LEAVWORLD: GRAFFITI POLITTI

If Joe Wilson and CIA operative Valerie Plame were conservatives , operating overtly and covertly in support of the conservative agenda regarding the Iraq war , the reporters that exposed them would win a pultzer prize , instead of instigating a special prosecutor . If Joe Wilson had been sent to Niger to trash the Kerry (or Gore) Administration's denials of Iraqi WMD by his covert CIA wife in order to get us to go to war with Iraq, would they be portrayed so symathetically in the press after their exposure? If a CIA operative was exposed conducting an obviously political mission against a Democratic President, would the source of that leak be indicted? Or even mentioned? Would an investigation of corruption in the CIA occlude an investigation of the Administration? It isn't easy to imagine the way it would play out in this inverted reality , but LEAVWORLD attempts it here. What if six turned out to be nine? If we hadn't gone to war with Iraq (under a Democrat Preside...

This is one highly informative interview! I'd say that Jay does a better job than O'reilly did at interviewing Mr. Sears, but he'd think I'm just kissin' up! LOL! Seriously, though: If you have any doubts about the true nature of the ACLU, or just want more info, read this interview .

On Oct. 19th, the NY DAILY SNOOZE ran two articles about a recently released documentary, " Three of Hearts: A Postmodern Family ". One was a three star review, and the other was a gossip piece about the father of one of the men not wanting to see (or be in) the movie. Why would the father, a jailed mobster, be ashamed to see, much less be seen in this documentary? Well, the movie was made over 8 years, documenting two gay men bringing a woman into their relationship, and calling it a three-way "marriage". She had two children, one from each of them, during their 13 years together. -See where this is going? First, the gossip column associated the "mobster" father's beliefs with one Rev. Louis Sheldon, of the Traditional Values Coalition . The Rev. has nothing to do with the mob, or the movie. He was just available to quote about it, I guess. This sets up a premise that opponents of the lifestyles documented in the movie are either crusaders or criminal...

I posted a forwarded email over at NEXTLEAV , which I titled "Seen and Unseen", regarding Katrina. I'll share an excerpt here: "WHAT I HAVE NOT SEEN; The ACLU setting up a feeding line. People for the American Way helping in the shelters. The NAACP doing any work whatsoever. The American Atheist organization serving meals in the shelters. Jesse Jackson directing traffic at the gas stations. I could go on but you get my message. Its the people with love and compassion who do the work. The gripers in Congress should come on down and get in line to pass the water and the ice. Are you listening Hillary, Chuck, Teddy and all the sorry loafers we call Senators and Congressmen. They don't have a clue as to what this life is all about here on the Gulf Coast." I have no idea who wrote this, but it's pretty good. Hat tip to JD, for sending me something I couldn't resist posting! Read about what was "seen" over at NEXTLEAV, linked in the title!

So, I was partially wrong in my previous post about Harriet Miers. The Dems didn't need to attack her (though some did), because the conservative pundits took the lead. I was correct in my disclaimer sentence, "barring any one of the aforementioned issues... snowballing into some real bipartisan opposition". Actually, it was a combination of two of the issues I mentioned: " They will charge cronyism ... questioning her qualifications ", and " ...pols and pundits will be harping on the lack of public policy documentation ". Anyway, she's history now. Read all about it at the link in the title, courtesy of STOP the ACLU . They also have an open trackback opinion piece, linked here . I'm not making any predictions this time, but I hope that Janice Rogers Brown is the next nominee. I like what I've seen of her, and think she'd give 'em hell on the hill!

I caught a segment of HBO's Real Sports show, dealing with racism by fans of the European Football Association . Apparently, White fans throw bananas at Black atheletes on the soccer field, as well as hurling racial epithets. During Bryant Gumbel's interview with a high-level representative of the association, he asked "what are you doing about this"? The reply came as follows: "WE DON'T BELIEVE IN PUNISHMENT", explaining that they encourage "counseling", and "educating" the fans. No wonder they have such a problem. Contrast this with Veterans' stadium in Philadelphia, where they put a temporary courtroom in the stadium to deal with fans who break the law. Unruly fans went right before a judge. This strikes me as a logical solution, which has worked in Philly. Also, it brings to mind the issue of NYC taxis' refusal to pick up Black riders. Danny Glover championed this cause, but then protested when the NYPD started ticketing d...

LEAVWORLD is back online, thanks to getting a friend's PC on the cheap. I have apparently been "tagged" in my absence, with a "meme". I'm not sure what this is, but I think I have an idea. Something about what kind of sign would I put up in front of an ACLU building. I will think about this at work tonight, and see if I can come up with something to post after work. Meanwhile, it's just good to be back online! Well, this is some predicament. I don't have any of my programs on this PC, and it only has 2Gigs of space. I'm going to download the Bloggerbot program ASAP, because right now, I can't even put links in my posts, other than the titles. The same goes for all my fun stuff, like bold and color variations. BUMMER! I also want to mention how my last PC crashed. Twice, it shut down as I deleted a SPAM comment on my NEXTLEAV blog. The second time, the power supply blew up when I tried to restart it. It could have just been old, but I thought ...

How twisted does your worldview have to be to come up with a headline that refers to the ratification of the first democratic constitution in Iraq as "Sunnis Appear to Fall Short in Iraq Vote"? The headline writer is obviously convinced that all Sunnis wanted to defeat this constitution. Later in the day, this AP headline appears on my homepage: "Iraqis Probe 'Unusually High' Yes Tally". Am I supposed to think they would have even reported on an investigation into an overwhelmingly high "no" vote? They'd be too busy reporting about "America's defeat" by the Sunnis. Perhaps it would be reported as the Iraqi government trying to change the results after the election. This is not idle speculation, considering today's media culture. Often, what seems to be reported is 180 degrees from the actual events reported on. This kind of worldview leads to headlines like these, from the harebrained editors at the AP Linked at STOP the ACLU ...

Hey, people! I've entered my Oct.14th post in THE CARNIVAL OF TRUE CIVIL LIBERTIES III, so go check it out! There's alot of other great stuff in the same vein. Linked in the title of this post.

Rosemary from LOVE AMERICA FIRST has a heartwarming post of an email from a friend. Go read it.

This is from Friday's NY POST: "A Long Island official who hung two "God Bless America" signs outside Lindenhurst's town hall vowed yesterday to keep them up despite charges that they violate the Constitution's call for separation of church and state." The reporter gets it wrong in that statement.The Constitution's call is not for "separation of church and state;" rather, it actually says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This is an exact example of what I wrote about in my last post . Let's continue with the story: "Gerry Dantone, of the ( Center for Inquiry )'s LI chapter , wrote Bellone ( the official ), asking: 'Why is it OK to offend nonbelievers?'" (The same reason it's OK to offend believers, or any random person, in the public square-ANYTHING will offend SOME people) "And Freedom From Religion Co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor noted in a letter that ...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. This is the first phrase in the first amendment of the U.S. constitution. That means it is pretty important, and has been for a long time. So if congress hasn't been allowed to pass any law doing this since the nation's founding, how do the courts keep finding it has? Well, they don't, exactly. The courts keep finding that a religious symbol (or act) displayed in a public space (school, court, library, etc...) violates the "establishment clause" cited above. Some of these displays have been around for decades, but only recently have been found to be in violation of the constitution. The courts occasionally find these religious displays OK, or not "an establishment of religion." Now, I'm no legal genius, but it's obvious that something is wrong with this situation. This legal reasoning is also applied to Christmas holidays, praying in public, and most famously in the lawsuit aimi...

Sometimes, I see or read something that just stops me in my tracks, and makes me think of things on a different level than I had before. Tonight, I had two such experiences. First, I saw an O'reilly Factor segment with Bill O. interviewing Alan Sears, author of The ACLU vs. America . Later this evening, I read an outstanding post by Jay at STOP the ACLU , with a link to the video of the O'reilly segment. I couldn't articulate the case against the ACLU any better, and both the segment and the post inspire hope in my heart for everyone in this country. Let me not forget Mr. Sears' book, which would make a GREAT CHRISTMAS PRESENT for any liberal or ACLU supporter . All of this adds up to the truth being told about an organization that has helped endanger Americans personally, whether soldiers or children, as well as having a major role in the loss of the moral underpinnings of our culture, namely the Judaeo-Christian values upon which this nation was founded. NOW GO READ ...

Regarding the flap over raising the terror alert in NYC, and the reasons for it: Thanks to the feds for passing along the info, but thanks to NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly even more for acting on it. Shame on the DHS bureaucrats for "pooh-pooh"-ing NYC's reaction. Especially after Katrina, the DHS ought to be glad that one area takes a warning seriously. My fiance takes the subway through midtown Manhattan every day, giving me a somewhat more personal interest in this story. It's also interesting to note that the third guy at the press conference, besides Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, was the NY reigon FBI representative. The DHS comments sound more to me like a turf war, with the FBI being subserviant to DHS. The NYPD, however, is not, in this case. Let's all hope this bureaucratic BS won't stop the DHS from sharing info with the FBI, or local jurisdictions in the future. That kind of crap caused 9/11. A funny footnote: The local FOX broadcast station...

In my experience, Catholic school students have been targets for abuse in NYC, on basketball courts, buses or subways, since at least the mid '70's. when I started going to and from school on my own. The uniforms (I wore a tie that said SPAS , for St. Paul the Apostle School - If you don't get it, SPAS is short for " spastic. "), most of all, made us singled out for bullying, though race and class were also factors. Thirty years later, the current perpetrators of these abuses are sometimes charged with "hate crimes" (sometimes NOT, creating more controversy). As much as I sympathize with the victims, I am still opposed to the "hate crime" designation, especially for minors. I was picked on for being white by my Catholic classmates, as well as outside of school, without my SPAS uniform on. Part of me is glad to see "hate crime" laws applied equally, because this will logically end up with these laws being moot, or overturned. Logic, t...

I'm not widely read enough for anyone to claim I'm giving the Dems ammunition, so read these predictions, after the first day of watching the MSM and conservative blog reactions to Harriet Miers' nomination: They will attack heavily on abortion, claiming she is against a woman's right to choose. Unborn babies will not be mentioned. They will charge cronyism, comparing her to former FEMA director Michael Brown - "in robes," questioning her qualifications. "61 and never married?" will be said on some MSM outlet, followed by speculation about her views on gay marriage. All Dem pols and pundits will be harping on the lack of public policy documentation, playing conservative fears like a fiddle . The race card has already been played (by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - AP story ), and it will be again by other groups. Now, I don't know about any of this for sure. I am willing to put these ideas out as predictions because som...