Crush Liberalism

Yet another "God’s punishment for…" post

A follow-up to my recent post about how the Jews are getting in on the “God’s punishment for _____________” fad. The recent post saw a rabbi speculating that God sent us bird flu because he was ticked at Israel giving up Gaza. Well, now apparently the Almighty is torqued at Israel about something else. From al-Reuters:

An outbreak of deadly bird flu in Israel is God’s punishment for calls in election ads to legalize gay marriages, according to Rabbi David Basri, a prominent sage preaching Kabbalah or Jewish mysticism.

“The Bible says that God punishes depravity first through plagues against animals and then in people,” Basri said in a religious edict quoted by his son.

Basri said he hoped the deaths of hundreds of thousands of turkeys and chickens would help atone for what he called the sins of left-wing Israeli political parties, the son, Rabbi Yitzhak Basri, told Reuters, a week before a national election.

The bird flu outbreak stemmed from far-left political parties “strengthening and encouraging homosexuality,” Rabbi Basri’s son quoted him as saying.

One of the parties aired an election commercial depicting two brides kissing. Some campaign advertisements also called for homosexual marriages to be legalized in Israel.

Basri is a prominent Kabbalist and author of commentaries on the Zohar, the main Kabbalah mystical text.

Then why has God decided to smite the Holy Land instead of San Francisco? And which is it: ceding Gaza, or letting Nigel and Raoul get married? Come on, fellas, get your stories straight…no pun intended!

Oh, well…see my prior disclaimer that “I’m not privy to God’s intentions, and unlike these charlatans, I won’t pretend to be.”

March 21, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Iran helping al Qaeda?

From the LA Times:

U.S. intelligence officials, already focused on Iran’s potential for building nuclear weapons, are struggling to solve a more immediate mystery: the murky relationship between the new Tehran leadership and the contingent of Al Qaeda leaders residing in the country.

Some officials, citing evidence from highly classified satellite feeds and electronic eavesdropping (did they have a FISA warrant? For those on the left, that’s sarcasm. – Ed.), believe the Iranian regime is playing host to much of Al Qaeda’s remaining brain trust and allowing the senior operatives freedom to communicate and help plan the terrorist network’s operations.

And they suggest that recently elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be forging an alliance with Al Qaeda operatives as a way to expand Iran’s influence or, at a minimum, that he is looking the other way as Al Qaeda leaders in his country collaborate with their counterparts elsewhere.

So “Ahm-a-nutjob” wants to buddy up with Cindy Sheehan’s “freedom fighters” and allow them room to grow and operate and plan? I’m thinking this might be a good time for implementation of the Bush Doctrine: “You are either with us, or you’re with the terrorists.” Do we have the resolve to deal with Iran forcefully, or should we try the left’s approach and give them a group hug and a lifetime supply of couscous and hummus and hope that they like us? Maybe send in some UN Terrorist Inspectors?

At this rate, Iran had better be careful before they run the risk of being on the business end of…(gasp!)…a sternly worded UN resolution! There…now THAT oughta get their attentions, huh?

March 21, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

France’s failed socialism

The young ‘tards in France (aka Frogistan) are rioting over a new law that allows employers to fire young workers (under 26) within the first two years of employment without cause. The nerve…employers getting to choose whom to hire and retain! What’s next, employers getting to decide what to pay workers? When will such madness end?

While at-will employment has been around in the US for generations, such laws have been nonexistent in Frogistan’s socialist state. Dennis Prager has a great column illustrating the failure of France:

As it happens, the whole point of the law was to encourage companies to hire young people. The unemployment rate among young people in France is 23 percent. And in many suburbs, it is double that. Meanwhile, French companies are understandably loath to hire 22-year-olds when they cannot fire them except “for cause,” which under union rules means something like committing mass murder in the workplace.

What these massive demonstrations reveal is the narcissism, laziness and irresponsibility inculcated by socialist societies.

Enough generations of socialist policies have now passed for us to judge their effects. They are bleak. Socialism undermines the character of a nation and of its citizens. In simpler words, socialism makes people worse.

These young people in France really believe that they should be able to be hired at their tender ages and that a company must not be allowed to fire them from their first day at work (except “for cause,” which, as we are learning in America, is increasingly difficult to establish). In America, most of us would call the French young people’s attitudes “spoiled.”

Socialism teaches its citizens to expect everything, even if they contribute nothing.

Socialism teaches its citizens that they have a plethora of rights and few corresponding obligations — except to be taxed.

Contrast the socialist mentality with that of less socialist societies like America:

And that is why the citizens of less socialist — and more religious — America give more charity per capita and per income than do citizens of socialist countries. That is why Americans volunteer time for the needy so much more than citizens of socialist countries do. That is why citizens of conservative states in America give more charity than citizens of liberal states do. The more Left one identifies oneself on the political spectrum, the more that person is likely to believe that the state, not fellow citizens, should take care of the poor and the needy.

Under socialism, one is not only liberated from having to take care of oneself; one is also liberated from having to take care of others. The state will take care of me and of everybody else.

Who needs charities when you have the government, right? Since the left in this country believes that the federal government should be getting bigger and bigger, and should be taking on a greater role of “taking care of” people (the Constitution be damned!), the left has much in common with Eurotrash socialists! Continuing:

The socialist idea sounded altruistic to those who began it, and it sounds altruistic to the naive who believe in it today. In practice, however, it creates self-centered individuals and a narcissistic society. So while it may have begun as a way to help others, it has come to mean a way of evading responsibility for oneself and for others.

That is why France is so frightened of the utterly rational idea that a young person should have a two-year trial period at work before being granted a lifetime job. Such an innovation in France would mean that young people would have to work hard and earn the right to lifetime employment. But if socialism means anything, it means that one shouldn’t have to earn anything. One merely has to breathe.

As much as America has been adversely affected by socialist thought, it is still inconceivable that in America hundreds of thousands of students would shut down their schools in order to gain the right not to be fired by the first company that hires them. But every time America’s socialists, the Democrats, prevail in an election, we move in that direction. No matter how pure their motives, the Left makes America and its citizens less noble people, just like the spoiled French students.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Socialism may have had good intentions, but its consequences have been disastrous.

March 21, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

More Nagin screw-ups

What’s the mayor of Chocolate City been screwing up lately? Neal Boortz tells us:

Here’s the story, fresh from last night’s Special Report with Brit Hume. Read this and you will know why Democrats and liberals just flat-out don’t like Brit Hume or Fox News Channel.

Texas based car crushing company. Offered to remove all abandoned and flooded vehicles from New Orleans and dispose of them. KNL Auto Crushers said it would take 15 weeks to finish the job. This offer was made last October. KNL also offered to pay the city of New Orleans $100 for each car that they removed. How many cars needed removing, you ask? About 50,000. At $100 each, that adds up to a payment to the city of $5 million. Not bad. So … did Ray Nagin take the deal? Nope. Instead of taking the offer from KNL, Ray Nagin is pursing a car removal plan that will take six months to complete, not 15 weeks, and wlll cost the city of New Orleans — make that the taxpayers of New Orleans — $23 million. Nagin balked at the KNL offer because he wasn’t sure that the city had the legal right to accept the offer although there was a clear city ordinance that allowed just such a thing. So, add it up. Take the $5 million New Orleans could have had from KNL Auto Crushers and add it to the $23 million the city will spend to get rid of the cars, and you have a total cost to the taxpayers of $28 million.

Last night Hume also reminded us that Ray Nagin failed to order a full mandatory evacuation of New Orleans as Katrina was bearing down because he feared that the hospitality industry would sue the city if the people all left and the hurricane didn’t hit. If there is one certainty in life is is that if Ray Nagin were a Republican mayor the media in this country would be clamoring for his head. Nagin gets a relative pass. There will be no 60 Minutes documentary profiling his incompetence.

By the way, Ray Nagin thinks he should be reelected.

Fox News, that “right-wing mouthpiece” ran the story. The rest of the MSM did not. Nope…no liberal media bias.

March 21, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

10 ways Dick Cheney can kill you

This is beginning to circulate around the ‘sphere, so count me in! It’s just too funny not to pass on, and if you can’t laugh at this, then you officially suck:

March 20, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Iraqi war is lost…by the MSM

The MSM, collectively allowing itself to be the useful idiots of the Islamofascists, have bet on the wrong horse in Iraq. However, as is typical with the left, they create their own versions of reality that help them cope with the inconveniences of the real world. From the “Land Down Under” (for those of you on the left, that would be Australia):

A SOLDIER friend stationed in Baghdad for the past two months has been sending me emails with such arresting lines as: “It’s late here and I [have] to get the Chief of Staff back to the Palace.”

From his office in the fortified military and government area, the Green Zone, he scans the web for news about Iraq and compares it with his reality.

“Baghdad is not burning down around my ears,” he wrote last week. “Things were tense a while back, but violence was within limits. Callous thing to say, but that is the reality around here.”

The only “quagmire” he sees is “the soft patch of ground out by the rifle range and no civil war in sight”.

He exhibits a soldier’s sang-froid. “We are expecting to be very busy the next few days. The terrorists are extremely media savvy (it’s the only area they get to win) and will be looking for big headlines. End of religious festival, big crowds and convening of new government.”

But with the third anniversary of the Iraq invasion tomorrow, he says, “the only people who seem to have lost both their grip on reality and their nerve are the western media”.

Sad, isn’t it? Our soldiers know that the terrorists are using the MSM to fight a battle that cannot otherwise be won by them, and yet the MSM allows themselves to be Islamofascist tools! Continuing:

His reality is quite different: “I am more and more impressed with the Iraqis every day. There are problems, to be sure, but I do not know of any country that has gone through the sorts of upheavals that this one has without any problems.
…
He also sent me a letter which has been circulating among soldiers for a month, from the mayor of Tal ‘Afar, near the Syrian border, praising the “lion hearts” of the US 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment who have changed the city from “ghost town in which terrorists spread death and destruction to a secure city flourishing with life”.

“Lion hearts” instead of “babykillers”? Why, who knew? Oh, that’s right…normal America knew! Continuing:

The violence of revenge attacks on Sunnis across Iraq, after last month’s bombing of the Shiite Golden Mosque in Samarra, led many commentators to declare the civil war they have been predicting for three years had arrived. But others point to signs the crisis has spurred Iraq’s political leaders to sort out their differences and work to form a national unity government, three months after their third successful election. And as Sunni politicians engage in the process, there are encouraging reports of infighting among Sunni insurgents.

Last Thursday Iraq’s new parliament was sworn in and 82-year-old Sunni elder statesman Adnan Pachachi told its first short session: “We have to prove to the world that a civil war is not and will not take place among our people. The danger is still looming and the enemies are ready for us because they do not like to see a united, strong, stable Iraq.“

It is safe to say that Pachachi includes the left in this country and other countries among those who are “enemies” and “do not like to see a united, strong, and stable Iraq.” After all, such an Iraq might possibly reflect positively on America in general and the administration in particular, and the left would rather be decapitated by a Sheehanista “freedom fighter” with a dull butter knife while eating room-temperature lemon-pepper mahi-mahi at Club Gitmo than ever allow Bushrove McHitlerburton to get a kind word his way!

Continuing:

And in The Washington Post, David Ignatius, in Baghdad, wrote that the Samarra mosque crisis was the catalyst that broke a deadlock and brought Iraq’s political factions together last week. (It pained the comPost to have to say that, I’m sure! – Ed.)
…
“And now their freely elected leaders are debating, and arguing, and compromising. In other words, they are engaging in a process called democracy.”

The anti-war protesters who picketed Rice might try having more faith in the Iraqis and the brave soldiers like my friend who are supporting them.

“I think it is right that we are here,” wrote my friend last week on his 39th birthday, “and that we support these people against the thugs, criminals and terrorists who would try and turn back the clock on them“.

Including the modern leftist insufferables who think that Iraqis aren’t good enough to deserve freedom!

March 20, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

"Peace" protestors can’t get symbol right!

If you’re gonna be a patchouli-smelling incense-burning hemp-wearing unemployable miscreant hippie “peace” protestor, it helps to know what your symbols are:

Wrong!	Right!

Hat tip to Michelle. In the first picture, we have a moonbat who displays her Mercedes pride at the Code Pinko rallies! I wonder if this is the type of anti-war brilliance that Richard Belzer (see prior post) thinks the left possesses.

In the second photo…well, we just have moonbats. Hey, at least they know what the peace logo looks like.

One of many reasons why no one takes these moonbats seriously.

March 20, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Belzer: Soldiers too stupid to know about war

Thank God (Insert Hollywood deity here) that we here in America are fortunate enough to have brilliant minds like Richard Belzer to tell us what our soldiers in the battlezone are too dumb to understand! From Newsbusters:

When Congresswoman Ileanna Ros-Lehtinen contended Friday night, on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, that servicemen she’s met in Iraq are “saying ‘we’re proud of our mission, we know what we’re doing over here. We don’t want you guys in Washington to lose it over there,’” actor/comedian Richard Belzer condescendingly fired back, claiming that to “ask them” is “bullsh#t” since, apparently unlike him, “they don’t read twenty newspapers a day.”

Which is more accurate: what you see with your own eyes, or what the New York Slimes tells you (and we ALL know just how credible the Slimes is these days)? Continuing:

Ros-Lehtinen cited the knowledge of her Marine officer stepson, but Belzer, who plays “Detective John Munch” on NBC’s Law & Order: SVU, retorted: “Doesn’t mean he’s a brilliant scholar about the war because he’s there.” A quite agitated Ros-Lehtinen sputtered: “Oh, you are though! You are though? Okay.” To which Belzer affirmed: “Well I have more time…” Host Bill Maher interjected that Belzer’s point was that a 19-year-old is in the army “because he probably couldn’t find other employment.” The Republican Congresswoman from Florida countered that her stepson is a college graduate, leading Belzer to snidely denigrate the military: “You think everyone over there is a college graduate? They’re 19 and 20-year-old kids who couldn’t get a job.”

So much for that “they’re idiots” stereotype! Belzer, who is a paranoid asshat conspiracy theorist (as shown in the linked article), has “more time” to read about this stuff because he’s not getting shot at! I’m not either, so you’ll have to forgive me for listening to the guys/gals who are getting shot at instead of the leftist elites in this country who can barely find Iraq on a map! Continuing:

Ros-Lehtinen mocked him: “Yeah, you know because you’ve been there.” Belzer rudely lashed back: “What, I don’t f#cking read!? Don’t do that!” He went on to argue: “It’s this patronizing thing that people have about if you’re against the war everyone’s lumped together. You know, the soldiers are not scholars, they’re not war experts.” That was too much for host Bill Maher: “You’re going to lose even me…”

Does anyone else see the irony of that emphasized statement? He patronizes our soldiers’ intellects and lumps them all into the “dumb as dirt” column, then he has the unmitigated gall to take exception to his kind being “patronized” and “lumped together”! “Good enough for me, but not for thee”, eh, Belzer?

Plus, how loony are you when Bill freakin’ Maher distances himself from you? The same guy (Maher) who said that the 9/11 hijackers were not cowards (and got fired from ABC over the statement) thinks that Belzer crossed the line! How batty does that make Belzer look?

Finally, Newsbusters makes the following observation:

During the 2004 campaign, liberals contended that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry’s experience in Vietnam as a ground soldier made him an expert on the Iraq war, but now, by Belzer’s reasoning, soldiers and Marines actually on the ground in Iraq have no credibility.

Only if they vote Democrat, I suppose. I guess like Kerry, the left actually did think that military service equals instant war credibility…before they didn’t!

March 20, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Common bonds?

Observe the following news stories:

Another "God’s punishment for…" post

Fred Phelps, the anti-gay bigot from the “church” in Kansas, said that the London bombings and 9/11 were God’s punishment for the US’ and UK’s tolerance of homosexuality. By “tolerance”, I guess he means that because we don’t stone them like the Muslims do, we’re too tolerant.

Al Qaeda said that Hurricane Katrina was God striking the US for hating Muslims. Al Qaeda was at a loss to explain the subsequent earthquake that leveled Pakistan, a predominantly Muslim country. I guess Allah hates Muslims more than he hates infidels?

Not to be outdone or underrepresented, the Jews are getting into the act. From YNet:

The bird flu outbreak in southern Israel is God’s punishment for the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank disengagement, National Jewish Front Chairman Baruch Marzel says.

“You were punished by God and now you’ll have to ask for the forgiveness of Gush Katif residents,” Marzel wrote in a letter to southern residents whose communities were affected by bird flu.

In the wake of the bird flu outbreak, rightists have been voicing various theories regarding the connection between the disease and the implementation of the pullout. Marzel himself is certain such connection exists.

“The kibbutz was used to house the expulsion headquarters because of greed, and therefore the bird flu outbreak happened there of all places,” the far right leader wrote in his letter to Ein HaShlosha kibbutz.

Unlike these “prophets”, I don’t pretend to speak for the Almighty, so this is a pure guess on my part and was not inspired by a peyote-induced vision or anything:

I’m thinking that God probably gets as tired of all of these self-proclaimed “divine clairvoyants” as I and many other people do!

I know that I’m not going out on much of a limb with that guess, but I needed to get that off my chest. I have little patience or tolerance for people who profess to have an answer for everyone of life’s tragedies, and it just so happens to be that their answers always begin with “God is mad that…” If God really wanted to get His message out to the world, I suspect He wouldn’t pick nutcases like Phelps, Al Qaeda, or Marzel to spread the word.

Then again, I don’t know what the Almighty thinks, so I’m speculating…unlike the aforementioned nutbars.

March 19, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Saddam…bin Laden…WMD’s…9/11? Nothing to see!

From ABC News:

Following are the ABC News Investigative Unit’s summaries of four of the nine Iraqi documents from Saddam Hussein’s government, which were released by the U.S. government Wednesday.

The documents discuss Osama bin Laden, weapons of mass destruction, al Qaeda and more.

The full documents can be found on the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Office Web site:
http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm
.

Note: Document titles were added by ABC News.

“Osama bin Laden and the Taliban”

Document dated Sept. 15, 2001

An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who’s only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:

That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq.

That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and “bin Laden’s group” agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America.

That in case the Taliban and bin Laden’s group turn out to be involved in “these destructive operations,” the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan.

That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq’s relationship with “bin Laden’s group” while he was in Iran.

At the end, the writer recommends informing “the committee of intentions” about the above-mentioned items. The signature on the document is unclear.

IF true, it seems pretty damning, wouldn’t you say? So what’s ABC’s take on this?

(Editor’s Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable — i.e. an unnamed Afghan “informant” reporting on a conversation with another Afghan “consul.” The date of the document — four days after 9/11 — is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value.)

Oh, so now we the news-consuming public are supposed to take “unnamed sources” with a grain of salt? The MSM injects information from “unnamed sources” every day, and they expect us to accept their reporting as gospel…often denigrating us for having the temerity to question their “unnamed sources”! Hell, the MSM’s “unnamed sources” wind up being partisan hacks who photoshop and forge (using Microsoft Word, no less), yet they tell us how their sources are “unimpeachable”, right?

But now that these documents may contain information that shoots their whole “Bush lied” mantra to Hell? Why, it’s imperative that we take “unnamed sources” less than seriously! I mean, I’ll bet Bushrove McHitlerburton himself pounded these out with Word 2003 (Arabic edition)!

Nope…no liberal media bias!

March 17, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Hanoi Jane honor…dropped

Kudos to the Georgia legislature for putting the kabosh on this idiot Democrat’s proposal to honor “Hanoi” Jane Fonda. From NewsMax:

The sponsor of an effort to honor Jane Fonda in the Georgia state Senate withdrew her resolution Thursday, after a rocky reception from some colleagues and a phone call from the actress’ office.

Sen. Steen Miles, D-Decatur, said a representative for Fonda, who is out of the country, asked that she avoid the controversy the effort had stirred.

“This, ladies and gentlemen, should not be occupying our time,” said Miles.

The resolution cites the Atlanta resident’s work as founder of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention, donations to Atlanta-area universities and charities and role as goodwill ambassador with the United Nations.

But the two-time Academy Award winner’s political activities protesting the Vietnam War, including a trip to North Vietnam in 1972, have long made her a target of veterans of that war.

Yeah, being photographed in a state of giddiness on the enemy’s anti-aircraft gun, reporting that tortured POWs looked to be in “good health”, calling the president during wartime a “new-type Hitler”, accusing soldiers of being war criminals, etc., tend to perturb Vietnam vets and their families just a tad bit, Lady! Continuing:

The measure, which Miles said is one of several she has pushed honoring Georgia women during Women’s History Month, cruised through the Senate on Wednesday before some members realized it was part of a stack of mostly non-controversial resolutions approved because no one objected to them.

Sen. John Douglas, R-Social Circle, later asked that the vote be reconsidered.

“I can think of no living American who is less worthy of this honor,” Douglas, chairman of the chamber’s Veterans and Military Affairs committee, said Thursday. “She is as guilty of treason as Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose.”

She has yet to apologize or be held accountable in a court of law for her treason…and no, her crocodile tears shed on 60 Minutes does not qualify as an apology! Continuing:

Miles said she is sympathetic to concerns of military members. She said her brother and ex-husband both served in Vietnam and her daughter currently serves in the Army reserve. But she said Fonda’s good works for the past three decades outweigh any negatives associated with her Vietnam-era actions.

“I have a deep and abiding respect and love for our men and women warriors,” she said. “We should not ignore the past, but we should not be inextricably bound to its mistakes.”

The past’s “mistakes”? Does she mean the “mistake” of Vietnam, where (as Miles is fond of pointing out) her brother and ex-hubby served? I wonder if those brave souls considered their service a mistake?

Or does she mean Hanoi Jane’s “mistake” of treason? Look, locking your keys in your car is a mistake. Turning your back on your country during war and giving aid and comfort to the enemy is the only crime that is actually expressly stated in the Constitution as punishable by death! Expecting that she should have at a minimum served some sort of jail time should not be too much to ask.

But hey…she loves women, kids, schools, and the U.N., so whatsay let’s let bygones be bygones, right?

March 17, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

The truth about Clinton wiretaps

Finally, we get a viable explanation from the left as to why Clinton’s wiretaps are different (and more acceptable) than Bush’s wiretaps! Hat tip to It’s All George Bush’s Fault:

For those of you on the left, the above is satire.

March 17, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Bush losing friends

Peggy Noonan piles on him. His Congressional buddies are piling on him. But there is good news: I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching…

No, the real good news, the real saving grace, the real silver lining is that contrary to prior MSM reports with headlines about “snubbing Bush”, Jessica Simpson actually “loves the heck out of” ol’ W!

Well…then all is right with the world, isn’t it?

Seriously, read the Noonan column. Excellent stuff. She asks within the column: “When George W. Bush first came on the scene in 2000, did you understand him to be a liberal in terms of spending?” She also painfully, though accurately, observes thusly: “A John Kerry would spend as much and raise taxes too. But could a President Kerry spend more than President Bush? How?”

March 17, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Quote of the day

From Sharon Stone:

“In America we tend to erase women after 40…”

This from Sharon Stone, who just turned…48. On the cusp of Basic Instinct II, where there will be “even more nudity and ‘kinky stuff’ than the 1992 original”. Who also “recently became the face of Dior skincare.”

Does anyone else think that very little of her is being “erased” these days?

March 16, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Man sues…himself?

File this under “Only in California”! From Breitbart/AP:

When a dump truck backed into Curtis Gokey’s car, he decided to sue the city for damages. Only thing is, he was the one driving the dump truck. But that minor detail didn’t stop Gokey, a Lodi city employee, from filing a $3,600 claim for the December accident, even after admitting the crash was his fault.

After the city denied that claim because Gokey was, in essence, suing himself, he and his wife, Rhonda, decided to file a new claim under her name.

City Attorney Steve Schwabauer said this one also lacks merit because Rhonda Gokey can’t sue her own husband.

“You can sue your spouse for divorce, but you can’t sue your spouse for negligence,” Schwabauer said. “They’re a married couple under California law. They’re one entity. It’s damage to community property.”

But Rhonda Gokey insisted she has “the right to sue the city because a city’s vehicle damaged my private vehicle.”

In fact, her claim, currently pending at Lodi City Hall, is for an even larger amount _ $4,800.

“I’m not as nice as my husband is,” she said.

It’s not bad enough that Lodi was an incubator for terrorists. No, it must also be an incubator for frivolous lawsuits, too.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a California court sided with the plaintiff in what normal people would laugh out of the courtroom in a heartbeat.

March 16, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Finally…charges in Chuckaquiddick identity theft?

From the Washington comPost:

Federal prosecutors have decided to bring charges against a Democratic researcher accused of fraudulently obtaining a credit report on Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, now a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate.

Lauren B. Weiner, who has since resigned from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington, will be charged with obtaining the report without authorization, according to a letter sent to Steele by the U.S. attorney’s office in the District.

A copy of the March 8 letter, which notified Steele that he is considered a victim in the case, was obtained by The Washington Post yesterday.

The episode, which happened last July, came as both parties started digging into the backgrounds of opposing candidates for one of Maryland’s marquee races this year, the contest to replace retiring Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes (D). Opposition research is typical in contested statewide races, but it is illegal under federal law to obtain a credit report under false pretenses.

Conspicuous by its omission is the name of the Senator for whom Weiner (must.resist.joke.) worked: Chuck “the Schmuck” Schumer.

Does anyone think such an omission would have occurred had the Senator in question for whom the staffer worked been a Republican? I’m just sure that the comPost wouldn’t have put that story on the front page and would have instead put it on the same page as this Chuckaquiddick story (page B-4)! I’m also just sure that I bought a a sweet piece of oceanfront real estate in North Dakota!

Also, isn’t it adorable how the comPost tried to blunt the impact by throwing in a “both parties started digging” reference? Both parties may suck, but as far as I can tell, only one party seems to have broken the law here…the Democrap Party!

March 16, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Saddam and Gore backers alike?

From MyWay News:

Saddam Hussein, testifying Wednesday for the first time in his trial, called on Iraqis to stop killing each other and instead fight U.S. troops. The judge reprimanded him for making a rambling, political speech and ordered the TV cameras switched off.

Saddam began his speech by declaring he was the elected president, touching off a shouting match with chief judge Raouf Abdel-Rahman.

Funny…Gore supporters are still saying the same thing about Gore today!

As you can see, delusions are not isolated to any particular country or group of people!

March 16, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Dems: DSL for everyone!

A universal right to broadband Internet service? That must be a Constitutional right found within the same amendment as the universal right to a Sealy posturepedic! From CNS News:

The Republican Party has wondered what’s taking Democrats so long to unveil their election-year agenda. Amid press reports that it will happen any day now, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday offered what amounts to a draft version.
…
Pelosi also mentioned the Democrats’ “Innovation Agenda” to maintain America’s leadership role in the global economy.

America lags behind other countries that have universal broadband deployment, Pelosi said; but the Democrats’ agenda “guarantees” that every American will have affordable access to broadband within five years.

Cool! I’m tired of paying for my cable Internet service, so you folks are going to do it for me! Much appreciated, my friends!

Hey, at least credit the Dems for having an idea in the first place, even if it’s as stupid as that one is.

March 15, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Lease fleece, especially Dem perps’ perks!

Say that five times real fast! From NewsMax:

When it comes to socking taxpayers with the tab for a leased car, Rep. Mike Ross is the most expensive member of Congress – the Arkansas Democrat’s Ford Expedition costs $1,248 a month.
…
…and Rep. Dennis Cardoza, a Democrat from California, spends $1,227 on a Chevrolet truck.

Two Democrats from New York ride in style. Rep. Gregory Meeks’ Lexus costs $1,062 a month, and Rep. Charles Rangel tools around in a $998-a-month Cadillac DeVille.

Hold on a minute! Aren’t the Dems the ones who are for the “little guy” in this country? Or has Charlie Rangel and his ilk earned the right, via years of oppression by Th’ Man, to drive whatever vehicle he wants on the taxpayer dole? “Good enough for me, but not for thee”, eh?

The Republicans are not exempt, either:

Rep. Howard McKeon, Republican from California, is close behind – his Acura costs $1,231 a month.
…
But some congressmen don’t use any public funds allotted to their budget to pay for a car, and members of the Senate are forbidden to do so.

The Senate is prohibited, but the House isn’t? Well, heck, why would a House member want to aspire to be a Senator? Sure, the paycheck is higher, but it sounds like the bennies of being a House leech are out of this world!

March 15, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Federal judge finds new right in Constitution: right to have a Serta!

I thought I was well acquainted with the Constitution, but I apparently was mistaken. From UPI (hat tip to Jason at Generation Why?):

Los Angeles County faces tens of millions of dollars in damages for bedding thousands of prisoners on mattresses on concrete floors.

The practice violates the Constitution and is symptomatic of serious problems in the crowded, riot-torn jail system, a federal judge tentatively ruled Monday.

I’m recalling my American history course at FSU, when we were studying about the Bill of Rights, and I vaguely remember something about “A firm mattress on a frame with boxsprings, being necessary for the survival of the republic, the right of the people to maintain Sertas shall not be infringed.” Wait…no, that was a different lifetime in a parallel universe. My bad.

California…go figure.

March 15, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

CNN: Vibrant economy not as important now as in ’90s

Leave it to CNN to come up with a new standard. Bill Schneider:

A lot of economists are saying things are pretty good around the country, uhhhh, and Americans seem to reflect that and they’re optimistic also. About 60% say they expect things to be better next year even than they are now. Uhhh, that — that’s a good number. Normally, you know, the old cliché, uhhhh, from 1992, it’s the economy, stupid? Well, the economy is doing well. But there’s another rule in politics that goes like this. “If the economy is bad, the economy is the issue. If the economy is good, something else is the issue,” and that seems to be the rule right now. The economy is pretty good, but people are upset over a lot of other things, most of all, Iraq.

Is it just me, or was getting Schneider to admit how the good the economy is doing like pulling teeth?

Let me get this straight:

During the Clinton scandals and impeachment, the economy trumped everything. Now that the economy is humming along, who cares? Got it. Thanks for the update. Fortunately, I didn’t expect CNN to adhere to its same standard anyway.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

March 14, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Dems’ ’08 strategy: Beat Bush!

Former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe was on the little-watched MSNBC show Hardball with Chris Whatshisname, and unveiled the 2008 strategy to win back the White House:

In 2008 the framework we’re going to be dealing with is a failed presidency, George Bush’s presidency…

Yesiree, the left plans to run for the Oval Office by campaigning against Bush! I seem to recall in 2000, the Dems giggled over Bush’s idea to rid the White House of the Clinton stain (pun highly intended), saying “Clinton’s not even running! Why campaign against him?”

Ignoring the fact that Bush was not campaigning against Clinton per se, but was instead linking Gore to Clinton (an approach that worked), the Dems seem to be going against their own advice. Considering that the GOP seems willing to fight Bush on certain issues (such as the UAE ports deal), it will be a more daunting task to link any GOP contenders to Bush too much. However, consistency is a trait we rarely see from the left, isn’t it?

Be sure to put down your soda or other beverage before reading this darling gem from McAuliffe:

Now the Democrats for some time since 9/11 lead on the issue of who will keep you safe. Why? Because George Bush has made so many mistakes and our soldiers are paying the price today, all over the world you’re seeing the American — our high esteem has now gone down because of George Bush. Our soldiers are paying the price. So first national security. We win that.

Ladies and gentlemen, give it up for Terry McAuliffe! He’ll be here at the Comedy Zone all week! Be sure to tip your waitress!

Terry, if Americans thought that you guys were capable of defending us and that you actually gave a wet fart on a dry January Monday about the troops, why do the soldiers and their families constantly vote roughly 70% of the time against you? Solve that riddle, pal, and the keys to the White House will be more within your grasp!

Oh, and having Russ Feingold trying to hamstring the commander-in-chief during wartime doesn’t exactly give our soldiers warm fuzzies, either!

March 14, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Feingold feeds the moonbat base

From Forbes:

Sen. Russell Feingold’s effort to censure President Bush is headed for the Senate Judiciary Committee, advancing a contentious debate over whether the president deserves a formal rebuke for his secret wiretapping program.

“I look forward to a full hearing, debate and vote in committee on this important matter,” Feingold, D-Wis., said in a statement. “If the committee fails to consider the resolution expeditiously, I will ask that there be a vote in the full Senate.”

A possible presidential contender in 2008, Feingold said Bush broke the law and violated the Constitution when he authorized the National Security Agency to conduct a warrantless wiretapping program as part of the war on terrorism.

“Congress must respond,” Feingold said Monday on the Senate floor. “A formal censure by Congress is an appropriate and responsible first step to assure the public that when the president thinks he can violate the law without consequences, Congress has the will to hold him accountable.”

To his credit, Sen. Frist tried to bring the motion to the floor of the Senate for a vote to put Feingold and any supporters (if applicable) on the record. Seing as how Democrats don’t like to be on the record these days for anything, Frist’s noble attempt was stymied:

Feingold’s introduction of the five-page censure resolution set off maneuvering among his fellow Democrats to prevent a vote that could alienate swing voters.

Republicans savored the Democrats’ discomfort. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., pushed for an immediate floor vote; Democrats protested, saying they hadn’t yet read the resolution. Several Democrats offered empathy for Feingold’s frustration but no overt support for his resolution.
…
Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said he had not read it either and wasn’t inclined simply to scold the president.

“I’d prefer to see us solve the problem,” Lieberman told reporters.

That’s why your party has no use for you, Joe. They have no desire to solve problems, merely bitch about them.

As Drudge reports: “When it comes to intercepting phone calls from Tora Bora to Topeka, Frist thinks Senate Democrats have made a huge blunder, and he will lead the charge to make Democrats put up or shut up on censure.”

March 14, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Moussaoui case maybe tossed?

From CNN:

A federal judge threatened to throw out the death penalty at the sentencing trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui after prosecutors disclosed Monday that a government lawyer tried to coach seven witnesses.

Question: Is this what John Kerry and his ilk had in mind when they tell us that terrorism is a law enforcement situation? After all, who needs to take out terrorists with drones, guided missiles, or the Marines, when we could always use…(gasp!)…lawyers and judges?

Maybe the prosecutor flunked Kerry’s “global test”?

March 13, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Hecklers bother fallen soldiers’ families at funerals

Believe it or not, this time the hecklers aren’t left-wing nutjobs like we’ve seen before, i.e. Code Pinkos running protests outside of Walter Reed Hospital pretending to speak for the soldiers inside, or the Democrat Lt. Governor of PA telling a soldier’s family at his funeral that PA was against the war in which he died.

Nope, this time the hecklers are in the form of vile right-wing nutbars from the famed Westboro Baptist Church, originator of the “God hates fags” movement. From Breitbart/AP:

Five women sang and danced as they held up signs saying “thank God for dead soldiers” at the funeral of an army sergeant who was killed by an Iraqi bomb.

For them, it was the perfect way to spread God’s word: America was being punished for tolerating homosexuality.

For the hundreds of flag waving bikers who came to this small town in Michigan Saturday to shield the soldier’s family, it was disgusting.

“That could be me in that church,” said Jackie Sandler whose son Keith is currently serving his second tour of duty in Iraq.

The fringe group of fire and brimstone Baptists from Kansas has been courting controversy for more than 15 years, traveling the country with their hateful signs and slogans.

The Westboro Baptist Church first gained national notoriety when they picked the funeral of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming student who was murdered in 1998 for being gay.

They have since picketed the funerals of Frank Sinatra and Bill Clinton’s mother, celebrated the terrorist attacks of September 11 as an act of God’s wrath, and have even targeted Santa Claus and the Ku Klux Klan.

So God is punishing the people in the Middle East (Americans, Arabs, Brits, etc.) because of…gay people? Not murderers, not drug dealers, not rapists, not liars or thieves…but queers? Now I don’t pretend to understand what goes on in the mind of the Almighty, but something tells me that such a theory may be a tad bit hair-brained.

Also, since Islamofascists tend to stone homosexuals to death, I wonder how Westboro’s founder feels about that. I mean, if he’s a “Christian” (and in his case, I use the word loosely), he must be appalled by Muslim violence, right? Or is it OK when it’s against gays?

Fortunately, founder Fred Phelps’ influence appears to be contained:

The group is so outrageous that some among the extreme-right have speculated that Phelps is a plant aimed at giving the anti-gay movement a bad name, said Mark Potok, the director of the intelligence project at the Southern Poverty Law Center which tracks hate crimes.

“I don’t think they have any constituency beyond their own members – even the Nazis aren’t interested,” he said.

You know you must be a right-wing crackpot if even the freakin’ Nazis don’t want anything to do with you!

Maybe we get a glimpse into the basis of Pehlps’ warped worldview:

Phelps’ virulence and frequently graphic condemnations of anal sex could mask a deeper issue than a radically literal interpretation of the Bible, Potok speculated.

“This man probably thinks more about gay sex than any other person in the United States of America and one can only guess at what that means,” he said. “Many of the most homophobic people are deeply afraid that they might be gay.”

Phelps can explain to God one day why he focused on the part of the Bible that mentions gayness while he ignored God’s commandment to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” I’m pretty sure God doesn’t need my help in dealing with an animal like Phelps.

March 13, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Terrorists killed and tortured American hostage

This is a tragic follow-up to my December post “‘Peace’ activists may learn fatal lesson“. From MyWay News:

American hostage Tom Fox has been killed and his body, showing signs of torture, left at a garbage dump in Baghdad, police said on Saturday.

One of the policemen who found the body said the 54-year-old peace activist, wearing a gray tracksuit, appeared to have beaten with electric cables before his death. He had a single gunshot wound to the head and his hands were tied behind him.

Fox, who had been in Iraq to campaign against the U.S. occupation and to work for the release of Iraqis held by U.S. forces, was taken hostage with three colleagues in November by a group calling itself the “Swords of Truth.”

I have a few thoughts on this:

1. While I have no doubts as to the sincerity of the mission of the anti-war Christian activists, I have plenty of doubts as to whether or not they have a lick of sense in them. Such a gross ignorance of the true nature of our enemies just proved fatal to Mr. Fox, and I pray that the others are spared of learning a similar lesson.

2. No matter which way you spin it, moonbats…George Bush did not kill Mr. Fox. A group of bloodthirsty Islamofascist murderers stuck in the Dark Ages, intent on the destruction of all Americans irrespective of our ideologies or parties, did. The same people that the leftists defend mightily (and secretly root for against us so as to make Bush look bad) just committed yet another war crime far worse than anything the left likes to accuse Bush of committing.

3. What…you mean this wasn’t the work of our soldiers? Those Pol Pot-like and Stalinesque troops of ours (Durbin the Turban’s analogy, not mine) didn’t do this? You mean it was actually the enemy who did this? Why, that’s not possible! I thought the promises of a group hug and free couscous would have mollified those Islamic fundamentalists!

For those of you on the left, the prior paragraph was sarcasm.

What we saw at Abu Ghraib, with forcing inmates to wear panties on their heads or having women rub boobs on them, does not qualify as torture. Being beaten with electrical cords like Mr. Fox was…now that is torture! Did our troops do that to him? Nope…it appears to be the work of Cindy Sheehan’s “freedom fighters” (her words, not mine!).

4. I wonder if we’ll see Amnesty International, the ACLU, CAIR, or any other do-gooder groups out there condemn the treatment of Mr. Fox with the same ferocity they attacked American soldiers for (a) letting Gitmo detainees’ lemon-pepper mahi-mahi fall below room temperature, and (b) not letting them starve to death via the hunger strike (resist the Schiavo analogies, folks, and stay on topic!). What do you think?

Mr. Fox did not deserve to die in this manner. I pray his family finds peace. While his judgment was clearly horrible, his heart appears to have been in the right place. Walk with God, Mr. Fox.

March 11, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Cuba gets an "in your face" lesson on free speech

From Breitbart/AP:

While Cuba played the Netherlands in the World Baseball Classic, a spectator in the stands raised a sign saying: “Down with Fidel,” sparking an international incident that escalated Friday with the velocity of a major league fastball.

The image of the man holding the sign behind home plate was beamed live Thursday night to millions of TV viewers _ including those in Cuba. The top Cuban official at the game at Hiram Bithorn Stadium in San Juan rushed to confront the man.

We can conclude two things for certain: (1) the protestor did not come from Hollywood or an Ivy League college or university; and (2) the Cuban official acted reflexively in a manner consistent with what he would have done in his own country. Fortunately for the protestor, he was not dealt with in a manner that Cuban government officials normally deal with dissidents.

Much to the shock of the Cuban:

Puerto Rican police quickly intervened and took the Cuban official – Angel Iglesias, vice president of Cuba’s National Institute of Sports – to a nearby police station, where they lectured him about free speech.

“We explained to him that here the constitutional right to free expression exists and that it is not a crime,” police Col. Adalberto Mercado was quoted as saying in El Nuevo Dia, a San Juan daily.

Iglesias must have thought he was still in Cuba. Rumor has it that upon hearing the words “free expression”, Iglesias said: “No comprendo.”

The Cuban propraganda fishwrap had this to say about the incident:

The brouhaha gathered steam Friday when Cuba’s Communist Party newspaper, Granma, called the sign-waving “a cowardly incident.”

So the CuComs think that free speech is cowardly, and stifling it is…what? Noble? Patriotic? Brave? Sorry, Grandmama…don’t think so.

Damned shame Alec Baldwin didn’t make good on his promise to leave the country after the 2000 election. Looks like he’d be a great fit in Cuba!

March 10, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

What is a Libertarian?

Considering that some folks seem to question whether I am truly a libertarian or a conservative, I decided that I would actually list some similarities and differences between the two ideologies. While it is true that both have more in common than not, the fact is that there are a few differences.

Also, it is important to acknowledge that not everyone fits perfectly into a pigeonhole when it comes to ideology or party. For example, while the national Republican Party platform is pro-life, you have many pro-choice Republicans. Similarly, while the national Democrat Party is in favor of gun control, you will find a number of Democrats (especially Southern or rural Dems) who are against gun control laws. Some Republicans were for the UAE port deal, and others were not. In other words, parties and ideologies do give an overall indication of a person’s views, but individual positions may actually deviate from time to time.

Full information about the Libertarian Party can be found here. To keep this shorter than it otherwise might be, let’s begin by pointing out where the Libertarian Party differs from conservatives, and whether I agree with the party or not:

1. Immigration. The LP believes as recent liberal visitor honestpartisan does, that we should have open borders where anyone from any country can come and go as he/she sees fit. I disagree with the LP on this!

Such open immigration poses a clear national security threat, and the Constitution says that one of the expressly stated limited roles of the federal government is national defense. It is naive to exclude border control from this category, since security trumps any perceived or real economic benefits. If we’re all incinerated, those cheap mushrooms at the supermarket were hardly worth it, right?

2. Legalization of drugs. The LP believes we should decriminalize drugs in this country. I agree with the LP on this! If someone wants to get stoned and bug Domino’s at 2:00 a.m., it’s no concern to me. If someone gets coked up and kills someone in a coke fit, or if a crack addict steals money to support his/her crack habit, then punish the murder/theft…not the addiction or possession.

We tried outlawing alcohol in this country. Violence escalated, law-abiding citizens were morphed into law-breaking ones, law enforcement was overwhelmed and endangered, etc. It just didn’t work. We are better able to protect people from others than to protect people from themselves.

The war on drugs is a hugely expensive and not very productive waste of money. We could use a fraction of that money (currently wasted in the war on drugs) to give to states so they could set up treatment centers. Treatment costs less than the drug war. Plus, as much as I hate to reference other countries, I would be remiss if I didn’t point them out. The Netherlands legalized dope, usage temporarily spiked (since people were able to be in the open), then usage subsided once everyone got over the initial excitement (plus, the taboo factor was removed).

I’ve never so much as taken a drag off of a joint, and I never will. However, if someone else wants to, I don’t give a rip.

3. Privacy laws. The LP seems to believe there is a constitutional right to privacy. I believe there is a natural right to privacy, but nothing in the Constitution affirms this belief (beyond creative interpretations of the Fourth Amendment).

Conservatives got bent out of shape when the SCOTUS ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that Texas’ state law banning consensual sodomy between adults was unconstitutional. Scalia said that the SCOTUS created a “constitutional right to sodomy”, which it hadn’t. The SCOTUS said that if prior courts held (correctly or not) that there existed a constitutional right to privacy, the Texas law was clearly in violation of that. SCOTUS was correct.

I had a problem with Bush’s wiretapping of suspected terrorists, but I pointed out that prior administrations had argued (and courts had held) that this was allowable under the conditions that Bush did it. Having said that, I believe that Bush’s argument that the FISA law was inadequate for today’s world was probably correct…but the proper remedy was to fix the law. I’m pretty retentive when it comes to the law (as it exists, not as liberals would creatively interpret it).

My experience is that conservatives generally value privacy…unless someone is doing something immoral (see Lawrence v. Texas above). Liberals generally value privacy…unless they think it’s a threat to their big-government worldview (see “prior administrations argued for wiretaps” above, as well as Hillary’s (and others’) desire to have national ID and federal database of our medical records).

4. Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The LP is against both. I disagree with the LP on this! As stated above, national security is a legitimate function of the federal government. The LP seems to think globalization is the way to go with respect to commerce and open borders, but isolation is the way to go with respect to defense. Wrong.

There’s much more to this debate, but I don’t want to put you to sleep any further! The point is that we all have one or more differences in beliefs with our identified parties or ideologies. I identify myself as libertarian (lower-case “l”, thus not the LP), however I clearly have a handful of positions contrary to the LP’s. If you want to interpret that to mean that I am not a “true” libertarian, that’s your choice (hey, is choice great or what? So long as it’s not school choice, right, libs? But I digress.) I assure you I won’t lose sleep over your views of me!

March 10, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Reuters, your Freudian slip is showing!

The al-Reuters “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” news network had a bit of a Freudian slip related to Cheney that I’m just sure isn’t indicative of any of their liberal bias:

March 10, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment