Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Imprisoned al Qaeda camelhumper sues over a Walkman

Or, more accurately, a lack thereof.  Sure, he’ll gladly deal with the Tossed Salad Man, but no Walkman?  Why, that’s tantamount to waterboarding!  From The Smoking Gun:

An al-Qaeda operative serving life in prison for his role in the bombing of American embassies in Africa contends that his rights are being violated by U.S. jailers who have denied him access to Arabic publications and religious books, limited his mail privileges, and no longer allow him to use a Walkman. Mohamed Al-Owhali, 32, claims that his incarceration at the “supermax” federal prison in Florence, Colorado has left him so severely depressed that he stopped eating for months, forcing Bureau of Prisons officials to feed him via a tube placed through his nose. 

He’s lucky it’s a tube in his nose instead of a tubesteak in his falafelhole.  Would anyone be surprised if we found out the ACLU was championing this weirdbeard’s cause?

November 6, 2007 Posted by | ambulance chasers, religion of peace | 7 Comments

Kerry says he can Swift Boat the Swift Boaters

Better late than never, I guess, huh?  Of course, it only took him 3+ years to “discover” the dirt, so it does his failed candidacy little good.  From FNC:

The 63-year-old Democratic senator told The Patriot-Ledger on Tuesday that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group of Navy servicemen who served with Kerry and criticized his record in Vietnam, will be revealed as liars.

“We have put together a documented portfolio that frankly puts their lies in such a total light of absurdity and indecency, that should they ever rear their ugly heads again, we have every single ‘t’ crossed and ‘i’ dotted, and I welcome that in a sense,” Kerry said after addressing Boston’s South Shore Chamber of Commerce. “It’s a shame we weren’t able to produce all that at the time.” 

No word yet on whether or not the dirt on the Swifties would explain Jean-François’ inability to release his military personnel record that he promised to release.

November 6, 2007 Posted by | Kerry | 4 Comments

Gore’s jawdropper: With global “warming”, the MSM is too…balanced?

Beverage warning!  Put down your drink, because this is “shooting through your nose” material right here.  From Newsbusters:

Meredith Vieira interviewed Al as part of the show’s “Green Week” extravaganza. After congratulating him on his Nobel, Vieira invited Gore to engage in some political payback:

MEREDITH VIEIRA: Back in 1992, the first President Bush called you “Ozone Man,” he ridiculed your efforts to bring attention to climate change. He even called you crazy at one point, so is this vindication of a sort for you?

Al took the high road, claiming it wasn’t about him. For that matter, why should it be vindication for a leftist to receive an award from a group of leftists, the same people who gave the peace prize to Yassir Arafat and the fraudulent Rigoberta Menchu?

A bit later, Vieira, to her credit, did challenge Gore.

MEREDITH VIEIRA: You know you shared the prize with scientists from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and one of those scientists, John Christy, wrote an op-ed last Thursday in the Wall Street Journal in which he criticized your dire predictions about the impact of global warming [in a flashback to Gore's disastrous 2000 debate with George Bush, Al could be seen and heard shaking his heard and uttering a loud "tsk"], he wrote: “I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming that we see.” So what do you make of his assessment?

That’s when Al launched into his comedy routine.

AL GORE: Well, he’s an outlier. He no longer belongs to the IPCC, and he is way outside the scientific consensus. But Meredith, part of the challenge the news media has had in covering this story is the old habit of taking the “on the one hand, on the other hand” approach. There are still people who believe that the earth is flat. But when you’re reporting on a story like the one you’re covering today, where you have people all around the world, you don’t take, you don’t search out, for someone who still believes the earth is flat and give them equal time. And the reason the IPCC was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the thousands of scientists who make up that group, have for almost twenty years now created a very strong scientific consensus, that is as strong a consensus as you’ll ever see in science, that the climate crisis is real, human beings are responsible for it, the results will be very bad for the United States and for the entire world community, all human beings, unless we do something about it. And there is still time to solve it.

Of course Al didn’t mention that the IIPC’s vaunted consensus is for a sea-level increase of about 7-24 inches over the century, not the scare-mongering 20 feet that Gore projects. “Inconvenient Truth” would have been a lot less dramatic if Gore didn’t use that alarmist assumption, permitting him to show much of Manhattan under water.

But I digress. Gore thinks the media’s coverage has been too balanced, that they’re giving too much time to people who don’t buy into his sky-is-falling view of the world? You’re killing me, Al. Let’start with NBC, the network where he was appearing, which is celebrating “Green Week,” devoting 150 hours to pushing his environmentalist agenda on every one of its programs, from news to entertainment,even to football. ABC is no better. GMA weatherman Sam Champion is nothing less than a global-warming alarmist, and when Gore appeared on the show not long ago host Diane Sawyer bemoaned the fate of polar bears and sighed whether it was too late to save the world. …

So the Goron thinks the MSM is too “balanced” with regards to global “warming”, does he?  I suppose NBC’s “green week” that pervades anything from Heroes to football constitutes “balance” in his eyes?

Also, let that sink in for a moment: even if we accept his patently ludicrous claims that the MSM is even-handed when it comes to reporting on global “warming”, he thinks that’s a horrible thing.  See, when you have an ever-growing list of scientists who use actual scientific data based on real (and, unlike the “hockey stick”, unflawed) models to reject the “man-made catastrophe” junk science that has enriched the Goron, then Albert thinks these people are akin to Flat Earth nuts.  By all means, let’s deprive real scientists a forum to get their competing views out there!  Ironically, these jerks want a return to the so-called “Fairness Doctrine”!

That’s a tactic the left loves: stick their clammy fingers in their crusty ears and repeatedly scream “consensus” at the top of their lungs (ignoring the obvious that there is no such consensus) to shout out genuine scientific disagreement.

November 6, 2007 Posted by | environuts, global warming, Gore, media bias | 2 Comments

Amnesty…or intifada!

A writer for the Miami Herald penned thusly:

The rapid escalation of the U.S. anti-immigration hysteria — fueled by ratings-hungry cable-television hotheads and leading Republican presidential hopefuls — is a dangerous trend: It may lead to a Hispanic intifada that may rock this nation in the not-so-distant future.

Remember the Palestinian intifada of the early 1990s, when thousands of frustrated young Palestinians took to the streets and threw stones at Israeli troops? Remember the French intifada of the summer of 2005, in which disenfranchised Muslim youths burned cars and stores in the suburbs of Paris?

If we are not careful, we may see something similar coming from the estimated 13 million undocumented immigrants (illegal aliens – Ed.) in the United States, most of them Hispanic, who are increasingly vilified in the media, forced further into the underground by spineless politicians and not given any chance to legalize their status by a pusillanimous U.S. Congress.

Translation: amnesty now, or we’ll get all Palestinian on your #ss.

Intifada: just another job that Americans won’t do.

November 6, 2007 Posted by | illegal immigration | 3 Comments

Poll: Americans oppose drivers licenses for criminal aliens

Go figure, huh?  From the Washington Times:

Voters oppose driver’s licenses for illegal aliens by a nearly five-to-one margin, a new Fox 5/Washington Times/Rasmussen Reports poll finds.

As immigration politics explode into the presidential race, polls show Americans are taking a hard line on benefits for illegal aliens, including opposing driver’s licenses and such taxpayer-funded benefits as scholarships at state colleges for illegal-alien students.

 
The new poll found 77 percent of the adults surveyed opposed making driver’s licenses available to illegal aliens, while just 16 percent supported the idea.

 
Licenses fared poorly across party lines, including near-blanket opposition among self-identified Republicans, at 88 percent. Among independents and Democrats, it was still overwhelmingly unpopular, drawing 75 percent and 68 percent opposition, respectively.

 
New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer in September proposed adding New York to the list of seven states that offer licenses to illegal aliens, and the issue has refused to die down since.

 
Most Democratic presidential candidates have embraced the policy, including front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, arguing it’s a matter of road safety and a valid response to the federal government’s failure to give a path to citizenship to illegal aliens. 

I guess that’s why Shrillary opposes the policy that she supports, right?

November 6, 2007 Posted by | Hillary, illegal immigration, polls | 2 Comments

Kos kooks “panic” at thought of Iraq success

But hey…they “support the troops”, right?  From Hot Air:

According to a Kos Kid, yes. (h/t Commissar)

As U.S. casualties have continued to drop, many people on the anti-Bush side of the aisle have begun to quietly panic in recent days over this question: “Could George W. Bush and Frederick Kagan have possibly been right about the surge?”

The Kossack goes on to poo-poo any thought that the surge or Gen. Petraeus, pardon me, “Betray Us,” has come with a counterinsurgency strategy that’s paying off. And the Kossack entirely ignores the fact that absent US troops, the sheiks who have decided to take on and fight al Qaeda would have had no means at hand to do so. The Anbar Awakening, which the left still pretends isn’t happening at all, couldn’t have spread all across Iraq without US troops provinding the backbone of the forces that are defeating al Qaeda.

The panicked Kossack pins the entire war, success or failure, on what Moqtada al-Sadr does or doesn’t do. Not US action or politics. Not even the actions of al Qaeda or the Iranians or the Iraqi government. Just the mullah Atari.

When al-Sadr lays down his arms, there will be relative peace. When he takes them up, Americans will die in dozens.

Quiet panic at the thought that the US might win a war. Reality-based thinking in action, friends. 

These are the vermin that own the Democrat Party.  When you’re this invested in defeat, you’ll do anything to lose.

November 6, 2007 Posted by | defeatism, Iraq, moonbats | 1 Comment

“Big Oil” not seeing the same profits as before

As all of you have noticed, the price of gas at the pump has spiked way up.  Normally, this time of year sees a decrease in gas prices.  However, this trend is unusual in a big way: it’s not being driven by the normal supply-and-demand mechanism that usually drives gas prices.

Here’s an article that shows where the oil companies aren’t the beneficiaries of the current $100-a-barrel oil prices we see today.  In fact, things are about to head south for the oil companies (much to the delight of the class warfare types).  No, we can’t blame today’s gas prices on “Big Oil” at all.  The blame instead lies on big money investors (i.e. speculators), many of whom lost their #sses in real estate and are now trying to make up their losses at our expense.

Here’s the low-down:

Crude oil futures prices per barrel have been zooming to all-time highs on the New York Mercantile Exchange, continuing a steep upward trend. Billionaire Texas energy investor Boone Pickens was right in his prediction that prices would top $100 per barrel.
…
But it’s increasingly obvious that oil prices are being pushed into the stratosphere by speculators in a lightly regulated global trading market that has grown by leaps and bounds. Traditional supply-and-demand factors can’t explain the price jump. There’s no shortage of oil or gasoline, nor major supply disruptions. World oil demand has stabilized at about 85 million barrels a day.

A weak dollar has made purchases of oil on the futures market look increasingly attractive to foreign investors. But that can’t account for $90 oil.

A favorite whipping boy — “Middle Eastern tensions” — again is being trotted out to explain the soaring prices. But even if a hot spot explodes, the odds are still against a major, sustained curtailment of global oil supplies.

Fadel Gheit, a respected energy analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. in New York, predominantly blames speculators. “There is absolutely no shortage of oil,” he says. “I’m absolutely convinced that oil prices shouldn’t be a dime above $55 a barrel.”

Oil speculators include “the largest financial institutions in the world,” he said. “I call it the world’s largest gambling hall. … It’s open 24/7. … Unfortunately, it’s totally unregulated. …This is like a highway with no cops and no speed limit, and everybody’s going 120 mph.”

Speculators can trade from anywhere via their BlackBerrys and buy oil on the margins by putting up only a small fraction of the price of a barrel, Gheit said. Oil prices are escalated by a “fear premium,” he acknowledges — trepidation that events such as a new Mideastern conflict will escalate prices.

Gheit said he is “making a bet that the U.S. will have airstrikes in Iran in the next two to four months,” but he notes that global oil supplies haven’t been seriously curtailed even by the prolonged war in Iraq.
…
Oil prices eventually will fall considerably, as supply-and-demand fundamentals prevail over market speculation. Some traders undoubtedly will take a financial bath. In the near term, however, gas-guzzling U.S. motorists will be taking it in the shorts. 

Those of you who know me know that I am a big defender of capitalism and free markets.  However, I do not see how these speculators add any value whatsoever to the market.  All they’re doing is disrupting the normal supply-and-demand mechanisms that have worked since the beginning of time by artificially inflating the cost of gas in order to get rich.  Hey, I don’t begrudge them for getting rich, and I can respect that they’re doing it in a way that’s perfectly legal.  As Gordon Gecko said, “Greed is good.”  By and large, I agree.

But eventually, their greed is going to kill them in the same manner that it killed those who got too greedy in the real estate market (and those whose common sense went on hiatus during the tech stock boom of the late 1990′s).  I won’t be weeping for them.

November 6, 2007 Posted by | economic ignorance, oil | 1 Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers