President Bush Speaks at West Point

President George W. Bush made some excellent points during his speech to the graduating class at the U.S. Military Academy:

Today, at the start of a new century, we are again engaged in a war unlike any our nation has fought before -- and like Americans in Truman's day, we are laying the foundations for victory. (Applause.) The enemies we face today are different in many ways from the enemy we faced in the Cold War. In the Cold War, we deterred Soviet aggression through a policy of mutually assured destruction. Unlike the Soviet Union, the terrorist enemies we face today hide in caves and shadows -- and emerge to attack free nations from within. The terrorists have no borders to protect, or capital to defend. They cannot be deterred -- but they will be defeated. (Applause.) America will fight the terrorists on every battlefront, and we will not rest until this threat to our country has been removed. (Applause.)

While there are real differences between today's war and the Cold War, there are also many important similarities. Like the Cold War, we are fighting the followers of a murderous ideology that despises freedom, crushes all dissent, has territorial ambitions, and pursues totalitarian aims. Like the Cold War, our enemies are dismissive of free peoples, claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and lack the resolve to defend our way of life. Like the Cold War, our enemies believe that the innocent can be murdered to serve a political vision. And like the Cold War, they're seeking weapons of mass murder that would allow them to deliver catastrophic destruction to our country. If our enemies succeed in acquiring such weapons, they will not hesitate to use them, which means they would pose a threat to America as great as the Soviet Union.

Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, we will never give in, and we will never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

The true believers among the communists and their fellow travelers and sympathizers were (and still are) dangerous to free people -- both to their liberty and their lives -- precisely because of their willingness to do anything to advance "the revolution." They were (and still are) amoral in the sense that the only test to determine right and wrong was whether an action would advance the revolution.

The true believers among the murderous moslems are equally dangerous for the same reason. Just as the communists believed their revolution would bring about a "heaven on earth," the moslem terrorists believe that our submission would transform the world into a peaceful and virtuous place.

We are presented with a choice that is similar to the one we faced in the contest with the communists: resist or submit.

While there are many who fail to see the choice facing us, we are fortunate to have many who do see it -- and who are willing to fight to defend us.

Leftists wouldn't know a book ban if it bit them

Predictably, the books on an Illinois school district's required reading list will remain despite the offensive parts.

Also predictably, the leftists claimed that the challenge constituted an effort to ban those books:

"They pick out the things that offend them like individual words, situations and sexual incidents," Krug [the American Library Association's director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom] said. "They have a right to do it and that's fine. But when they attempt to remove materials so no one has the choice to read them or not, then we take offense. Because what they're doing is saying, `I know what's good for my children and your children,' and that's not their right."

They generally have the ability to understand the difference between making books available to students who choose to read them and requiring that students read certain books.

But in this case as in most others, the leftists set up a straw man to knock down, rather than attempt to answer the actual argument of their opponents.

Inconvenient Facts Omitted From "An Inconvenient Truth"

Albert Gore is a strange man, and his latest global warming propaganda reflects this fact.

This article is interesting, and the linked explanation of Gore's malicious attacks on a scientist who disagreed with him reveals the part of Gore that he tried mightily to hide behind that stiff, wooden veneer up through 2000.

Motto Offends, Bestiality Does Not?

If only the people who define what is and is not politically correct could be tricked into believing that Christians revere promiscous or perverted sexual activity, drug abuse, and graphic depictions or descriptions of gratuitous violence, imagine how easy it would be to exclude such stuff from the curriculum in our public schools.

Here is an example of "PC" exclusion of words the leftists consider potentially damaging to the minds of our youth:

Texas school drops God from U.S. coin

KELLER, Texas, May 23 (UPI) -- A Texas elementary school that removed the words "In God We Trust" from the image of a nickel on its yearbook is taking flak from around the country.

Earlier this year, the principal of Liberty Elementary School in Keller, northwest of Dallas, made the decision to alter the image on the cover, but to provide a sticker that could be applied to the coin's picture that put the words back.

Here is an example of the argument in favor of retaining offensive books on a list of required reading material:

It is the first time in more than 20 years that a reading list has been challenged in the Arlington Heights-based district, said Chuck Venegoni, who heads the English and fine arts departments at Hersey High School. The district uses an extensive review process based on established national reading lists, and the suggestion that teachers are using materials on par with porn is insulting, he said.

"This is not some serendipitous decision to allow someone to do what they felt like doing because they had something about talking about something kinky in front of kids," Venegoni said. "It's insulting to hardworking people who really do care about kids."

###

"For however edgy a few passages taken out of context, there is nothing in any of those books that even remotely approaches what an objective person would call pornography," he said.

The defense seems to be that careful thought went into choosing the challenged books, so the offensive parts ought to be ignored by those who find them offensive.

Why not apply that decision rule when deciding whether to edit a picture of a nickel to remove the words, "In God We Trust"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

How would you answer the first question in this USA Today/Gallup poll, if you didn't think the Bush administration has been "restricting people's civil liberties"?

USA TODAY/Gallup poll
GOVERNMENT PHONE RECORDS REACTION

First, thinking about how the government is dealing with the issue of terrorism,

1. Do you think the Bush administration has gone too far, has been about right, or has not gone far enough in restricting people’s civil liberties in order to fight terrorism?

The answers given during the poll May 12-13 were: "Too far," 41%; "About right," 34%; "Not far enough," 19%; and "No opinion," 6%.

"Are you out of your mind?!" apparently was not one of the permissible answers to the question.

Senator McCain Spoke and Students Listened

Since there is no mention in the New York Times article of hecklers or others who wished to make spectacles of themselves, it appears that students at the Liberty University graduation ceremony were respectful of the speaker and the others in attendance:

At Falwell's University, McCain Defends Iraq War
Published: May 14, 2006
LYNCHBURG, Va., May 13 — With the Rev. Jerry Falwell at his side, Senator John McCain offered a spirited defense of the Iraq war on Saturday, telling graduating students at Liberty University that victory there was crucial to world security.
###
"If an American feels the decision was unwise, then they should state their opposition and argue for another course — it is your right and obligation," Mr. McCain said, adding, "But I ask that you consider the possibility that I, too, am trying to meet my responsibilities, to follow my conscience, to do my duty as best as I can, as God has given me light to see that duty."
###
"I stand that ground not to chase vainglorious dreams of empire; not for a noxious sense of racial superiority over a subject people; not for cheap oil," he said. "I stand that ground because I believed, rightly or wrongly, that my country's interests and values required it."

As the reporter noted, things probably won't be the same come Friday:

Mr. McCain is also the scheduled speaker at the graduation on Friday at the New School in New York. He intends to deliver the same remarks, his aides said, with the expectation that they may draw a less-than-enthusiastic reaction there, given that school's liberal nature. His planned appearance has caused an uproar among students and faculty because of his conservative positions on issues like Iraq.

I suppose McCain knows it. He did include in his remarks a request that dissenters at least consider that he honestly believes in the position he has taken -- so it's clear that he knows the ossified mind of the barking moonbat.

ISC Re-releases Road Show

Having failed to garner support among members of the public or of the legislature, the International Speedway Corporation will try on May 31 to find legislators who are willing to act on its behalf to get public financing for ISC's proposed NASCAR-capable speedway in Kitsap County.

Yesterday, Lt. Gov. Brad Owen announced the work session of his "Legislative Committee on Economic Development and International Relations":

Owen said the primary purpose of the session is to educate legislative members about the projected local and state economic impact from the ISC proposal, as well as to start a serious legislative discussion regarding the potential impacts of the proposed facility to the state.

According to the Port Orchard Independent, Owen believes ISC hasn't yet had a chance to tell its story to the legislature:

A legislative fact-finding meeting will take place later this month in Seattle to give representatives of the International Speedway Corp. a chance to present their case for construction of a NASCAR facility in Kitsap County.

“ISC didn’t get the opportunity to present their case in front of the Legislature this year,” said Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, who is organizing the meeting. “So this is their chance to tell us what they have in mind. It’s an opportunity for them to speak and for the public to listen.”

It's true that ISC couldn't find a sponsor for its legislative proposal, so there were no hearings during this year's legislative session.

But, it's not as though ISC hasn't been trying to educate legislators and others for quite a while. Indeed, back on October 7, 2004, the Seattle Times carried an article about the first disclosure of ISC's plans for public financing -- back when Snohomish County was their chosen site:

State legislators yesterday heard for the first time what it could take to get racetrack developer International Speedway Corp. (ISC) to build a 75,000-seat track on a site between Marysville and Arlington.

Under a proposal jointly introduced by Snohomish County, the city of Marysville and ISC, the state and possibly the county would be asked to raise about $250 million through the sale of bonds to build the track, estimated to cost $300 million to build. The state would also foot the bill for road improvements around the track, including a possible new interchange on Interstate 5. No estimates have been made for the cost of those improvements.

The $250 million in bonds would be repaid with tax revenue generated by the track. The land would be leased to ISC, local officials said during a 90-minute legislative-committee meeting.

The track developer would pay $50 million toward the track's construction, the city's chief administrative officer, Mary Swenson, told the Legislative Committee on Economic Development and International Relations.

ISC has increased their offer from $50 million to $166 million, but otherwise it seems pretty much the same as it was in 2004. The government's share of construction costs would be $179 million rather than $250 million, but the government's costs for infrastructure improvements -- including roads and highways -- has yet to be estimated.

Maybe Owen has new members on his committee who need to be brought up to speed.

Seattle Schools' Definition of Racism

AndrewsDad has noticed something really odd, but not unexpected, in the Seattle School District: Marxist ideology masquerading as "Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice."

"Racism" seen through the rose-colored lenses of Marxist ideology is difficult to recognize. Their internalized dogma about class warfare, oppression of nationalities, and imperialist yearning of the bourgeoisie to dominate gets in the way of their attempt to define the term.

How else can one explain their inclusion of these phrases in their definition of "cultural racism"?

...having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology....

Has Sam Reed Bothered To Look?

Today's edition of The Seattle Times contains an article stating the huge number of illegitimate voter registrations that have been eliminated from the relatively new statewide data base.

It also contains this disingenuous statement of Secretary of State Sam Reed:

The total includes 35,445 duplicate records and 19,579 entries for dead people. But Reed said he suspects that very few people voted twice.

Sam Reed hasn't even tried to find out how many illegal votes have been cast using those bogus voter registrations, so what is the basis for what he claims to "suspect"?

He simply wants to continue to mislead the public by making baseless statements about the integrity of our elections process.

The end of his term of office cannot come too soon.

You lied, she said

NBC News with Brian Williams actually gave a decent account of the crazy people who interrupted Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's speech today.

The video (which appears to be the same as what was broadcast on the 6 o'clock news) is available alongside this article:

Rumsfeld heckled, accused of lying at speech
3 protesters escorted out while defense secretary speaks about Iraq war
Associated Press
Updated: 8:07 p.m. ET May 4, 2006

ATLANTA - Protesters repeatedly interrupted Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld during a speech Thursday, and one man, a former CIA analyst, accused him of lying about Iraq prewar intelligence in an unusually vociferous display of antiwar sentiment.

“Why did you lie to get us into a war that caused these kind of casualties and was not necessary?” asked Ray McGovern, the former analyst, during a question-and-answer session.

“I did not lie,” shot back Rumsfeld, who waved off security guards ready to remove McGovern from the hall at the Southern Center for International Studies.

The AP characterized Rumsfeld's reply as "shot back." But, if you watch and listen to the recording, you will see that the reporter has a vivid imagination. Rumsfeld's tone of voice was calm, quiet, polite, etc. He simply said, "well, first of all, I did not lie."

The screaming fat female mooncalf was shown as she was physically "escorted out." At one point she can be heard clearly yelling: "You lied that Iraq's oil would pay for the war!" (And fades out with "you lied, you lied, you lied....")

Where in the dickens did the lunatic left get the idea that Rumsfeld or anyone else in the administration ever said that Iraq's oil would pay the costs of the war?

Apparently, they got it from the same place they got all their other opinions -- from their psychotic delusions.

Representative Jan Schakowsky (D - ILL) has been kind enough to gather some quotes from administration officials and post them. Those quotes show that after the invasion of Iraq began, some people answered questions about the cost of reconstruction by saying that not all of the cost would have to be shouldered by America -- part could be paid with Iraq's oil revenues, among other things.

If Schakowsky hasn't found anything to support the fat mooncalf's delusions, no one can:

UPCOMING EVENT
Join Jan and Rep. John Murtha for a

TOWN HALL MEETING ON IRAQ

WHEN: Sunday May 7, 2:45pm (doors open at 2:15pm)

WHERE: Northwestern University, McCormick Auditorium in the Norris University Center
Evanston

Three Cheers for Fox News

It's no wonder the "lib'rull media" and their fans hate Fox News:

The Fox News Effect
By Richard Morin
Thursday, May 4, 2006; Page A02

We report. You decide. Does President Bush owe his controversial win in 2000 to Fox cable television news?

Yes, suggest data collected by two economists who found that the growth of the Fox cable news network in the late 1990s may have significantly boosted the Republican Party's share of the vote in the 2000 election and delivered Florida to Bush.

I chuckle every time a "lib'rull" goes nuts over Fox News. They can see that it's not the same as their own favorite propaganda organs (e.g., C_BS). But, rather than admit that their own favorites may be biased, they stick to their dogma and claim that Fox is the only network news that is biased. (Even coming up with cute monikers like "Faux News.")

It's nice to think that American voters pay some attention to the news reports and analyses before deciding for whom to vote.

It's even nicer to know that they have the opportunity to hear from the other side of the political spectrum since the arrival on the national scene of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Tony Snow (darn, he's gone to the other side of the revolving door for now) and Sean Hannity.