must make clear to them what is appropriate and acceptable and what is not. It doesn't mean that you have become a prude. It means that you care about the world your sons and daughters will be venturing out into and how that world will treat them.

Will your daughter be the next Sally Ride or Natalee Holloway? Will your son be the next Peyton Manning or Darrent Williams? You will have a big influence on that.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Middle School Girls Gone Wild
Lawrence Downes
NYTimes.com
December 29, 2006

---

So, after all of the chest beating about reigning in the "culture of corruption" in a Republican controlled Congress, how do the Dems handle corruption within their own ranks? They quietly forgive it and hope that nobody notices. You see, in the mind of the average leftist, it is only unforgivable corruption if it is committed by a Conservative Republican. If committed by a liberal Dem, then it is to be brushed over as quickly as possible.

Take for example the current situation with John Conyers (D-MI). He stands accused of using his legal counsel as a tutor for his children and having his staff pick the children up from school and babysit them in the office, all of this without additional compensation from Conyers. Additionally, he allowed a former top aid who had been convicted of fraud to obtain a fake passport and flee to Ghana until the aid was recaptured and extradited back to the U.S. Also, Conyers had his staff work on the campaigns of friends and relaitves without taking leave (i.e. on official Congressional time) and Deanna Maher was instructed to live in the Conyers home for six weeks while Conyers' wife took law classes. Maher quit in May of 2006.

According to the House Ethics Committee Website:

Representative John Conyers had performed campaign activity on official time and in some instances using official resources, and that some staff members may have been compelled to do campaign work or personal work for Representative Conyers. The assertions in the reports, if true, could implicate a number of laws and House rules applicable to Members, including: House Rule 23, clause 1 (requiring the conduct of a Member or employee to reflect creditably on the House of representatives); House Rule 23, clause 8 (requiring that congressional staff perform official duties commensurate with compensation); 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a) and corresponding regulations of the Committee on House Administration (providing that official funds may be used only for the purposes appropriated); and 18 U.S.C § 606 (prohibiting adverse personnel action or intimidation to secure a “contribution of money or other valuable thing” including services, for a political purpose).

The Press Statement goes on:

In the course of providing information to the Committee, Representative Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. Representative Conyers also provided the Committee with documents indicating that he had begun taking steps to provide clearer guidance to staff regarding the requirement that campaign work and official work be separate. After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

You can access this comment on-line here:

Statement of Chairman Doc Hastings and Ranking Minority Member Howard L. Berman Regarding Representative John Conyers
Press Statement Regarding John Conyers
U.S. House Of Representative
December 29, 2006

So, John Conyers is not going to be held accountable for his corruption? I guess this is what Nancy Pelosi meant when she said that this would be "the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history.” Exactly as she is quoted here:

Pelosi Announces New Majority Leadership Team
Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader
November 16, 2006

John Conyers notwithstanding, of course.

In fact, you can access a more complete story about this on-line here:

Rep. Conyers' Questionable Ethics
Washington Times Editorial
March 8, 2006

---

And not just in the House, but the Senate is starting to light up with Dem corruption as well. Apart from what we already know about the corrupt dealings of Harry Reid (D-NV) we are beginning to learn small details of trouble brewing for Barack Obama (D-IL). According to Human Events Online:

In between the “fluff and style” news items, there have been reports of Obama’s connections to Antoine “Tony” Rezko. Rezko, who was indicted in October 2006 for a multimillion dollar kick-back scheme, has been a longtime supporter of Obama. Rezko’s companies have donated large sums to Obama’s campaigns. Rezko also hosted a fundraiser for Obama. Completing the shady political trifecta—there’s even a questionable real estate deal between the two men. Last week, Obama denied granting an internship in his Capitol Hill office to a 20-year-old student recommended by his corrupt buddy. The highly competitive internship was one of 98 Illinois spots filled from a pool of 350 applicants and Rezko wanted a friend’s son to get the job. The intern’s father is a longtime Rezko associate who, incidentally, has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama’s political campaigns.

And even if true, I doubt the Dem controlled Senate will do much about the "culture of corruption" the libs are inflicting on our government already.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Ethics Questions Put Obama On The Spot
Chris Farrell
HumanEventsOnline.com
January 2, 2007

I've had to take some time off recently because of deadlines at work and taking care of my family over the holidays. I'd like to spend more time working with this blog and checking up on Old Media and the libs, but, since I am a Core Conservative, I will always put my family's welfare and well-being first. Anyway, that's why I've been away for so long. I promise I will try to put more entries up in the future.

For today, I have the text of an essay I recieved in an email from my sister. Please read it and heed the warnings. Western culture is in danger of falling within the next three generations. Unfortunately, it is going to be replaced by the barbarism known as Islam. It is already happening in Europe, and if we are not careful (and decisive) it will happen here in the U.S. as well.

The essay:

If you have the time, once you finish reading the article below, click on, the Brussels Journal link displayed in the 1st line. The Brussels Journal offers an interesting (terrifying) piece on the progress Muslims have made in their demographic conquest of Western Europe. The initial focus has been in cities, from which they are rapidly displacing the native inhabitants. As the author Fjordman predicts, soon, you will travel from London to Paris, Amsterdam or Stockholm and find that you have left one city dominated by burkas and sharia to find yet another city dominated by burkas and Sharia. Absurdly, the politically correct Left is celebrating the replacement of Europe's diverse cultures by a single grim Islamic one in the name of "cultural diversity." Here are a few examples of what this so-called diversity entails: In England, Muslims are creating no-go areas for native Europeans. Signs indicate that whites can enter only at their own risk. Hindus are also subjected to ethnic cleansing. Caucasians are fleeing Londonistan in droves. In France, there were 818 of these "no-go" zones when the presumably horrified government stopped keeping track - which was way back in 2002. Anything representing Western civilization, including post office trucks and fire engines, is routinely attacked with Molotov cocktails in these areas. The welfare checks go in; only violence and Islam come out. In French math classes, Muslim students refuse to write "plus" signs because they remind them of the Christian cross. Following last year's riots, the police announced that the situation had returned to normal when a day passed with only 98 vehicles set on fire by Muslim hooligans. In Holland, Muslims will soon make up the majority in all major cities. Forty percent of Moroccan Muslims in the Netherlands explicitly reject Western values and democracy. Thirty-two percent of native Dutch already want out of what's left of their country. In Germany, at least 50 women have been killed in the past decade in "honor killings" - i.e., for trying to live Western lifestyles. Germans are considered by the Muslim colonizers to be "stinking people" who are "doomed to go to hell" for being "useless creatures and infidels." In Denmark, Muslim taxi drivers spy on female immigrants, so they can be hunted down and killed if they attempt to escape from Muslim society. In Norway and Sweden, protection money must be paid to bloodthirsty Muslim gangs. It is becoming increasingly impossible to deny that the bleak and brutal culture of Islam is in the process of destroying European civilization. Yet Islam is only an opportunistic infection. Muslims have wanted to destroy the West for well over a millennium. If they are only now beginning to succeed, it is because only now is the West willing to let itself be destroyed. As Dutch politician Frits Bolkestein puts it, Muslim conquest by immigration has to do with the loss of confidence in one's own civilization. There is no clear European identity today. This has a real impact on foreign policy. In other words, Europe is dying because it doesn't believe in itself. Where once pride acted as an immune system to protect from external threats, now there is only the sanctimonious self-hatred known as liberalism.

If you read that whole thing, then yes, you read it right about the math classes. So, refusing to take math lessons is a sign of diversity? Seems more like a method of "dumbing down" the common man, something that libs have been trying to do ever since the first leftist gained any type of political power.

Also note the other important point: "it is because only now is the West willing to let itself be destroyed." That's right. The West wasn't willing to lay down and submit to Fascism, nor to Communism, and yet for some, odd, illogical reason, the leftists in the West are telling us we should lay down and submit to Islam and all of its radical barbarism such as requiring women to wear burhkas, not allowing women to drive, hold jobs or do anything other than have sex when their husbands demand it.

Too bad that NOW isn't warning American women about the dangers here. I wonder what they have been doing all this time?

Here is the link alluded to in the essay:

Beheading Nations: The Islamization Of Europe’s Cities
Fjordman
The Brussels Journal
July 13, 2006

I know the date is from six months ago, but the threat is still alive and well today and it is growing. Click the link and check out all of the other links in the article. All of them are referenced and come from credible, reliable sources. Time to wake up!

We can only hope and pray that the new Democrat controlled (i.e. pro-terrorist Congress) will wake up to what is happening in the world and do something to stop it. I am not confident that they will. I think they will continue to make concession after concession to Muslims while never realizing that they are making concessions to terrorists and those who support them.

After all, this is all in the name of "diversity."

---

Some of us knew this was going to happen. Apparently, all of the "responsible media" outlets in the U.S. completely missed it, or deliberately ignored it in an effort to try and hide it.

I won't hide it. I will do my part to make sure that everyone has the chance to learn about it. So, what am I talking about? I am talking about the terrorists using the platform of the Democrats here in the U.S. an an excuse to increase their violence and hatred of all things non-Islamic.

Aaron Klein, writing for the World Net Daily notes:

A high level U.S. commission's recommendations for an eventual withdrawal from Iraq and for dialogue with Iran and Syria proves "Islamic resistance" works and America will ultimately be defeated, according to senior terrorist leaders interviewed by WND. The militants, from the largest Palestinian terror groups in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, welcomed the policies outlined by the Iraq Study Group, which they claim recognizes Islam is the "new giant of the world."

In short, the terrorists feel they have won and have gained an immeasurable amount of confidence which they will use to incite more violence against innocent people.

And Aaron goes on:

"The report proves that this is the era of Islam and of jihad," said Abu Ayman, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin. The Islamic Jihad terror group is responsible for every suicide bombing in Israel during the past two years. "[With the Iraq Study Group report], the Americans came to the conclusion that Islam is the new giant of the world and it would be clever to reduce hostilities with this giant. In the Quran the principle of the rotation is clear and according to this principle the end of the Americans and of all non-believers is getting closer," Abu Ayman said. According to Abu Abdullah, a senior leader of Hamas' so-called military wing, Baker's report is a victory for Islam brought about by "Allah and his angels." "It is not just a simple victory. It is a great one. The big superpower of the world is defeated by a small group of mujahedeen (fighters). Did you see the mujahedeens' clothes and weapons in comparison with the huge individual military arsenal and supply that was carrying every American soldier?" exclaimed Abu Abdullah, who is considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, Hamas' declared "resistance" department. "It is no doubt that Allah and his angels were fighting with them (insurgents) against the Americans. It is a sign to all those who keep saying that America, Israel and the West in general cannot be defeated on the ground so let us negotiate with them," Abu Abdullah said.

Remember when the libs kept saying that if we simply pulled out and stopped interfering in the Middle East that the terrorists would give up the fight? It is becoming crystal clear how deluded those libs were and how gullible they were to believe that an Islamic terrorists could be trusted to work for peace.

And check this out:

Abu Abdullah said following a withdrawal from Iraq, the U.S. will be defeated on its own soil. "America must understand that with anti-American governments in Latin America and with Islam growing and reinforcing, including in the U.S. itself, the next step would be a total defeat on their (American) land, not a relative one like they are facing in Iraq," he said. Abu Nasser, the second-in-command of the Martyrs Brigades terror group in the West Bank, called the Iraq Study Group report a "great victory" from which other jihadist organizations can learn. "The Iraqi victory is a great message and lesson to the revolutionary and freedom movements in the world. Just to think that this resistance is led by hundreds of Sunni fighters who defeated hundreds of thousands of Americans, British and thousands of soldiers who belong to the puppet regime in Baghdad. What would be the situation if the Shiites will decide to join the resistance?" commented Abu Nasser.

And as for at least one of the more irrational recommendations of the Baker report:

The report stated the U.S. should engage Iran, Syria and insurgent leaders in Iraq, and said Israel should be pressured into withdrawing from the West Bank and the Golan Heights. The West Bank runs alongside Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Israel's international airport. The Heights is strategic mountainous territory that looks down in Israeli and Syrian population centers.

This shows how completely out of touch with reality the Baker-Hamilton Commission really is. Giving up those heights to the terrorists is an invitation for more rocket and other terrorist attacks against civilian population centers.

Again, only a Democrat could have been so gullible as to believe the terrorists would lay down their arms as start living in peace if we simply capitulated, as the Dems are going to force us to do.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Terrorists Rejoicing Over New Iraq 'Plan'
Aaron Klein
WorldNetDaily.com
December 6, 2006

---

This comes from Reuters. Apparently, European socialists, not content with screwing up their own countries, are eager to work with the Democrats here in America in order to force the same disatrous socialism on us.

Here is what they wrote:

Socialist leaders attending a meeting of the European Socialist Party pledged that with the Democrats on the rise, strong ties could be renewed with the United States after years of cool relations with Republican President George W. Bush. Howard Dean, chairman of the national committee of the U.S. Democratic Party, is attending the two-day conference together with the leaders of leftist governments of several countries and party leaders from across Europe. "We are not anti-American, we want the real America, your America," former Danish Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, president of the European Socialist Party, said in remarks directed at Dean.

What that means is that they want income tax rates of 60-75%. They want socialized health care systems under which patients can be euthanized without their families even being consulted and other patients die while waiting for approval of treatments. They want Americans to be subservient to an all-powerful Federal Government and to be completely dependent on a Welfare State. They want the hard workers to work and toil for the benefit of the lazy who simply want to live off of welfare programs.

Socialism and Communism are the two most disastrous economic systems ever devised by man. We saw what socialism did to Eastern Europe, what it is doing in Asia today and how socialist policies have been sparking violence and unrest in France. (Remember those riots?)

The fact the Howard Dean was even present at such a conference shows clearly where the Democrats stand on this particular issue. And that may be an even bigger danger to the United States than terrorism is.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

European Socialists Eager To Work With U.S. Democrats
Reuters
December 7, 2006

---

---

It was a fraudulent story, as fraudulent as Dan Rather and Mary Mapes producing fake memos about President Bush's National Guard service. Associated Press claims that six Iraqis were burned alive and then cited a fraudulent source as their reference. AP says that Iraqi Police Captain Jamil Hussein gave them all of the details.

There's just one little problem. They cannot produce Captain Hussein in order to verify his story. Further, rather than admitting the truth, AP is sticking by their fraudulent story rather than retracting it as they should.

According to Mark Tapscott:

You've probably not read much about it because only a handful of mainstream media outlets have covered it, but the Associated Press - for decades America's largest and most trusted wire news service - is at the center of a credibility crisis largely of its own making. You probably have heard of the AP story that started it - a horrifying dispatch from Iraq the day after Thanksgiving claiming that six Sunnis had been doused with kerosene as they left their mosque following Friday prayers and burned alive by Shiite-aligned militiamen. The story, which was quickly picked up by virtually every major news organization in the world, also claimed that "the Shiite-dominated police and Iraqi military" stood by doing nothing as the six people were gruesomely murdered. The story was sourced to "police Captain Jamil Hussein." The problem is there appears to be no such person as Captain Jamil Hussein, at least not who is employed by the Iraqi police. The U.S. military says Hussein doesn't exist and has demanded that AP issue a correction. The Iraqi government says no such person is on its police payroll.

A resposible news media outlet would admit the fraud and then take steps to ensure that it doesn't happen again. But Old Media is a very old dog that it dead set in its ways. Look at all of the fraud scandals over the past few years. Jayson Blair of the New York Times, Eason Jordon of CNN, Dan Rather of CBS, the Reuters Fauxtography scandal, the Washington Post rigging opinion polls. And nothing is ever done to correct the situation.

It really does look like Old Media is so arrogant that they expect us to believe everything they publish or broadcast without any question at all.

I cannot say enough about how the Internet has been a God-send.

You can access Tapscott's complete blog entry on-line here:

How To End AP's "60 Minutes Moment" On Iraqi Sources
Mark Tapscott
The Washington Examiner
December 5, 2006

---

And despite the fact that most Americans oppose amnesty for illegal aliens, the Dems are expected to force an illegal alien amnesty bill next January. Mostly because it is the only piece of legislation they will be able to get through with their narrow majorities and since such a bill will have the backing of Presidnet Bush. But it is still an amnesty bill, and the Dems also want to defund the border fence that was approved by the last Congress.

Charles Hurt, writing for the Washington Times has this:

Congress will approve an immigration bill that will grant citizenship rights to most of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the U.S. after Democrats take control next month, predict both sides on Capitol Hill. While Republicans have been largely splintered on the issue of immigration reform, Democrats have been fairly unified behind the principle that the illegals currently in the country should get citizenship rights without having to first leave the country. "Years of dawdling have worsened our border security and made it harder to fix this broken system," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who will lead the Judiciary Committee next year. "We should not let partisan politics and intolerance continue to delay and derail effective reform."

"Effective reform?" Effective for whom? The illegals have shown nothing but disdain and disrespect for America and have made no effort whatsoever to integrate themselves into our culture although they have made monumental efforts to integrate themselves into our welfare and free medical care programs.

The only "effect" of such reform is that Congress will be able to force people like you and me to pay more in taxes to fund social programs for these illegals.

Mr. Hurt goes on:

With President Bush as an ally in the White House, he worries, Democrats will proceed next year with legislation to ultimately make citizens out of most of the illegals now in the country. And Republicans, still reeling from deep losses in the November elections, will give up the fight. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, said he expects an immigration-reform bill that doesn't deport illegal aliens to be the only significant legislation to come out of the new Democratic Congress and win Mr. Bush's approval. "The only real legislation that can be expected from Congress is amnesty," he said. "If they come up with a plan and the president is behind it, it will pick up a lot of our own members."

At least someone is calling it what it is: Amnesty. Too bad Old Media won't show as much integrity in their description of the bill.

This, along with the Dems trying to surrender in Iraq, will guarantee that Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups will have multiple opportunities to strike on American soil again and kill more innocent people.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Congress Open To Passing Bill On Immigration
Charles Hurt
The Washington Times
December 4, 2006

---

George Putnam had penned a nice little essay to serve as a reminder that Islamic terrorism is not the only danger the U.S. is facing right now. We also have a new sphere of leftist influence growing right in our own backyard, right down in South America. Ironically, it is we Americans who have allowed it to happen so close to home. Because of all the petrol-dollars we send to Venezuela and Mexico, we have been financing its growth for several years now.

And a few voices in the wilderness have been sounding the warnings for the past year. You can access those articles on-line here:

Will Chavez Embroil Venezuela In A War In The Caribbean?
Kenneth Rijock
Venezuelan News And Analysis
March 11, 2006

Fueling Our Enemies' Engines
Lt. Col. Oliver North
TownHall.com
February 17, 2006

Wave Bye-Bye To Freedom And Human Rights In Venezuela
Jim Kouri
New Media Alliance
March 16, 2006

Geroge Putnam notes the following:

It is this reporter's opinion that America, preoccupied with all of its many crises, should heed the warning of the brilliant Washington Times journalist, Frank Gaffney Jr., who warns of the rise of the radical anti-American left in Latin America. Gaffney points to the emergence of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as the oil-rich heir to Fidel Castro's revolutionary ambitions. With Chavez's money and Castro's coaching, these core leftists are seeking power through the ballot box and then using it to destroy constitutional processes. We have paid scant attention as Bolivia and Argentina have moved squarely into the Chavez-Castro orbit. And two other targets are Peru and Ecuador. The region's largest country, Brazil, is in the hands of Castro's ally, Luiz Inácio "Lula" da Silva. Among other things, this sinister cabal is poised to return Nicaragua to the longtime authoritarian Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas.

It has been brewing for some time. But no one has paid much attention to it since we have people like ex-President Jimmy Carter gushing all over his pal Hugo Chavez (despite the human rights violations that are so rampant in Venezuela now). And other leftists have given their moral support to these thuggish regimes too. It is all going to boil over some day and we will find ourselves in a new war with the adversary trying to march up the Central American Isthmus.

You can access George Putnam's column on-line here:

One Reporter's Opinion — A Latino Cabal Is Looming
George Putnam
NewsMax.com
December 1, 2006

And you can access the referenced Frank Gaffney Jr. column on-line here:

Latin America’s Leftist Menace
Frank Gaffney Jr.
The Washington Times via FrontPageMag.com
October 18, 2006

---

And what is the price of not enforcing our immigration laws? Read on.

Here is an incident that will most certainly stir the pot about illegals and the insane idea of granting them amnesty. 21-year-old Marine Corporal Brian Matthews and his girlfriend, Jennifer Bower, were killed by drunk driver Eduardo Raul Morales-Soriano, an illegal alien, in Montgomery County, Maryland on Thanksgiving night.

Some of you might be saying: "So, what?" A legal American could have done the same thing. True, but consider this from the World Net Daily:

It wasn't Morales-Soriano's first auto accident and it wasn't the first time police had dealt with the landscaper when alcohol was apparently involved. In February, Columbia police responded to a non-injury accident in a parking lot involving Morales-Soriano. According to police reports, he was "unable to maintain his balance" during a field sobriety test. He was given four citations and allowed to leave the scene of the accident with a relative after he refused to take a Breathalyzer test. Although Maryland law requires an automatic 120-day forfeiture of a drivers license for refusing the test, Morales-Soriano's license was not suspended after the accident. Prosecutors dropped all charges in the February accident due to "weak evidence," allowing Morales-Soriano to recover his seized license from the police and to avoid a fine and points added to his license. A policeman's error at the accident scene – returning the form documenting the refusal to take the Breathalyzer test to Morales-Soriano – meant that the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration did not receive the information necessary to suspend his license, Wayne Kirwan, a spokesman for the Howard County state's attorney told The Baltimore Sun.

So, why wasn't this illegal identified and deported then?

How many more tragedies do Americans have to suffer at the hands of people who should have been deported a long time ago?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

DUI Illegal Kills Marine Home On Leave From Iraq
WorldNetDaily
December 2, 2006

---

Despite all of the hub-bub during the election about the unpopularity of the Iraq War, indications are now that the Iraq Study Group is going to make, essentially, the following recommendation: Stay The Course. Yes, you read that right. Stay The Course.

From Robert Kagan & William Kristol, writing for the Weekly Standard:

[A]ccording to at least six separate commission sources sent out to pre-spin the press, the Baker-Hamilton report will call for a gradual and partial withdrawal of American forces in Iraq, to begin at a time unspecified and to be completed by a time unspecified. The goal will be to hand over responsibility for security in Iraq to the Iraqis themselves as soon as this is feasible, and to shift the American role to training rather than fighting the insurgency and providing security. The decision of how far, how fast, and even whether to withdraw will rest with military commanders in Iraq, who will base their determination on how well prepared the Iraqis are to take over. Even after the withdrawal, the study group envisions keeping at least 70,000 American troops in Iraq for years to come. ... Despite efforts to make it appear otherwise, then, the real recommendation of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group is "stay the course." For this we waited nine months?

Yes, for this we waited nine months. Apparently, despite calls for "cut and run" (i.e. "redeployment"), the Dems have found that they cannot do so, not without seriously compromising our efforts in the War On Terror nor without looking like they are bowing to the will of the terrorists.

The Baker-Hamilton Report will simply echo what the President and former SecDef Donald Rumsfeld have been saying all along, except they will try to paint it as an original idea. Too late though. Too many people know about it. The only ones who will go ga-ga over it are the fawning leftists in Old Media who will use the opportunity to launch more attacks against President Bush. And for what? Because Baker-Hamilton will recommened exactly what the President is recommending.

Go figure.

And here is the prediction on another aspect of Baker-Hamilton that has been the subject of some debate:

As for Baker's other significant and more original recommendation--that the United States hold direct talks with Iran and Syria to get their help in Iraq--Bush nixed that idea, too. In Estonia last Tuesday, the president said, "Iran knows how to get to the table with us, and that is to do that which they said they would do, which is verifiably suspend their [uranium] enrichment programs." This the Iranians have steadfastly refused to do, of course. As for Syria, Bush continues to accuse Syria, rightly, of trying to retake control of Lebanon by means of assassination and support of terrorist violence. He gave no indication that he was willing to begin direct talks with Syria on Iraq.

Yep. And according to these two authors, Baker-Hamilton is going to be dead on arrival. But the damage has been done. Our allies have begun to abandon us and our enemies took it as a sign that they were winning and ramped up the violence.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

A Perfect Failure
Robert Kagan & William Kristol
WeeklyStandard.com
(To be published in the Weekly Standard, December 12, 2006 in Volume 012, Issue 13.)

---

From the Pajamas Media:

Democratic leaders are poised to gut America’s missile defense - at the same time North Korea and Iran are testing long-range missiles that can strike the U.S. and its allies, including Israel, Japan and Britain. Meanwhile, sources inside the missile-defense community tell Pajamas Media that the Bush administration is planning to ask Congress to begin funding development of an “orbital battle station.” With these key developments, 2007 is set to be the biggest battle of space-based weapons since President Reagan proposed “Star Wars” in 1983. The incoming chairman of the Senate’s Armed Services Committee is Carl Levin. Levin, a Michigan Democrat, has long been a foe of missile defense. In 1980s, he worried that President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative — which aimed to develop technology to destroy Soviet missiles during all phases of flight — was “destabilizing.” Today Sen. Levin sings the same tune in a different key. “They’ve not done the operational testing yet that is convincing,” said Senator Levin during a post-election press conference. He was referring to the Ground based Missile Defense [GMD] system being installed in Alaska and California, to defend against North Korean missiles. He added that he favors stalling purchases of interceptor missiles - vital for missile defense — until after testing is complete. In short, Sen. Levin and other longtime opponents of missile defense plan to use “testing” - set to an unrealistically high level - to stop missile defense.

Actually, the tests have been quite successful, although Levin will not acknowledge it. His idea of an operational system is a one-for-one ratio, that is it should take only one interceptor to shoot down one ICBM. Actually, it takes about five interceptors to do so, but that is a huge improvement over the ten-to-one and twenty-to-one ratios of just ten years ago. Levin knows about this but is deliberately downplaying the fact, just like a little kid who has been caught stealing is ignoring the fact that his parents were right there to see the act and the kid is still protesting his innocence.

We definitely need to rectify this situation in 2008 and put more reasonable people back in power, assuming the U.S. doesn't suffer another attack between now and then.

You can read about Carl Levin's plans to scrap Ballistic Missile Defense here:

Democrats To Gut Missile Defense
Taylor Dinerman
PajamasMedia.com
December 1, 2006

---

In a previous blog entry, I wrote about a miscarriage of justice against two border patrol agents. Members of the outgoing GOP Congress are calling for hearings into what happened that day and what led to the convictions, implying that there may have been prosecutorial misconduct.

From the Daily Bulletin:

Fifteen congressional representatives this week urged the outgoing chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to immediately hold hearings in the case of two Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a drug smuggler. ... "The purpose in having this hearing is to shed more light on the facts of what occurred on the border that day," Poe said Friday. "An investigation is necessary to make sure that all the evidence was presented fairly, without a hidden agenda." With Democrats taking control of the Senate and House on Jan. 3 - including chairmanship of all committees - supporters of the agents believe time is of the essence for Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, who are expected to surrender Jan. 17 for incarceration.

And in a classic case of Dem flip-flopping:

Texas Democratic Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee and Silvestre Reyes, both of whom sat on Sensenbrenner's committee, also called for a congressional investigation at the Aug. 17 hearing. However, Reyes, who was appointed chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on Friday, flip-flopped on his decision to hold hearings, saying Friday that he would not interfere with a jury's decision and saw no evidence of prosecutorial abuse in the agents' case.

The hearings should go forward and this case should be made as public as possible. It will highlight how porous the border is and how lackadaisical Congress has been about addressing the issue.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

GOP Reps Call For Immediate Hearing On Border Patrol Agents Case
Sara Carter
DailyBulletin.com
December 3, 2006

---

It has become clear, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the left in America wants its own agenda forced on the people of the United States, even if that means giving moral support to our enemies, in this case, terrorists, and compromising whatever security we Americans can provide for ourselves.

There are numerous examples of this happening all over the left side of the political spectrum. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) called our troops in Iraq "terrorists." Can you imagine how emboldened the real terrorists were to hear an American politician equate U.S. troops with jihadis?

Then we have leftists all over the U.S. screaming about how terrorists should have certain rights, even if in exercising those rights they would use their freedoms to plot to kill more innocent Americans. Do you think those same people would want a known rapist living in and having freedom to roam the same neighborhood as their own teen-aged daughters? Wait, don't answer that. I know quite a few leftists who are looney enough to do just that.

Many other Dems called the war unwinnable and immediately began calling for us to cut and run from Iraq. When the real terrorists heard that, they knew all they had to do was wait until the defeatists politicians in America came back to power and then terrorism would be given a new golden opportunity to spread. They got their wish.

Then there is the leftist New York Times which publicized a foreign eavesdropping program that allowed us to foil hundreds of terrorist attacks. That particular tool is still under attack and its effectiveness has been lessened because of it publication. The Times also released classified information about the SWIFT Program, the tool that allowed Western intelligence agencies to foil the London bomb plot in which several Muslim jihadis had planned on blowing up airliners as they flew over American cities. The SWIFT Program was completely compromised as a result of the Times exposing it and is no longer an effective tool.

But the leftist media still hasn't run out of morale boosters to present to Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and other jihadi terror groups. Recently, the New York Times (surprise, surprise, surprise!) gave the terrorists another huge boost when they leaked a classified memo saying that the United States had lost confidence in Iraqi President Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. One can only imagine how jubilant the terrorists must have become when they read this news. It proved that once again all they had to do was wait until the defeatists got into power and then terror groups would be given a free hand to kill more innocent people.

As for the leak itself and its consequences, Ben Johnson at Front Page Magazine has this to say:

Written by Stephen Hadley, a member of the National Security Council, the memo alleged that Maliki painted an overly rosy picture of “Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish partnership,” and “the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action.” And it worried he received tainted information form the Shi’ite Dawa Party. (Which the Left has likened to the supposed neoconservative captivity of President Bush. Somehow, the media never fret that Democratic presidents are hearing only from a coterie of leftists, socialists, and fellow travelers; that would be “McCarthyism.”) The subsequent postponing of the Bush-Maliki meeting could be the least deleterious effect the publication has on free Iraq. Aside from eroding support for an already ailing Iraqi president and creating a tense wedge between the United States and her most vital allies in the central front of the terror war, the New York Times literally telegraphed our plans to the enemy, allowing them to foment a more informed opposition. If the terrorists are able to parlay the NYT’s new perestroika policy with U.S. classified information into action, it could cripple the Maliki government, now struggling to establish a non-sectarian democratic government in the heart of the Muslim world.

The left is correct about one thing when they equate the Iraq War to Vietnam: both wars were lost because leftists themselves emboldened the enemy to continue the fight.

I cannot repeat this warning enough: The VC did not follow us back to the United States. But Al-Qaeda will.

And the left in this country (e.g. the Dems and Old Media) are doing everything in their power to ensure that terrorists will continue to have opportunity after opportunity to carry on their violence and kill more innocent Americans. But do you think the left will ever apologize for their efforts to do so? You might as well ask a rapist to return a young girl's virginity.

You can access Ben Johnson's complete article on-line here:

Sabotage Times
Ben Johnson
FrontPageMag.com
December 1, 2006