From today’s (11/30/06) WaPo:

Democrats Reject Key 9/11 Panel Suggestion
Neither Party Has an Appetite for Overhauling Congressional Oversight of Intelligence
“It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation’s intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.”

Another panel? What was that whitewash 9/11 Commission? Why did we waste all that time and money on that if we just have to start over? MMM …what does that bring to mind? This is a family website, so I can’t really say what I’m thinking. Suffice it to say that it is a phrase with the word “circle” in it. Not to worry, though, Kids. The dems are going to follow through with one recommendation:

“establish a civil-liberties board to protect the public against intelligence agencies expanding their reach.”

Right, because we wouldn’t Abdul to have anything less that what the ACLU demands.

Trackback URL

Remember in those episodes of “Leave it to Beaver” where smarmy Eddie Haskell would ask his popular friend Wally Cleaver to get him a date?

In yet another instance of life imitating art, or at least sit com, our own Eddie Haskell, the man that the late Steve Neal famously called “the pudgy huckster,” the senior senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin, is seeking to ingratiate himself with the Big Man on Campus, in this case man-god Barack Hussein Obama (yes, that’s really his middle name). According to the Chicago Sun-Times Lynn Sweet, he has launched an on-line petition to convince He Who Walks on Water to run for president in 2008, and has been e-mailing supporters, urging them to support BHO. (Gee, I wonder if he wrote to Tony Rezko? Perhaps not. He’s done enough for the Obamas by helping them to afford their $1.65 million house, a transaction that the Obama-worshipping MSM (mainstream media) completely ignored, preferring to focus on the less significant purchase by Barack of an additional strip of land from Tony.)

As Ms. Sweet notes, Sen. Durbin’s enthusiastic support for his junior colleague is not necessarily motivated by his desire to see the best person in the Oval Office, or even by the partisan desire to see the dems back in there. Sen. Durbin is thinking about his 2008 re-election run. He knows that while both he and Sen. Barack Obama are crypto-socialists with ridiculously extreme left-wing points of view and voting records, there is a huge difference in their public perception. As we all know, Sen. Obama is a “rock star,” while Sen. Durbin …not so much. Dick has seen his television appearances, and he knows that while Barack comes off so smoooooth distracted listeners don’t even notice that he’s peddling liberal baloney, he can’t avoid appearing to be what he is: a fleshy-faced, bug-eyed, breathy-voiced phony. Better that his opponent should have to run against not only the pudgy huckster, but also the man-god, no?

Not that Barack has a negative opinion of Eddie. Let’s not forget how in his “brilliant” speech at the Democrat convention, Barack said “Thank you, Dick Durbin. You make us proud.” Of course, this was before Sen.Durbin compared our troops to Nazis, and before he told Chris Matthews that he would have been hesitant to put the thumbscrews to Moussaoui, even if it would have prevented 9/11, but as Mr. Neal notes in the article cited above, by July 2004, Sen. Durbin’s record was hardly one that would have engendered pride in any thinking citizen. Proud of Dick Durbin? Yeah, sort of like Paris Hilton’s parents must be proud of her video.

One thing I can’t help but notice; that is, how both Ms. Sweet and Mr. Neal refer to Durbin as a “cheerleader.” I guess the comparison is inevitable. Back in 2005, based on his shameful military bashing comments, I called him a cheerleader for al Qaeda. Whichever it is, if the miniskirt fits …

Trackback URL

Recently (11/19/06 on Fox News Sunday), America’s favorite unintentional comedian and one of the most unlikable people in America, John Fonda Kerry, asked an intriguing and important question: “How do we build a bipartisanship that lifts our government and seizes this moment of optimism and hope that’s been expressed by the American people?” (Another intriguing question: Is Lurch the last guy who thinks he can mount a serious presidential campaign in 2008? How do I ask a man to be the last one to die politically for a mistake? Oh the humanity …)I doubt that the democrat victory in the recent midterm elections is evidence of optimism and hope—more like ignorance and distraction on the part of the “independents”–that is a GREAT question. How do we build the right kind of bipartisanship? Given the fact that about 50 democrats got elected running on a conservative platform, if we play this right we have the opportunity to forge a conservative bipartisan coalition in the House that can pass some good legislation, such as making the tax cuts permanent, and to block the worst liberal ideas that San Fran Nan and the 1970’s throwbacks who will in charge of committees try to foist on us. That is the right kind of bipartisanship, conservative bipartisanship. It is proactive, and it means staying on offense and grabbing the reins. The alternative is playing defense, being reactive and allowing the liberal democrat leaders in Congress to set the agenda.

The decision to embrace a conservative bipartisanship has implications well beyond politics or even domestic policies like keeping the tax cuts, as important as that is. Conservative bipartisanship is proactive. It is visionary in that it takes the long view, essential in this post-9/11 world. If President Bush doesn’t grab the reins, he could find himself forced into a situation in which he is forced to cut some sort of short-sighted cut and run—and I’m not talking OJ here–deal on Iraq that will make the democrats’ claim that Iraq was a “mistake” and a “disaster” a reality and endanger America’s long term national security.
Don’t take my word for it. Asking why some are considering the boneheaded idea of a “regional solution” in Iraq (that is make nice with the Persian Dennis Kucinich, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Bassar “Go Hezbos” Assad), the very insightful former Reagan Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. echoed my words in this column today:

“It comes down to a lack of seriousness on the part of too many elected leaders of both parties — exhibited in a failure themselves to understand the gravity of a global war in which Iraq is but one front, and a failure to educate their constituents about the stakes associated with such a war. This superciliousness has translated into political circumstances in the United States (including delegating great responsibility to unelected and unaccountable commissions) and strategic conditions elsewhere that make diplomatic options appear more real and appealing than they are.

Of late, it has become fashionable to assess blame for failures of intelligence and policy to “groupthink.” The term describes the phenomenon whereby lots of smart people feel pressure to conform to a consensus view and, in the process, lose (or at least suppress) their willingness to observe that the emperor has no clothes.

Rarely has the pressure to go along with such groupthink been greater than is increasingly the case with respect to the idea of relying on one or the other of our foes — Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia — to solve our problems in Iraq. And rarely has it been more important that this strategy of appeasement, and the very hard place to which it will lead us, be rejected.”

Today the president reiterated his commitment to complete the mission in Iraq. I pray that he will remain steadfast. He and our brave military are the only thing standing between us and another terrorist attack on our shores that, if the Rug Puller Party (aka the September 10 party) has its way, will make 9/11 look small by comparison.

Trackback URL

Check out this story about a courageous prosecutor resisting calls by freedom-hating, gun grabbing elitists who want a citizen prosecuted for defending himself against the juvenile thief who was trying to run over him with his own car! Not that you would know that from the way the story is written. Here’s how the incident is initially described:

“Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters announced Friday that he would not file charges against 61-year-old Bennie Hall, who fired at least three shots into his 1994 Ford Taurus as 14-year-old eighth-grader Quavale Finnell attempted to steal it Oct. 23. Hall had gone inside while his car was warming up that chilly morning, leaving it unlocked.”

It is only when you read on that you learn what really happened:

Deters said Finnell - after having been out all night, apparently kicked out of his house by a parent because there was not enough room for him - took advantage when he came upon Hall’s running car and tried to drive it away.
“Hall, who had a permit to carry a firearm, chased his car, but found it coming back at him after Finnell drove up Odin Avenue in Kennedy Heights and turned around. After unsuccessfully trying to wave Finnell down and with the car bearing down on him, Hall fired three times, Deters said.
One shot lodged in the car’s door, another in a tire. The third struck Finnell in the chest and tore his aorta, Deters said.
Hall “tried to just wave the guy over. That was his initial purpose, but the car came directly at him where he was literally brushed and the car he was standing in front of was side-swiped,” Deters said. “This thing happened so quickly where his life was in danger. He had a right to fire.”

“The first law of nature is to protect yourself and we all know that,” said Tanya Batte, training program manager at the Center for Peace Education in Cincinnati’s Mount Auburn neighborhood. “And even thought that may be true, we have to use common sense and teach our children there are other ways to solve conflict.”

Too bad no one taught this 14 year-old about solving conflict. His parents could start with explaining how it’s wrong to steal and kill. No chance he’ll learn that in school. We can’t have those Ten Commandments in public school! Just ask the ACLU.

Living here in the Nanny State of Illinois, where a law-abiding citizen cannot exercise his God-given Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, but a 13 year old can get an abortion without telling her parents, or even buy cold medicine without practically registering with the state, it’s nice to know that there are still places in America that understand and respect our freedom under the 2nd amendment.

Trackback URL

There is a story in this morning’s Washington Times by Jennifer Harper about Thanksgiving traditions. It contains this interesting little tidbit:

We are still grateful for our lot in life, for one thing: 85 percent of us report we’ve got much to be thankful for, according to a Rasmussen poll released yesterday. Despite the travails of Election Day, Republicans are more likely to be happy than Democrats, 92 percent to 83 percent, respectively, even though the poll of 1,000 adults was conducted last Thursday and Friday — after the election.

The only surprise in the results of this survey is that as many as 83 percent of democrats are happy. Given the constant drumbeat of negativity that comes from democrat leaders, I’d expect 99% to say that they expect the combined forces of global warming, American imperialism and Halliburton to cause the world to end by next Tuesday. These moonbats live in the greatest country in the history of mankind and all they think about is what a rotten place it is.

Let’s hope that this bringdown brigade doesn’t show up at your Thanksgiving!

Trackback URL

This morning’s Washington Post reports:

“Former attorney general Janet Reno has taken the unusual step of openly criticizing the Bush administration’s anti-terrorism strategy — joining seven other former Justice Department officials in warning that the indefinite detention of U.S. terrorism suspects could become commonplace unless the courts intervene.

In a friend-of-the-court brief filed in the case of alleged enemy combatant Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, the former prosecutors assert that criminal courts are well equipped to prosecute terrorism suspects while guaranteeing the constitutional rights of defendants arrested on U.S. soil.”

Isn’t that special? Janet Reno is suddenly interested in constitutional rights, but only for the fanatical head choppers. Had Ms. Reno had equal concern for the rights of American citizens, Crystal Martinez age 3 when she was killed by Commandant Reno’s raid might be getting her driver’s license right now. Nineteen other children were incinerated on April 19, 1993 at Waco at the direction of Ms. Reno, giving some to be skeptical about her frequently expressed concern for “the children,” like Elian Gonzalez. Would it be too harsh to point out that Ms. Reno’s actions in Elian’s case conflict were her current concern for the rule of law?

Trackback URL

So, yesterday I’m driving home from the gym, when I hear a commercial for release of the 7th season of “Seinfeld” on DVD. Then I get home and see Michael Richard’s racist rant on Drudge. As I’m fond of saying, what are the chances?

I had a few other thoughts (of course); specifically,

• This can’t be good for business.
No doubt that accounts for Jerry Seinfeld’s requesting a chance to put Michael Richards on the Letterman show so he could try to explain himself. You can see the video here.

• Of course, it’s much worse than that. Maybe Michael Richards should do some hard time.
Speaking of the “N” word, didn’t we learn in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial that using the “N” word is worse than slicing up two innocent human beings in a homicidal rage? At the time of the trial, one L.A. city council man suggested that Mark Furhman should be tried like a Nazi at Nuremburg for using that word. Speaking of Slasher Simpson, I’m sure that you are all as disappointed as I that we’re not going to be able to hear him describe “if I did it, here’s how it happened.” (Nice semi-literate title. Yeah, I’m really sure he wrote a book.) “N” word symmetry—catch it!

• The Left’s Double Standard is Showing Yet Again
At the risk of being accused of having a profound grasp of the obvious, let me join all of you in observing that once again, the elitists’ double standard is showing. Rather than the bitter, spitting condemnation that was directed at Trent Lott, we have the sorrowful disappointment that someone everyone knows couldn’t possibly be a racist, a liberal, made a mistake, ala Robert Byrd. As anyone who saw his interview with Bill O’Reilly in which he vigorously defended Cindy Sheehan knows, David Letterman is a big liberal, which is why he wanted to bend over backwards to help rehabilitate Kramer. Can you imagine him doing the same thing for a conservative who made a controversial comment, say Bill Bennett or Rush Limbaugh[]?

• I’m Not a Racist. I Just Play One on Stage.
For someone who isn’t a racist, Mr. Richards seemed very familiar with the “N” word, didn’t he? He was enraged and that word was the first that sprung to mind. He’s like Vladimir Nabokov or something, by which I mean, perhaps he isn’t a racist, but he seems fluent in their language.

• These televised apologies are always embarrassing.
This one was especially so, what with the awkward pauses, and Mr. Richard’s bizarre attempts to equate his on-stage meltdown with war, I assume the war in Iraq, and his narcissistic suggestion that somehow his distasteful racist rant could somehow fuel more racial conflict.

“I’m concerned about more hate and more rage and more anger coming through, not just towards me but towards a black white conflict. There’s a great deal of disturbance in this country and how blacks feel about what happened in Katrina and you know many of the comics, many performers are in Las Vegas and New Orleans trying to raise money for what happened there, and for this to happen and for me to be at a comedy club and to flip out and say this crap, I’m deeply deeply sorry. And I’ll get to the force field of this hostility why it’s there, why the rage is in any of us why the trash takes place, whether it’s between me and couple of hecklers in the audience or between this country or another nation.”

Katrina? What is he saying? Black people were upset about Katrina, and his racist rave-out is going to remind them of it? Not only is he repeating the Kayne West (in yet another wacky stream-of-consciousness brain dump by an entertainer) liberal myth that the government failures in dealing with that natural disaster were racially-motivated, ignoring the fact that the biggest failure was at the local level (remember the submerged school buses?), headed up by Ray Nagin, a black mayor. He’s also got a seriously over-inflated view of his own importance. Try to take yourself more seriously, Kramer.

In addition, why must these air-headed entertainers always try to masquerade as serious people? Everyone knows that if they say anything that sounds half-way intelligent, it’s because a smart person wrote it. The attempt to connect the war with his beef with a couple of unhappy patrons at some silly comedy club is embarrassing and insulting to those of us who understand what is at stake in our current conflict. Please stick to falling down in your underwear and leave the important public policy discussions to the grown ups.

• What would Chris Rock say about this controversy?

Trackback URL

Wasn’t it only a few weeks ago, after he was on the receiving end of a full throttle finger-wagging meltdown by Bill Clinton, that some were suggesting that Chris Wallace should stay out of Fort Marcy Park? So over the weekend, we learn of the shooting of two of Bill and Hillary’s neighbors. Interestingly, this guy is also a disbarred lawyer. On the same cul-de-sac! What are the chances? Some cynics may suspect that this “guy jumped in the back of the car and shot us” story sounds a tad Charles Stewart, and they might be right. There’s always the possibility, though, that they antagonized former First Enabler, Hillary Clinton,during one of her rare forays to the Chappaqua digs. (Why do I picture her having to do a Mapquest search to find the place?) On the one day that HRC decides to visit, these hapless saps leave their emptied garbage cans out on the corner over night, or their dog barks too much. Repeating: what are the chances!

Trackback URL

As you know, today is Veteran’s Day, a day when all Americans should reflect on the courage and sacrifice of the men and women who made, and continue to make it possible for the rest of us to live in freedom in this greatest country on the planet. And let’s not also forget what they have done for the rest of the world. Anywhere on earth where people are free and their human dignity is respected, chances are an American serviceman or woman stood there, bled there, and often died there.

Back in 2004, when the 5th column “mainstream” (yeah right–their values and opinions are about as “mainstream” as Dick Durbin’s) media was obsessed with the Abu Ghraib “torture” scandal, one name enchanted the editors of the Liberal Death Star (New York Times) and the news rooms of the fossil media: Lindy England. You remember Lindy. She was the one who looked like Ernie from “My Three Sons,” and who is famous for leading an Iraqi prisoner around with a dog leash.

I guess I’m not surprised that the press would relish any opportunity to smear the Bush administration and damage the war effort, but even I was appalled at how much coverage this pathetic wretch and her low-life boyfriend received and how little was given to Cpl. Jason Dunham. If you asked 100 people in the parking lot of your local grocery store, chances are many more would have heard of the Dog Leash Girl and almost none would have heard of the brave marine, Cpl. Dunham, who yesterday, on what would have been his 25th birthday, posthumously received the highest decoration for valor, the Medal of Honor for throwing himself on a grenade during an ambush in Karballah on April 14, 2004. You can read more about Cpl. Dunham’s story here, here and here. Speaking of reading inspiring stories of heroism, I also recommend that you check out a book that we discussed often on the air, Medal of Honor: Portraits of Valor Beyond the Call of Duty, Peter Collier and Nick Del Calzo. You can find it on the bookshelf at teriobrien.com here (please enter the title in the search box).

Also, please visit the website for Project Valor. Their mission is to give voice-activated laptops to our injured heroes so that they can communicate with their friends and loved ones.

I have said often that I personally feel an enormous debt of gratitude to each and every one of them, and even though words can never be enough to express what I feel, I have to say it any way: Thank you, veterans.

Trackback URL

In this case about the dismissal of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. When I heard about it at noon at a luncheon, where was serving as an MC, I was thunderstruck. Hadn’t the president just told us right before the election, that Rummy was there to stay? So what was the point of firing him and announcing it the day after the dems, who have been screaming for his head, win the election? That sends a great message of leadership, doesn’t it?

Newt is correct when he says that if this move was going to be made it should have been made before the election. If not then, then certainly not the very day after the election! It makes it appear that the president is not a strong leader, but a gutless politician who bases his decisions on the political expediency, and who still hasn’t learned that trying to appease liberals only emboldens them. [tag]President Bush[tag] seems to have always understood that weakness provokes our enemies abroad. He needs to realize that that analysis also applies to the enemy within.

Trackback URL