Friday, June 30, 2006

THE NY TIMES: I WOULDN'T WIPE MY ASS WITH IT!

Let me suggest a novel way to protest the NY Times; something I've been doing for years. Every so often, I come across one of their subscription ads, with the little postage-paid envelopes. I take the form, and write in big, fat marker: "I WOULDN'T WIPE MY ASS WITH THIS RAG!" Then, I put it in the envelope, and mail it off to them.

I'm sure that no-one of consequence reads these, of course, but I bet it gives their mail room, or subscription department workers a big laugh!

Thursday, June 29, 2006

ACLU Against Brain Scans on Suspected Terrorists

Crossposted from STOP THE ACLU.

If it is a tool we use in the fight against terror one can bet that the ACLU will be against it. When the NY Times revealed classified information that we are trying to track international phone calls of suspected terrorists, the ACLU took that ball and are still running with it. When the NY Times leaked classified information that we are trying to track international bank transactions in order to catch terrorists the ACLU jumped on board with that too. If the NY Times doesn't leak it to everyone, the ACLU will do its best by filing freedom of Information Act requests.

In the face of suspicions that the government is using cutting-edge
brain-scanning technologies on suspected terrorists being held overseas or at
home, the American Civil Liberties Union today announced that it has filed a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with all the primary American
security agencies.

"There are certain things that have such powerful implications for our society
-- and for humanity at large -- that we have a right to know how they are being
used so that we can grapple with them as a democratic society," said Barry
Steinhardt, Director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project. "These
brain-scanning technologies are far from ready for forensic uses and if deployed
will inevitably be misused and misunderstood."


I know that the ACLU claim to be the experts on rights, but I'm not sure where they found this "right to know" every secret government program used in a time of war. This must be one of those rights the ACLU made up out of thin air.Furthermore the ACLU's leap that it would be inevitable that the program would be misused and misunderstood is pure biased opinion on their part.

Here is
a brief description of the program.

FMRI is a technique for determining which parts of the brain are
activated by different types of physical sensation or activity, such as sight,
sound or the movement of a subject’s fingers. This “brain mapping” is achieved
by setting up an advanced MRI scanner in a special way so that the increased
blood flow to the activated areas of the brain shows up on Functional MRI scans.
(See here for a description of the physiology of the BOLD response.) The whole
FMRI process will now be briefly described.

The subject in a typical experiment will lie in the magnet and a particular form
of stimulation will be set up. For example, the subject may wear special glasses
so that pictures can be shown during the experiment. Then, MRI images of the subject’s brain are taken. Firstly, a high resolution single scan is
taken. This is used later as a background for highlighting the brain areas which
were activated by the stimulus. Next, a series of low resolution scans are taken
over time, for example, 150 scans, one every 5 seconds. For some of these scans,
the stimulus (in this case the moving picture) will be presented, and for some
of the scans, the stimulus will be absent. The low resolution brain images in
the two cases can be compared, to see which parts of the brain were activated by
the stimulus.

After the experiment has finished, the set of images is analyzed. Firstly, the
raw input images from the MRI scanner require mathematical transformation
(Fourier transformation, a kind of spatial “inversion”) to reconstruct the
images into “real space”, so that the images look like brains. The rest of the
analysis is done using a series of tools which correct for distortions in the
images, remove the effect of the subject moving their head during the experiment, and compare the low resolution images taken when the stimulus
was off with those taken when it was on. The final statistical image shows up
bright in those parts of the brain which were activated by this experiment.
These activated areas are then shown as coloured blobs on top of the original
high resolution scan, for interpretation of the experiment. This combined
activation image can be rendered in 3D, and the rendering can be calculated from
any angle. (Here is a brief description of the program.)


Now why would the public need to know about this and debate it? This kind of information is for our elected officials to decide, and our enemies don't need to know about it.

Back to the ACLU...

The most likely technology to be used for anti-terrorism purposes is
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), which can produce live, real-time
images of people’s brains as they answer questions, view images, listen to sounds, and respond to other
stimuli. Two private companies have announced that they will begin to offer “lie
detection” services using fMRI as early as this summer. These companies are
marketing their services to federal government agencies, including the
Department of Defense, Department of Justice, the National Security Agency and
the CIA, and to state and local police departments.

“This technology must not be deployed until it is proven effective — and we are
a long way away from that point, according to scientists in the field,” said
Steinhardt. “What we don’t want is to open our newspapers and find that another
innocent person has been thrown into Guantánamo because interrogators have
jumped to conclusions based on a technology no one understands very
well.”


Who does the effectiveness of the program have to be proven to? If it has to be proven to the ACLU it would never happen. If the companies that have developed the technology are providing this service to the government as a useful means they are staking their reputation on its effectiveness. The ACLU admit that they don't understand it well. Who would better understand it than those that developed it?

The ACLU’s FOIA requests were filed yesterday with the Pentagon,
NSA, CIA, FBI and Department of Homeland Security.

“These brain-scanning technologies have potentially far-reaching implications,
yet uncertain results and effectiveness,” said Steinhardt. “And we are still in
our infancy when it comes to understanding the underlying processes of the brain
that the scanners have begun to reveal. We do not want to see our government yet
again deploying a potentially momentous technology unilaterally and in secret,
before Americans have had a chance to figure out how it fits in with our values
as a nation.”


The Uncooperative Blogger says:

I say let’s experiment on terrorist, what better testing ground can
you ask for? The ACLU has become just plain ridiculous, and they are not working
in the best interest of our country. The New York Times, the leakers and the
ACLU, who I refer to as the American Communist Liberation Union, are killing us
in the war on terror!

So, what are we going to learn from an FOIA request? That they are using what I
just told you about? Gee, that will be very helpful to the American people won’t
it?


I'd just like to know how the ACLU would have us handle the war on terror. It seems they want us to fight the killers with kid gloves. If someone can name me one anti-terrorist program our government has implemented that the ACLU has approved of we might have a debate. I can't think of one. If we are to fight the war on terror the way the ACLU wants we might as well just go ahead and surrender.

Bill O'Reilly is right on target.

The anti-Bush crew, led by The New York Times and the ACLU want
civilian trials for terrorists, no coerced interrogation, no rendition for
terrorists to other countries, no war in Iraq, and on and on. As I opine, The
Times and other committed left media believe the Bush administration -- and not
the terrorists -- is the primary danger to this country.


Thats ironic, because every once in a while I think it is the ACLU and far left that pose more of a danger to America.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us,please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 200 blogs already on-board.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

PAGE SIX: CONTINUING TO EXPOSE CELEBRITY IDIOCY AND HYPOCRISY!

A couple of items from the Saturday NY POST's Page Six caught my eye. First, the idiocy:

June 24, 2006 -- ROGER Waters doesn't like walls. After spray-painting "Tear down the wall" and "No thought control" on the concrete barrier that separates Palestinians from Jews in Bethlehem, the Pink Floyd rocker told 50,000 cheering fans on Thursday night, "We need this generation of Israelis to tear down the walls and make peace with their neighbors." Earlier, he told a reporter, "It's a horrific edifice, this thing . . . how extraordinarily oppressive . . . how sad it is to see these people coming through these little holes. It's craziness." Waters, who performed in 1990 at the Berlin Wall, will probably come to Arizona next to sing at the wall on the Mexican border.

Let's get this straight: First, he milks his 1980 "The Wall" recording after the fall of the Berlin wall. Now, he's milking it again, while imploring Israel to invite the terrorists in. My favorite part is the graffiti, of course. This guy is what, 60? Can anyone say "publicity stunt?" As for the speculation about the southern border wall, I can only add: If we build it, he will come.

Next, the hypocrisy:

June 24, 2006 -- ANGELINA Jolie probably thought she was helping the people of Namibia when she generously decided to give birth to Shiloh there. But Namibia's National Society for Human Rights (NSHR) is calling her and Brad Pitt "colonial overlords" who "used heavy-handed and brutal tactics" to pressure the government into providing extraordinary restrictions on the media. A NSHR spokesman said, "To shut down a national border so she can give birth in peace is a massive abuse of power." Foreign reporters had to be approved by Jolie and Pitt before they were issued visas. South African journalist John Liedenberg had his passport and camera equipment confiscated, and was later arrested on public property and charged with trespassing. The NSHR said the Namibian government should be spending more money on its own pregnant mothers, "who go without medical care, food and shelter! But government can afford to spend thousands of taxpayers' money on the so-called protection of the privacy for a filthy rich Hollywood family! Who is fooling whom?"

The noble BRANGELINA, colonial overlords? Isn't she a UN "goodwill" ambassador, or some such nonsense? I've never heard him talk much about it, but she is very into "helping the poor of the world." Great way to set an example, by encouraging a government to waste resources, and supress freedom and civil rights throughout the country. "Freedom for me, but not for thee" seems to be their motto here.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

ACLU Fights To Keep Communist Propaganda In School Library

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU


Hat tip:
Danegerus

The American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal judge to stop the
Miami-Dade County school district from removing a series of children's books
from its libraries, including a volume about Cuba which depicts smiling kids in
communist uniforms.

The ACLU and the Miami-Dade County Student Government Association argued in a
lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Miami on Wednesday that the school board
should add materials with alternate viewpoints rather than remove books that
could be offensive.

Last week, the board voted 6-3 to remove "Vamos a Cuba" and its English-language
version, "A Visit to Cuba" from 33 schools, stating the books were inappropriate for young readers because of inaccuracies and omissions about life in the
communist nation.

The book, by Alta Schreier, targets students ages 5 to 7 and contains images of
smiling children wearing uniforms of Cuba's communist youth group and a carnival
celebrating the 1959 Cuban revolution. The district owns 49 copies of the book
in Spanish and English.


To the ACLU it doesn't seem to matter that the books are misleading, inaccurate,
and inappropriate for this age group. It doesn't matter to the ACLU that the
book is pure propaganda. To the ACLU it is a book ban. It just so happens that
the message portrayed in the book seems to
go along with their founder's beliefs.

“I have been to Europe several times, mostly in connection with
international radical activities…and have traveled in the United States to areas
of conflict over workers rights to strike and organize. My chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and
violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has brought it
to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and unemployment…Therefore, I am
for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State
itself…I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied
class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."
~ Roger Baldwin-founder of the ACLU~

Here is another one from Mr. Baldwin.

“Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise…We
want also to look like patriots in everything we do. We want to get a good lot
of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers
wanted to make of this country, and to show that we are really the folks that
really stand for the spirit of our institutions.”-Baldwin’s advice in 1917 to
Louis Lochner of the socialist People’s Council in Minnesota.


I'm sure the ACLU's founder would be proud of the ACLU's move to protect the
propaganda of his ideology. The ACLU's main point of argument is that banning
one point of view is the wrong way to deal with the situation is lost when it is
five year olds potentially being exposed to this crap. To the ACLU this is
nothing more than a book ban, and they are asking the school to include more
alternative views instead of banning unpopular ones. No one has to ask if they
would fight this hard to keep a Bible in the school library, or whether their
strength would be focused on getting rid of it.
Take this however you want, but the ACLU has never strayed very far from its
founding principles.

This was a production of
Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added
to our mailing list and blogroll.
Over 200 blogs already on-board.

Sunday, June 18, 2006

ANNA SCARES THE CRAP OUT OF ME: TERRORISM IS A REALITY IN NYC!

What I am writing about is serious, and from the heart. In NYC, the threat of terrorism is VERY REAL. We are under direct threat here, repeatedly. While I live a few miles east of the NYC border on Long Island, my fiance, Anna, lives in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn. She works in Queens, and has to use the subway through Manhattan every day, often stopping to shop while switching trains. This is how she came to tell me about the strange, sweet smell permeating Manhattan one day. It wasn't widely reported until the second or third time it happened, some weeks later. When it finally got reported, I had to take it as more serious than it sounded, especially with the sparse reporting. The origin of this "smell" has not been determined.

There is also the matter of the Iranian embassy personnel expulsions, for doing things like filming the No. 7 line, in Queens. This is an excerpt from Sen. Chuck Schumer's press release about this:

Schumer warns Iranian Ambassador that if his mission doesn't waive diplomatic
immunity and let the NYPD/FBI question two diplomats who were videotaping
No. 7 line operations at 1:30 AM Sunday, they may have their visas revoked
and be removed from the United States.

Schumer: "We won't know if this
is a minor misunderstanding or a major
plot until the suspects speak."


They left the country, unquestioned. My fiance rides the 7 train to work every day. This is the kind of stress she feels, on a daily basis. For a long time.

Now, TIME.com has a new piece, titled "Exclusive Book Excerpt: How an Al-Qaeda Cell Planned a Poison-gas Attack on the N.Y. Subway." Subtitle: "The plot was called off by Bin Laden's No. 2 only 45 days from zero hour, according to a new book by Ron Suskind." Oh, boy. SYMPATHETIC COVERAGE, ANYONE?

An excerpt from the TIME piece: (Hat tip STOP THE ACLU)

This was not simply a proposal; the plot was well under way. In fact, zero-hour
was only 45 days away. But then, for reasons still debated by U.S. intelligence
officials, Zawahiri called off the attack. "Ali (our agent in Al
Queda-EditorLEAV) did not know the precise explanation why. He just knew that
Zawahiri had called them off."


From what I can gather from the article, the attack was due in March 2003. Whatever the reason that it didn't happen, I'm not feeling any more sympathetic to Zawahiri, or Al Queda. I want to murder those bastards before they murder my future wife. I don't want to wait for the next attack; I want to attack them, here in the US, as well as in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, among other locations, worldwide.

I am not scared of provoking a worse attack on NY than 9/11. They already are trying their best to do the worst to us. It's too late for that. We are draining Al Queda's resources much faster than we did the USSR's. The war on terror, while an eternal paradigm, will be won by the forces of freedom in this incarnation, and it won't take 70 years this time.

-I digress. I want all of my liberal, anti-Iraq or "war on terror" readers to think of my beautiful LIBERAL fiance, riding that damn subway every day, switching trains at Times Square, knowing of much more than the three reports mentioned in this post. She also told me about the Brooklyn Bridge bombing plot months before it was reported; again, only as a suspicion. That makes four.

She's a lib, but she's tough on terrorism. Our first date was the night they tested the 9/11 "lights in the sky" display, a day before it's "official" debut. We saw it out of the window of a taxi, going over the Brooklyn Bridge. Why can't everyone realize that this is an actual war, and Iraq is not the only front?

Thursday, June 15, 2006

ACLU Sues Florida Over New Law Banning State Funding For Travel To Terrorist Supporting Countries

This week's STOP THE ACLU blogburst is from BOB G, author of SWEET SPIRITS OF AMMONIA, a man with some smelling salts for this nation to inhale!

Crossposted from Via Miami Herald

The recently passed Florida law that essentially bans state academic travel to Cuba promised to escalate into a constitutional battle when Gov. Jeb Bush signed it into law last month.

.......snip...

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing several professors from state universities, filed a lawsuit against Florida officials in federal court, claiming the travel ban is unconstitutional. The group also demands a temporary injunction to prevent the law from taking effect while the case is in court.

''This act is terribly misdirected,'' Randall Marshall, legal director of the ACLU of Florida, said of the new law. "This is unconstitutional, and we hope to have this law struck down very shortly.''


The Florida Masochist has the right question:

Tell me Mr. Marshall where it says in the constitution that taxpayer money must be used to support travel? Anywhere in the world? I'll await your reply but I doubt I'll get one.


The new law prohibits spending state money on any aspect of organizing a trip to any of the five nations on the U.S. State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism: Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria.

Other plaintiffs named in the suit include the faculty senate of FIU; Jose Alvarez, professor emeritus at the University of Florida; Carmen Diana Deere, director and professor at the University of Florida's Center for Latin American Studies; Houman Sadri, associate professor at the University of Central Florida; and Noel Smith, curator of Latin American and Caribbean Art at the University of South Florida.

The academics worry that the travel ban will discourage top students who have an interest in studying Cuba or other countries on the list from remaining at Florida schools.


This law is a very responsible move on the part of the state. The argument that it will discourage study in these countries and therefore diminish our security is crazy. We are at war despite the attitudes of some to recognize it. Why in the world should the state use its funds to put Americans in harms way where they could be taken hostage and a myriad of other terrible things done to them?

I will repeat my opinion from when the ACLU first announced their opposition to the law.

This law is straight up common sense, and if the ACLU were truly concerned for the security of Americans they would be applauding it. The law does not prevent anyone from actually travelling to these countries, it only prohibits taxpayer funds from paying for it. If professors and students want to travel to these dangerous countries they can do it at their own risk, and their own dime. Perhaps the ACLU are disappointed that the taxpayer will not be paying their fare to visit their clients? If so, I'm sure they have plenty enough duped supporters that would gladly donate.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 200 blogs already on-board.

I WAS A PRE-TEEN TERRORIST!

Crossposted from NEXTLEAV, and linked at ASSORTED BABBLE BY SUZIE. The latest of my TALES FROM THE VENDOME.

I don't know exactly what posessed us, but I suppose it was all of the domestic terrorism in the '60's that we grew up watching on TV, if I was to blame it on something other than ourselves. We had a copy of "Steal This Book," by Abbie Hoffman, when I was in my pre-teen formative years. This book is another convenient scapegoat for my young, impressionable mind. Our parents didn't know half of our subversive tendencies.

CASE IN POINT:

One day, we decided to see what would happen if we called a bomb threat to the bank on the corner of 72nd & Columbus Ave. We looked up their number, and called them, disguising our voices with some cloth over the phone. Sure enough, within 20 minutes or so, there were police in the street outside our window, which faced the bank. If you've read some of my other Tales, you can guess what we did next: We egged their cop-cars from the roof! This time I was actually worried about hitting, and hurting a cop. We only took one egg each, though, and ran back downstairs to watch the cops looking up at our rooftop. We didn't even hide, because everybody was watching out of their windows.

The point here is that, at age 11 or so, I grasped the potential for asymetrical warfare in our free society that many well-educated idiots in the government, as well as the MSM still haven't! Thank God that I didn't stay on the radical course that I embraced in my youth. This was one of the worst of my childhood pranks, but it shows that you don't have to be too smart to outsmart an inept bureaucracy. We were never caught, in those pre-caller ID days. We never did it again, though we often joked about doing it again, when we were bored. This would always elicit laughter, and the re-telling of the story to anyone who wasn't there.

Carrying on the tradition, I hope you can laugh at this.

Thursday, June 08, 2006

EMAIL YOUR CONGRESSMAN! STOP THE ACLU ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!

I'm taking the opportunity of this week's STOP THE ACLU Blogburst to republish my edits to an NYCLU email form letter, first published back in April. I originally published both their version, and my edited version. For the record, here is what I emailed to my elected representatives:

Immigration reform should not punish individuals who come to this country legally seeking a better life for themselves and their families. Rather, immigration reform must be consistent with American values, primarily obeying the law and customs of our nation. I ask you to support any immigration bill that contains the following provisions:

Section 202 - The indefinite detention (possibly for their entire lives) of undocumented immigrants who cannot be returned to their countries of origin, if they are legally determined to be a danger to society.

Section 231 - The expansion of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database to include data on millions of immigrants who are here illegaly. Police who use the NCIC database must be charged with enforcing federal immigration laws. Illegal immigrants will be discouraged from seeking government services, unless they comply with the guest worker program.

Section 301 - Requiring employers to verify the employment eligibility of all citizens, lawful permanent residents and visa holders. Congress must make it a crime to knowingly not enforce these laws, or to COERCE their non-enforcement.

Sections 701 and 707 - Stripping the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal of their jurisdiction to hear immigration appeals and requiring that all appeals be sent to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, DC. Repeat illegal immigrants should be deported with as little involvement by the judiciary branch as possible.

We need a reasonable bill from the Senate, not an unrealistic bill based on pro-illegal immigrant sentiment.

UPDATE: We didn't get a reasonable bill from the Senate, so now it's up to the House to hold fast to the points outlined in this post, for starters. If they cave on this, we've all been fooled again.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board.

ABC REPORTS ZARQAWI DEAD!

ABC News is reporting that Abu Musab Al Zarqaw has been blown up in a US bombing raid. DING-DONG, THE WITCH IS DEAD! I know it's not Christian to celebrate another human's death, but God forgive me, I'm happy about this! For those who don't know, he trained with the Taliban, and found refuge in Saddam's Iraq, after we invaded Afghanistan. He was treated at a hospital under Saddam's late son's control, which is something that still seems to escape the notice of those who claim Saddam had no links to terrorists. This has deprived the terrorists of a vital leader and figurehead. Here's hoping Osama meets a similar fate!

UPDATE: It is also reported that he lived through the bombing, and was handed over to Iraqi authorities, and then he died. Well, that's interesting. ABC keeps repeating that his "spiritual advisor" was also killed in this attack. Sympathetic, or just pathetic?

UPDATE II: 06/09/06 CNN and FOX are reporting that Zarqawi lived through the initial bomb strike as if it was a new development. Wolf Blitzer called it "a startling new development." PUH-LEEZE! What actually happened was that the US military formally acknowledged it on Friday, but I reported it from ABC NEWS in my first update, around 4 AM Thursday, an hour or so after my original post! Who says bloggers are more inaccurate than the "drive-by" media?

DEATH TO THE ENEMIES OF FREEDOM!

-and that includes the old "drive-by" MSM!

Also see: LOVE AMERICA FIRST - THE BITCH IS DEAD!

Monday, June 05, 2006

HADITHA: WHAT WE FIGHT AGAINST

There is one thing missing from any commentary I've heard or read yet about the Haditha massacre. Marines are not trained to kill innocent civillians, but the terrorists are. What is alleged to have been done by these Marines is ordered on a daily basis by those we oppose in Iraq. Ordered by who? Zarqawi and others like him.

Pres. Bush is not to blame for Haditha, regardless of how many want to pin it on him. Zarqawi orders his people to target civillians, while we prosecute war crimes by our own. The fact that there is a seperate investigation into a possible coverup by the military proves this point, hopefully leading to tighter scrutiny of the mid-level military bureaucracy.

Since Haditha, Zarqawi has blown up hundreds of innocent Iraqis. Why hasn't the media focused their criticisms on these insurgents? The majority of innocent civillian deaths in Iraq are caused by the "insurgents," better known as the terrorists.

The western media support the terrorists by not putting the reported Marine atrocities in this context.


I speak as a U.S. Marine, who has witnessed the good and bad points of USMC training.

WE'RE THE GOOD GUYS; BETTER THAN ONE CAN FIND ANYWHERE ELSE ON EARTH!

Friday, June 02, 2006

NEW YORK STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY: AN OXYMORON?

Charles E.F. Millard has an excellent piece in the NY POST about the NYS Republican party. (free registration req'd) An excerpt:

The Republican Party in this state has a big decision to make: Is it
Republican or is it Democrat?

The party faces this crossroads up and down the ballot, and all across the state - but an anecdote from the battle for the gubernatorial nomination between former Assembly Minority Leader John Faso and one time Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld really brings it home.


He goes on to describe one of many ridiculous attacks against Faso, this one over a "comparable-worth bill" that Faso voted against. His point is well taken.

Weld, a "country club" Republican, is very "socially" liberal. I don't know much about Faso, but the negative attacks from the Weld camp have only made him look better to me. Either candidate will probably lose to Atty. Gen. Eliot Spitzer, but if the Republicans nominate Weld, they aren't anything but "moderate" Democrats.

The truth is that the NY Republicans have been Democrat-"lite" for years. Gov. Pataki came in on a tax-cutting horse, but caved to the liberal special interests before his first term ended. In the last year, he has actually done some conservative things, such as his comission to close down some of, or consolidate NY's excess of hospitals (a problem that has grown critical under his watch). I attribute this to his delusional presidential aspirations, after meeting real Republicans in Iowa, and other parts of the country.

PaTAXi has also witheld his expected endorsement of Weld, though this may have more to do with the Decker College scandal, which is still under investigation by authorities. His endorsement only would cement Weld as "more of the same," to conservatives, at least.

This election cycle, the Republican slate is virtually a joke, from what I've seen so far (I don't even know who's challenging Dem. Rep. McCarthy in my own district). John Faso is the only one I've seen with a record of voting conservative principles in office, though Weld did cut taxes, and state health care costs in Massachusetts, both of which are appealing. My problem with Weld, and the NY Republican candidates in general, is their "knee-jerk" social liberalism. Will any of them stand up and make an argument for any of these basic conservative principles: right to life, or any regulation of abortion; enforcing existing immigration laws; defining "marriage" as between a man and a woman; opposing racial preferences? Not likely.

Let's hope they learn that there is a conservative base in NY, but I'm probably just spittin' into the wind. These positions can get you some big enemies, with alot of power here in NY. I am a former liberal, and am now more "moderate" on all of the above issues. However, what I consider "moderate" is interpreted as woman-oppressing, xenophobic, homophobic racism by most liberals, at least the NY variety.

The point is that the NYS Republican leadership should follow my advice here, if they want to stand for anything. I got fed up with the destruction of society by well-intentioned "liberal policies," and embraced a conservative way of fixing these problems. Most of those solutions have worked, when not screwed up by liberal influence. There lies the real problem. In NYS, the entrenched, "old-boy, special interest" lobbies are almost all liberal. They counter criticism of their taxpayer ripoffs with claims that ending the thievery will hurt the "children/elderly/poor/minorities," when the opposite is true.

It's time some NY Republican spoke "truth to power," to use a favorite liberal phrase.

HEVESI APOLOGIZES FOR SAYING SCHUMER "WILL PUT A BULLET BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT'S EYES"

This one is pretty incredible. NYS Comptroller Alan Hevesi (D), giving a commemcement speech, said the following about NY Sen. Chuck Schumer(D):

"The man who, how do I phrase this diplomatically, who will put a bullet between the president's eyes if he could get away with it. The toughest senator, the best representative. A great, great member of the Congress of the United States."

Way to "phrase this diplomatically," Alan... NOT! I heard a report about this on Fox, but have a link to the WNBC story, thanks to one of Michelle Malkin's readers.

Comptroller Hevesi made a complete mea culpa:

"I apologize to the president of the United States" and to the fellow state politician, Sen. Charles Schumer, Hevesi said. "I am not a person of violence.

"I am apologizing as abjectly as I can. There is no excuse for it. It was beyond dumb."

Alan Hevesi is a typical NY pol, who is moderately liberal on most issues. I liked him for putting his name on a $40 refund check I got from NYS, after paying $70 state taxes that NYS itself said I owed. That seemed like a mea culpa, though not for as big a screw-up as this. I have to say that he really stepped in it this time, but I wonder if it will hurt his political career. There is, after all, a double standard.

Sen. Trent Lott had to resign his leadership position after some ill-worded praise for Sen. Strom Thurmond on his 100th birthday. Hevesi is running for re-election, and yet this has not made a huge impression in the local media, or the MSM in general. We'll see in the next few days if this has any impact on the race.

Hevesi was a Democrat I was willing to vote for, as NYS Comptroller at least. Not anymore. Where is the outrage?

Thursday, June 01, 2006

ACLU MAKING AMERICA LESS SAFE

Crossposted from STOP THE ACLU

The banner linked here and slogan is quite deceptive and an utter joke to those that are truly
aware to the ACLU's workings. Just in the past week the ACLU has launched a massive campaign against the NSA's
efforts
to trace terrorist phone calls into the U.S. This campaign with
full page ads has even been denounced by media that usually defend the ACLU as
completely lacking in context. In just the last few days the ACLU has
pounced at the chance to bash America, applauding the decision of an EU Court that struck down an
anti-terrorism agreement that allows the European Union and the U.S. to share
information on airline passengers. And in the same day the ACLU of Florida came out against a
new law
that restricts colleges and universities from using state funds for
travel to countries classified as terrorist states by the U.S. government.

The ACLU consistently allign themselves with groups like CAIR, and other organizations
that have known terrorist ties. They have turned down donations from some of
their most generous donors because of anti-terrorism stipulations. They can always be seen defending our enemies. It is no wonder that they fight to exempt lawyers from anti-terror supporting
oaths.


A while back, my friend Kathy wrote about how deceptive this banner is, and it still
applies today.

So now the ACLU is promoting itself as a champion of both safety for
our citizens and of freedom. What a joke! When 9-11 occurred what measures did
the ACLU take to ensure our safety? None, zip, nada. This organization has done
nothing to ensure our safety, in fact it has chosen to sue our government on
behalf of terrorists outside of their legal jurisdiction while they were
located in prisons on foreign soil.

They have since then demanded that the government release and make public top secret security information
regarding not only the activities of our military, but also that of our
intelligence forces. They have also initiated one lawsuit after another against the government to stop the searching of
individuals for security purposes in mass transit situations, to stop what they
call profiling (we will never see a Protestant white middle-aged woman as a
terrorist working with an extremist Islamic organization) by race, sex and
religion, and to stop the government from detaining and questioning or
interrogating individuals who have ties or contact with known terrorist individuals and organizations.

They want to kill the Patriot Act because they see
the rights of an individual who may or may not be an American citizen as more
important than the safety of the nation at large. They want the borders open because they see that as an infringement
of the rights of non-Americans to become Americans however they can manage it.
They want to have military and intelligence sources, activities, and planning
revealed to the public so they can "watch dog" and ensure freedoms of
individuals and/or groups are not being compromised, but in doing so will enable
those very individuals and/or groups under surveillance the ability to avoid
surveillance and possible capture before they do something destructive to
American citizens.

They say they are for a safe and free America. Yet their actions speak very loudly the opposite of the lip service
they give in this banner for a safe America. As to a free America, how free are
American's who live under constant threat of a lawsuit by the ACLU for imagined
Constitutional transgressions by a small group of jaded individuals who think
their rights are more important than the communities they live in or the country
they obviously find such fault with?


As for the part of the banner that says they want a free America, perhaps a
better slogan would be...."If standards are good, then double standards must be
even better." When it comes to freedom of speech, the ACLU trip over their own
two feet. While the left hand defends the rights of anti-American protesters,
the right hand acts to supress the free speech rights of pro-life protesters. When
it comes to religious free speech, the ACLU act more like a censor than a protector. The hypocrisy of the ACLU on freedom of speech has even been noticed by
its own board members, but the ACLU has a solution to that....restrict their
speech.


There are very few organizations that are as hypocritical, and dangerous as the
ACLU. I really don't understand why so many politicians sit aside and do
nothing to curb the reckless power they have accumulated. However, as many
people are seeing in today's times, when the government doesn't do what it
should, the people rise up and stand up for their own
rights.


The ACLU and the judicial activists are destroying our heritage, security, and
our soverignity. They are doing it with our tax dollars. Join us, and the American Legion to urge Congress to put a
stop to this. Support Congressman Hostettler's
legislation to stop taxpayer funding of the ACLU.


Sign
the Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding of the ACLU.



This was a production of Stop The ACLU
Blogburst
. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit.
You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over
200 blogs already on-board