Wednesday, March 31, 2004

If it ain't broke...

From comes this Hilarious Correction of the Day, from The Australian newspaper.
    A story headlined 'Syria seeks our help to woo US' in Saturday's Weekend Australian misquoted National Party senator Sandy Macdonald. The quote stated: "Syria is a country that has been a bastard state for nearly 40 years" but should have read "Syria is a country that has been a Baathist state for nearly 40 years." The Australian regrets any embarrassment caused by the error.
Still trying to figure out what was wrong with the original. Thanks to Free Will for the heads-up on this one. Nice.

Stupid Dead Kids

I don't want to come across as cold and uncaring here (oops, too late maybe), but what the hell is wrong with kids? Are we breeding a generation of extremely slow learners? How much money has been wasted spent on programs designed to educate children about the dangers of drinking and driving? Stories like this are all too familiar, showing up in the pages of newspapers across the country.

"The profound anguish of three grieving families filled a Dedham courtroom yesterday as a 20-year-old Halifax man was led off to jail after pleading guilty to driving drunk and killing two of his best buddies."

"Police estimated Scanlon was driving 105 mph in a 1993 Grand Cherokee when he crashed on northbound Interstate 95 in Foxboro after he and friends spent several hours drinking in Rhode Island bars in celebration of Shaughnessy's 20th birthday."

Throw the book at this kid...literally, preferably a large book. Then lock him up for 10 years. If I recall correctly, the 20's were some pretty damn good years of my life. Not a decade in which I would have enjoyed being incarcerated.

Telling kids not to drink and drive is like telling Al Qaeda to be nice. It doesn't work. Here's what we do: First DUI offense (as long as there's no fatalities involved), the judge sentences the offender to 30 years. Then after the individual shits himself in the courtroom, the judge can inform him that all but 30 days are to be suspended, to be served the next time the guy gets so much as a speeding ticket.

You think anyone's gonna do 30 days and say, "You know what I want? I want to do that again, but this time, 365 times as long. That'd be pissah."?

Remember the MIT student who died after drinking a bottle of Captain Morgan's? His parents were shocked something like that could happen, because "he NEVER drank". There you go. Whether the "evil" you want to protect your children from is alcohol, firearms, or drugs, you aren't doing your kids any favors by denying their existence. Real education is the first step toward teaching personal responsibility. There isn't a politician anywhere who can teach your kids right from wrong. That job is the sole responsibility of the parents.

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

File Under "WTF"

I'd like to nominate for the "Best News Headlines" award.
    NEW YORK -- A Brooklyn music teacher was arrested after he allegedly hung a 5-year-old student by his belt loop in a classroom closet, police said.

    Jason Schoenberger, 24, was apparently playing a practical joke on another teacher at P.S. 279 in the Canarsie section when he hung the boy, police said.
Aahhh, the old hang-a-five-year-old-child-in-the-closet gag. You can't make this stuff up.

Shit Flows Down(Beacon)hill

Before anyone gets whipped into a frenzy over this, myself included, this bill hasn't moved an inch and I wouldn't bet my house on its passage, even in Massachusetts. State Representative John Fresolo of Worcester is the sponsor of House Bill No. 2207. With this piece of legislation, Mr. Fresolo is looking to prohibit the possession of ammunition "which is capable of piercing or penetrating armor or bullet proof vests".

Now by definition, there is no such ammunition capable of piercing a bulletproof vest. That's what bulletproof means. Unless he's addressing military ordnance here, this is a ridiculous piece of legislation. If, on the other hand, this is to include bullet-resistant Kevlar vests that police officers throughout the state wear on a regular basis, then Mr. Fresolo will have been successful in banning all centerfire hunting rifles, the kind that even John Kerry has allegedly sworn to protect. This is nothing more than another step on the path toward total disarmament of the people. What a crime-free utopia we'd live in then - not.

The next argument will be to ban all handguns of a caliber larger than the smallest "armor-piercing" rifles. After all, bigger bullets are meaner, right? Then they'll rally around the statistic that an overwhelming number of gun-related crimes involves smaller caliber pistols, there go your .22 and .25 caliber firearms. I mean who could possibly oppose outlawing weapons that are actually used by thousands of criminals (never mind that they're currently calling assault weapons the "weapon of choice" for Joe Crackhead, they're counting on the public's lack of awareness to aid in the execution of their grand scheme)?

Don't buy this "I support sportsmen's rights" crap for one second. It seems Mr. Fresolo's been spending too much time listening to the likes of our Senior Swimmer Senator and the Chivas fumes might be affecting his judgment. I now defer to Kevin at Smallest Minority with this thorough dissection of Kennedy's recent display of lunacy from the floor of the Senate.


UPDATE: I have e-mailed this legislator for an explanation as to the exact scope and intent of this bill. Will post a reply if I receive one.

Yankees in last place!!!


Senate Bill No. 1005 (update)

To follow up this earlier POST on Massachusetts Senate Bill No. 1005 (An act relative to the commitment of sexually dangerous persons), I now have the names of the nine state representatives who voted against this measure. It should be noted that there was a proposed amendment to this bill that was rejected by a vote of 21-133. I do not have the roll call vote for that amendment, but it seems that the nine "nay" votes were among the supporters of that amendment.

I would be very curious to learn (a) what was the content of that amendment, and (b) what was the rationale of these nine legislators who voted against passage of the final bill. I will hold off any vitriolic comments toward these individuals until the facts are in.More later.

Monday, March 29, 2004

Thanks Ms. Kaprielian, but no thanks.

Here is a piece of proposed gun control legislation I pray never sees the light of day.

Massachusetts House Bill No. 2509: An Act Requiring all Handguns to Be Insured - sponsored by Ms. Kaprielian of Watertown, petition of Rachel Kaprielian, David Paul Linsky and Patricia D. Jehlen.

Here's the meat of it:

No license to carry shall be issued pursuant to this section unless and until the applicant for the license or for the renewal of an existing license presents to the licensing authority a complete list of every handgun owned by the applicant along with a certificate of insurance verifying that the applicant has a valid insurance policy insuring against any harm or damage that might arise out of the use of each weapon on said list. The applicant shall swear under the penalties of perjury that said list is a complete list of all handguns owned by the applicant. The insurance policy shall be in an amount of at least $250,000 and shall list the specific weapons covered by the policy.

Who voted these idiots into office? If this becomes law, and you're a collector of firearms, you better have disposable income coming out your ears. What would the annual premium be for $250,000 insurance policies for, say, 50 handguns? These politicians, who are doing this only for the children you understand, know too well that banning handguns will never happen. This is just another way to regulate them out of the state. Force the people to pay out the nose to comply, sell their guns, or become criminals for refusing to go along with such a pea-brained notion (my apologies to peas, no harm intended).

Question: How many crack dealers on their way to cap a rival gang-banger are gonna change plans because they forgot to get insurance for their handgun?

DEAD HORSE BEATING ALERT: NONE, YOU MORONS! Criminals don't obey laws - it's written into their job description. Why is this impossible for these liberal, blithering shit-for-brains stewards of the vox populi to understand?

Try enacting legislation that would target the criminal element. That would be a refreshing change, but I'm not holding my breath.

And in this corner...

The third round of debate on the gay marriage issue in Massachusetts is underway in the State House today. As a follow-up to this previous post on the subject, let me re-iterate that I do support the rights of gays to marry, given the same restrictions and limitations currently placed on heterosexual couples. What I do not support are many of the actions being taken nationwide by some of the more radical pro-gay marriage politicians, legislators, and judges.

And to anyone who might wish to label me a Neocon-Bush-Apologist based on my previous posts denouncing Kerry as a pathetic, liberal panty-waist, pay attention.

I whole-heartedly disagree with amending the constitution (state or U.S.) to define marriage based on anyone's religious views. Yes, I disagree with my president, oh, the horror. This country was founded on the principle that no one, including the State, has the right to impose their religious principles on others. The idea of laws based on Judeo-Christian principles (thou shalt not steal, murder, etc.) is significantly different than the idea of laws that might be enacted based on one specific religious tenet or another.

The question I have for those vehemently opposed to gay marriage due to its contradiction with one's religious views is this: How would allowing a gay couple making a commitment to one another, in the form of a civil marriage, weaken the sworn covenant of Holy matrimony that you have created between you, your spouse, and your God? If you feel your marriage would be weakened by this being allowed, let me give you a clue. It's already pretty weak.

If you are against homosexuality based on your interpretations of the teachings of the Holy Bible, it is your inalienable right to hold those beliefs, and I will defend your right to your beliefs. I will also defend your freedom to worship whichever God you please, and to join whichever church you feel shares your views. Unlike many people we read about in the news every day, I don't necessarily label all those who are against gay marriage as hate-filled bigots. We are a diverse nation, and yes, diversity means living in the same communities as those who do not share your core beliefs.

Well, that's all for now.

Understatement of the Year

From the Boston Herald:
    A Lowell woman and her grown son were enjoying the morning on their Beacon Street deck yesterday when they discovered a dead man in the buff under the stairs, the woman said.
The money quote:
    "You could tell there was something drastically wrong."
Ya think?


Here's a letter from a mildly retarded enlightened reader of the Boston Sunday Globe. In this drivel-laden whine, Tom Larkin of Bedford, MA espouses the genius of Richard cha-CHING Clarke and lays out the "facts" as they exist in his tiny head.
    THE WAR in Iraq is not a war on terrorism. It is a waste of resources. As Richard Clarke makes clear in his book, "Against All Enemies," the Bush administration does not understand terrorism ("It's hard to say war wasn't worth it," op ed, March 23). The facts are:
Are you sitting down?
    Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the United States. The enemy is religious terrorism.
Another confirmed case of Halliburton Ernie Syndrome (see post below). Wait, let me try...IMMINENT IMMINENT IMMINENT...NOW did Bush say it?
    Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction and no means to apply them. The United Nations was effectively monitoring Iraq's threat to the world.
Wow! Holy MTV Attention Span, Batman! This dipshit said THREE sentences ago that Hussein was not a threat to the US, now he's a threat to the world - as if somehow that's a better situation. The only thing the UN was doing effectively was siphoning funds from the Hussein regime through their "sanctions" and aiding and abetting the systematic torture and bodily mutilation policies of that nice man, who by the way HAD large quantites of WMD's as well-documented by the UN years ago. Obviously they just turned into pixie dust and vanished.
    Saddam was a secular tyrant with no ties to Al Qaeda or any other religious terrorist group. Iraq had its own problems with religious extremists, as does almost every nation state.
Never mind that immediately following the FIRST Al-Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center, Saddam did everything short of laying a mint on the pillow for Abdul Rahman Yasin, one of the prime suspects behind the attack. And try telling the relatives of the innocent people blown up in Israel by suicide bombers funded directly by Saddam Hussein, that he had NO ties to "any other religious terrorist group". Let me guess, you think suicide bombers killing babies are "militants" or maybe "freedom fighters". And people say our publis schools aren't failing us. I bet they churned out this knuckle-shuffler.
    Those who study religious terrorism's cosmic, irrational world view would counsel against military attacks on Islamic nations because religious terrorism is not contained within national borders.
No, you fuckwit. Those who are profiting from terrorist-supporting Islamic nations counsel against military attacks. And "not contained within national borders"? Where the fuck do you think these people come from, a giant floating raft in the middle of the ocean? outer space maybe?
    Bush's preemptive, almost unilateral, invasion of Iraq fueled Islamic terrorist groups worldwide without addressing their threat.
ALMOST unilateral? That's quite impressive for a whining leftoid to actually admit that Operation Iraqi Freedom was a multi-national effort. Now explain how Bush's action fueled Islamic terrorists. What, has their mantra suddenly changed from "Death to America!" to "Death to America...twice!"
    The United States squandered international goodwill after 9/11, and the opportunity to build international collaboration against the civilized world's common enemy -- religious terrorism.
Yeah, shame on us for pissing off the countries that support the crushing of freedom. We're, like, mean and stuff.
    To paraphrase Pogo, on the battlefield of religious terrorism, we are defeating ourselves.
To paraphrase myself, you're a poorly-educated, leftist idiot. You wouldn't recognize reality if it smacked you in the head with a 2-by-4.

Saturday, March 27, 2004

Required Reading

Here's the latest, albeit a bit lengthy, offering by David Horowitz, "How the Left Undermined America's Security Before 9/11". Read it. Then read it again.

Friday, March 26, 2004

Too Much Time on Their hands

Citizens of Massachusetts, your tax dollars hard at work. I came across this nonsense while trying to find the vote roll call of Senate Bill 1005 (see post below). House Bill No. 144 just made it to the House Rules Committee. Too bad I missed the public hearing on this one.

    HOUSE, No. 144

    By Mr. Travis of Rehoboth, petition of Philip Travis relative to the licensing of fortune tellers. Government Regulations.


    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

    Section 185I of chapter 140 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out the second sentence.
Here's the kind of dire social injustice occupying our elected representatives' time these days.

    Chapter 140: Section 185I Fortune tellers; license (Full Text Here)

    "Section 185I. No person shall tell fortunes for money unless a license therefor has been issued by the local licensing authority. Said license shall be granted only to applicants who have resided continuously in the city or town in which the license is sought for at least twelve months immediately preceding the date of the application. No such license... "
Thank God this issue has finally been addressed! No longer will the nomadic fortune tellers of Massachusetts suffer this horrific discrimination.

But it's not about revenue, you understand. Our legislators are genuinely looking out for us, making sure that when we get our fortunes told, we go to a state-licensed fortune teller. Here's a thought. Suppose an unlicensed fortune teller is way off in his or her prognostication, does that still warrant a fine being issued? This bill doesn't address what happens if someone feeds you a line of total horseshit for money. In the name of justice, it's a damn good thing there's still time to get this thing amended. And these people want to vote themselves a raise? Christ.

Thursday, March 25, 2004

Halliburton Ernie Syndrome

Any of these sound familiar?

"Bush lied!"
"Bush was AWOL!"
"No blood for oil!"
"Bush is Hitler!"
"Iraq is a quagmire!"

These are just a few of the examples of the latest disease to spread across the nation: "Halliburton Ernie Syndrome". The primary symptom is the inability to refrain from repeating the same tired, boring drivel with hope, that over the passage of time, it will become fact.

Scientists named this affliction after the episode of Sesame Street where Bert returns to the apartment to find that Ernie has eaten one of his cookies. He tells Ernie he distinctly remembers having five cookies on his plate before he left, and when he came back, there were only four. Ernie then spends the next few minutes repeatedly re-arranging the cookies on the plate in varying configurations, and re-counting them trying to come up with five.

Sadly, there is no known cure for H.E.S. It has been shown in clinical trials that putting down the Michael Moore books and abstaining from watching the Today Show can result in a lessening of the symptoms, but no conclusions as to the effectiveness of this study have been made.

Words of Advice

Don't bring a paintball gun to a sledgehammer fight.

Finally the robber gave up and started walking out. He hadn't noticed that a customer had slipped out the back door and was waiting outside for him.

"He already had tape on his license plate," J.R. Croy told the TV station. "The door was open and the van was running. He was on his way out."

Croy bashed the robber in the head with a 2-pound sledgehammer. Four times.

Absolutely priceless.

Slappin' to the Oldies

This is just silly.
    "Exercise guru Richard Simmons allegedly slapped a man who made a sarcastic remark about one of his videos, police said."
Oh, to have been there to see that.

MA Senate Bill No. 1005

From the Boston Herald:
    "Lawmakers cracked down on sex offenders yesterday, expanding the pool of crimes that allow for lifetime lockup and creating new penalties for predators who fail to sign up as sex offenders."
This is good news for the people of Massachusetts and is a shining example of local politicians setting aside their partisan ways to get things done - although, the bill (Senate Bill No. 1005) had been mired in the House Rules Committee since last November (better late then never I guess). What bothers me is that of the 153 State Representatives who cast votes for this bill, NINE voted "no".

On The Blute and Scotto Show on WRKO (680 AM) this morning, Representatives Lida Harkins (D) and Scott Brown (R) discussed this bill and what it means for the people of Massachusetts. Rep. Harkins explained that some of the "no" votes came from Representatives who had their proposed amendments voted down prior to the final vote on the bill. I'm trying to get more information on these proposed amendments, but it sounds suspiciously like petty politics at its finest.

When I get the roll call votes for this bill, the names of these nine individuals, as well as their addresses, e-mails, and phone numbers will be posted here.

Wednesday, March 24, 2004

This Dick Gets It

Now, here's a Dick who's seen the light. In his New York Post opinion column, Dick Morris paints a picture which many on the left side of the aisle can't be too pleased with. A few bits below:
    "The polls are starting to reflect the effectiveness of Bush's ads, which depict Kerry explaining his ultra-liberal record to the voters. This Democrat, who escaped scrutiny by posing as the un-Dean in the primary, is now being revealed as the leftist he is."

    "The fact is that Massachusetts liberal Democrats don't spend a lot of time learning how to appeal to middle America."

    "Bush needs to keep up the pressure and watch Kerry's ratings drop. In a few months, we may be wondering why the conventional wisdom ever thought this race would be so close."
I have to partially disagree with the last quote above. I think it is going to be a very close Massachusetts.

Crappy 80's Song of the Week

And definitely on my short list of the worst songs of all time:

"We Built This City" by Starship

Give it up, Dick.

This has been blogged to death (and then some), but I'm gonna get my licks in nonetheless. Anyone who thinks Richard Clarke's recent book is anything more than partisan, Bush-bashing, bickering, bullshit needs a smack in the head serious reality check. To somehow say that Bush should have done in less than eight months everything that Clinton failed to do in eight years is simply asinine.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the networks to get this story out, but Fox News has the transcript from a briefing with Richard Clarke and a handful of reporters from 2002, where Clarke comes right out and says that the Bush administration's efforts in fighting Al Qaeda in the spring of 2001 were significantly greater than the plan in place at the end of the Clinton presidency.

See Glenn Reynolds' take on this at Instapundit. Clarke might just be the biggest non-news news story of the year.

UPDATE: Here's the latest from the Associated Press on Clarke's testimony to the 9/11 panel today. I think the opening paragraph pretty much sums up Clarke's credibility.
    The government's former top counterterrorism adviser testified Wednesday that the Clinton administration had ''no higher priority'' than combatting terrorists while the Bush administration made it ''an important issue but not an urgent issue.''

Tuesday, March 23, 2004

More Local Numbnuts

Found this news item quite entertaining. What the hell is wrong with kids today? Are they working too closely with industrial shoe adhesive in their art classes or something?
    "Two Westboro High School seniors face charges for making hundreds of dollars worth of phony money on a home computer and passing the counterfeit bills at a local Target and Dunkin' Donuts, police said last night."
"Russ, dude, check this out!"
"Kyle dude...that's pissah! Let's take 'em to Tahget!"

Monday, March 22, 2004

Newton's Law

OK, class, repeat after me. Arresting people for violent crimes reduces the number of violent criminals on the street, resulting in a lower crime rate. Got it? Good. Seems that Newton Police Chief, Jose Cordero, has taken this novel approach to crime-fighting.

Cordero said the increase in arrests is due to a change in philosophy. Since he began as chief in February 2002, Cordero has enforced mandatory arrests on domestic assault suspects as well as those accused of attacking others with dangerous weapons.

So, what exactly was their policy prior to February of 2002?

More MA Gun Control Success

Yes, yet another gun control success story in the utopian paradise of Massachusetts. During a confrontation following a fender-bender on the streets of New Bedford...
    "Garcia, who police said is suspected of being an illegal alien, allegedly pulled out a handgun and shot Andrade once in the chest."

    "Garcia is charged with attempted murder and illegal possession of a firearm."
AGAIN...I'm stunned. Doesn't this nice young man realize it's against the law to carry a firearm without a permit?

There isn't a piece of gun-control legislation ANYWHERE that would have prevented this jackass from obtaining, carrying, and using a firearm in the commission of a crime. Did this guy take a firearms safety course? Did he plunk down $100 for a permit application, and submit his fingerprints to the State Police? Did he retain a spent shell casing and ensure that one was forwarded to the state for ballistic fingerprinting purposes? Was the gun he used on AG Tom Reilly's list of handguns approved for sale in Massachusetts? Did he keep it locked in a pistol safe in his place of residence?

Criminals don't obey laws! Hence, the meaning of the word "criminal". Hello??? Anyone home???

Apologies to the dead horse for this beating.

Update: also from the Boston Herald, comes this gem.

Why is reality so difficult to grasp for those holding the chains of power on Beacon Hill? Thanks to our leaders' efforts in passing gun control laws making it ridiculously difficult to obtain a permit to carry a firearm for personal protection, we now live in an environment where this can happen. Of course, the policy accepted by most of these stores is give the bad guy whatever he wants (not the two in the hat that he needs).
    "A man wearing sunglasses and a baseball hat swiped $1,600 from a Waltham Shaw's Supermarket yesterday after announcing he had a gun, police said."

    "The clerk complied and the man walked out of the store in an unknown direction, police said."
"Hi, I have a gun. Give me all your money"

"OK. Have a nice day."

Woo-hoo! Free money, everyone!

Sunday, March 21, 2004

THIS rules!

OK, now THIS is cool. is a website that takes information on individuals' contributions to presidential campaigns and out in a searchable database. Try the "neighbors" feature to see who on your street has given money to which campaign, and how much.

Of course, our friends at Democratic Underground (I won't tarnish my blog with an actual link) are having a hissy fit over the dissemination of public information. Would you like some cheese with that whine? Check out the round-up of comments over at FREE WILL. Thanks, Aaron for posting those. I'd still be cleaning the vomit out of my keyboard if I had tried to read that stuff.

Saturday, March 20, 2004

"Parents of the Year" Nominees

From this delightful piece in the Boston Herald:

    "A New Hampshire couple were locked up yesterday for allegedly driving around Lawrence and buying heroin while their 5-year-old daughter was in their pickup truck with them."

Friday, March 19, 2004

More Gun Control Garbage

Here's what passes for "sensible" gun laws in the enlightened Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and in the City of Boston in particular.

First, Massachusetts is not a "shall-issue" state. This means that even if you meet all the "normal" requirements for obtaining a gun permit, you have absolutely no right to one unless the Chief of Police in the town you live in feels like issuing it. He or she can deny your application for ANY reason he or she deems appropriate. Also, as part of the application process, an applicant must state a specific need or reason for asking the state's permission to carry a gun in Massachusetts. Seems to me that by the time you REALLY need a gun, the waiting time for the processing of your application will of little to no concern to the person seeking to do you harm with his no-permit-required illegal firearm. It's like trying to put on your seatbelt on as the paramedics are trying to extricate your mangled body from the wreckage.

Let's have a look at what one must do to obtain a License to Carry in the City of Boston. Thanks to our mayor and our local liberal politicians, a series of regulations are in place to protect the rights of criminals to prey on unarmed civilians.

First, there's the mandatory firearms safety class ($99 to $250) - here endeth anything that a rational person would describe as "common sense". Next, we have a "mandatory" membership in a firearms club ($200-$300). Note that the current laws do not require this, but allow local officials to impose any restrictions they deem appropriate. And third, an application fee for a License to Carry ($100). So, we're $400 (minimum) into the process, and we're not done yet. Next, the applicant must go to the police firing range at Moon Island and demonstrate proficiency with a .38 revolver on targets at 7-yards (shooting one-handed) and 15-yards. Think you might want to practice a little before taking this test? Better hope that local firearms club you just signed up with will rent handguns to its members for use on their range. And ammo ain't free either.

The city requires you to be proficient with a handgun you are prohibited from even touching in the first place. Further, a License to Carry issued in a western Massachusetts town by a police chief, who feels the right to bear arms actually means something, is 100% valid within the City of Boston. AND, a resident of another state can apply for a non-resident LTC with very few cumbersome restrictions. Only the people who actually LIVE here in Boston and enjoy the higher tax rates are affected by these "common sense" regulations.

Again, these laws do not apply to the criminal element. They remain unfettered in their ability to purchase any firearm they can get their hands on.

These restrictions come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the actions of the gun control lobby for any amount of time. If you can't ban the guns, install a series of bureaucratic and financial hurdles to discourage, if not outright, prohibit the citizens from obtaining a firearm to defend themselves and their families. And whom do these laws affect the most? Poor, inner-city residents, who have the most urgent need to protect themselves from violent crime, and the fewest resources available to fight the bureaucracy that stands between them and their constitutional rights. But the liberal democrats that run this town seem to have no concern for their safety. If you're rich, white, and politically connected, feel free to go about your business, exercising ALL your rights. The rest of you...get in line.

I have written my State Rep and Senator on these issues. No reply yet. I'm stunned.

Thursday, March 18, 2004

You Get What You Pay For

In this piece from Dan Kennedy in the Boston Phoenix, Boston's free, blatantly anti-Bush, weekly paper that meets ALL your needs, from leftist whining to bondage gear, Kennedy writes about an encounter with David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush. The article addresses several points, including the "Who would Bin Laden vote for?" issue and media ethics in a time of war.

To his credit, Kennedy does recognize that the media tend to paint an "unduly negative picture" of what's happening in Iraq today, but he can't help but immediately follow that up with this remark:
    "But again, Frum is skimming the surface and eliding the more basic questions - the most crucial of which is why we went to war at a time when there were UN weapons inspectors in Iraq, no-fly zones over much of the country, and economic sanctions in place."
I couldn't agree more. These are very crucial questions which need to be addressed (yawn...again).

1. True, there were UN weapons inspectors in Iraq, BUT they never received the full cooperation of the Hussein regime they were entitled to under the numerous UN resolutions passed since the liberation of Kuwait. Further, over the years, the role of the inspectors had somehow changed to that of WMD seekers, expected to scour every square inch of the Iraqi landscape in an effort to locate these weapons, the existence of which had been thoroughly documented by the UN itself. The original role of the inspectors was to oversee and/or verify the destruction of the WMD's and have this information given to them by the Hussein regime.

2. True, there were no-fly zones over much of the country, BUT coalition aircraft were routinely fired upon by the Iraqi military during routing patrol of these no-fly zones. What's that? Another UN resolution violation by Mr. Rational, Saddam Hussein? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

3. True, there were economic sanctions in place, BUT can anyone demonstrate that they did anything to prevent Saddam Hussein from amassing great personal wealth at the expense of the Iraqi people who were regularly denied adequate food, water, and health care? Following the removal of Hussein from power, it was revealed that the Saddam loyalist forces had warehouses packed to the gills with food and supplies intended for distribution to the Iraqi people via the UN Oil for Food Program.

I don't think Frum was eliding these questions. They had been asked and answered countless times in the past. Many people on the left today, including Mr. Kennedy, still refuse to accept the answers, yet continue to ask the questions as though, somehow, the facts will change with the passage of time.

It's like when Ernie was trying to convince Bert he hadn't eaten one of his cookies by re-arranging and re-counting the remaining three cookies several times, trying to come up with four.

Local Loozahs

From the Boston Herald comes this story of a Tewksbury man proclaiming his innocence in the murder of his pregnant ex-girlfriend 11 years ago.

OK, guilty or not, if you're a suspect in the beating death of an ex-girlfriend who had a restraining order issued against you, would your defense include this brilliant statement?

    "Every girl I've gone out with has put a restraining order against me," said the chain-smoking Stanichuk, who denied beating Bates.
Well spoken, sir.

More Kerry Krap

I found on PBS' website, this TIMELINE of events leading up to the first Gulf War - highlights below. Senator John Kerry voted against authorizing the use of force in the Persian Gulf (S.J. Res. 2, Roll Call Vote #2: Passed 52-47: R 42-2; D 10-45, January 12, 1991). Kerry has stated he voted against the use of force, in order to allow more time for economic sanctions to force the ouster of Hussein from Kuwait.

He is now speaking out against President Bush's decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein, despite having voted FOR the resolution authorizing the use of force. I'm certain the fact that that vote took place right before mid-term elections had NOTHING to do with it. He says the President failed to build an international coalition, as if one more country (France) on the list would have made everything OK.

Let's see what the international community thought of Hussein's annexation of Kuwait back in August of 1990.

    August 2: Iraq invades Kuwait and seizes Kuwaiti oil fields. Kuwait's emir flees. Iraq masses troops along the Saudi border. U.N. condemns Iraq's invasion and demands withdrawal.

    August 6: U.N. imposes trade embargo on Iraq.

    August 7: Saudi Arabia requests U.S. troops to defend against possible Iraqi attack.

    August 9: First U.S. military forces arrive in Saudi Arabia. U.N. declares Iraqi annexation of Kuwait void.

    September 14-15: United Kingdom and France announce deployment of 10,000 troops to Gulf.

    December 17: U.N. sets deadline for Iraqi withdrawal on January 15, 1991. Hussein rejects all U.N. resolutions.

    January 9: Talks between U.S. Secretary of State Baker and Iraqi Foreign Minister Aziz end in stalemate.

    January 12: Congress grants President Bush authority to wage war.

So, Saddam's forces invade a sovereign (US ally) nation. This action is condemned by the UN. Saudi Arabia requests protection from the US. The UN declares the annexation of Kuwait void. England and France send troops to the region to support the US and its allies. The UN sets a deadline for Iraqi withdrawal and is laughed at by the oh-so rational Saddam Hussein. Dimplomatic efforts by the US State Department and the Iraqi Government prove fruitless (what a shocker!).

The UN and France were solidly on board, and all the distinguished Junior Senator from Massachusetts could muster was something to the effect of "Hey, I have an idea, lets try more economic sanctions! That'll teach him a lesson!"

Needless to say, once the war was over in a matter of days, with Kuwaiti sovereignty restored, Kerry trumpeted his support for the entire operation. This man is a joke.

Let's see what the real JFK had to say on similar matters: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This much we pledge - and more."

Nope, no swing to the left for the Democrat Party here. None at all.

Wednesday, March 17, 2004

Crappy 80's Song of the Week

"One Night in Bangkok" by Murray Head

"I get my kicks above the waistline, Sunshine." Huh?

Uh huh said "boner"

Broadcasting & Cable Magazine has an article (subscription required) on the efforts taken to make South Park network-friendly for syndication.

Words that are OK for syndication include:

Ass, Boner, Prick, Punk-ass bitch, Son of a bitch, Buttholes

What can't they say?

Asshole, Spooge, Goddamnit, Jesus Christ, Butt-plug, Sucks Ass, Ass Rammer

Just thought you all should know.

Tuesday, March 16, 2004

Kerry on Homeland Defense

Via HobbsOnline - this take on John Kerry's approach to the War on Terror. I wasn't going to post so much about our distinguished Junior Senator, but this shit just writes itself sometimes.

In summation:

If I'm John Kerry and my family and I are attacked, I want to have a cell phone handy so the police will know where to go to pick up my children's lifeless corpses. If I'm George Bush, I want to have a firearm handy so the police can come and collect my attacker's remains.

Edit: Tip o' the hat to Instapundit for the link.

Going to the Chapel

With gay marriage being the hot topic of the day in the Bay State, I figure I'd throw my two cents on the table. I'll try to be brief.

First, I feel there needs to be a distinction made between marriage, as defined by the state, and holy matrimony, as defined by various religious denominations. The State has no authority to tell any church who they can and cannot marry in a religious rite of matrimony. However, for a married couple to obtain the benefits afforded them by the state, it is necessary that the state recognize the civil marriage of the two people.

All marriages recognized by the State are civil marriages. Many of these marriages take place in a religious setting, and are treated as a covenant between the couple being married and their God. The State recognizes freedom of religion, and as long as these people fill out the required paperwork, and pay their license fee, the state will recognize them as married. The same can be said for a couple married by a judge, or other duly appointed representative of the State.

The term "civil union" has been created as a way to extend marriage rights and benefits to same-sex couples, without offending those who hold the "marriage" as a sacred, religious institution. As far as I'm concerned, the word "marriage" means the bringing together of two entities to create a new "whole entity". Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, are by that definition, the marriage of chocolate and peanut butter.

The distinction, again, should be between "civil marriage" and "holy matrimony".

My personal belief is that the law should allow for same-sex civil marriages, given the same conditions applied to civil marriage for heterosexual couples. Furthermore, if a church takes the stand that the concept gay marriage goes against their core beliefs, it is entirely acceptable for that church to refuse to perform the rite of holy matrimony for same-sex couples. Should a church believe that gay couples are entitled to be married in the eyes of, and with the blessing of God, then that church should be free to perform the ceremony to sanctify the civil marriage granted to them by the State.

My take on the whole issue as it's being played out in the Bay State is:

I think the pro-gay marriage advocates are shooting themselves in the feet with their "all or nothing" approach. As the gun-control lobby has learned, the best way to achieve your goal is to proceed with baby steps, making incremental changes to the law and public opinion. Dianne Feinstein and her ilk realized they would never be successful at taking all the guns away from the American public in one fell swoop, so they began their long campaign of gun restrictions, licensing, and registration - all part of their grand scheme to deprive the citizenry of their 2nd Amendment rights. As much as it pains me to say, they have been VERY successful so far.

There is also an on-going debate on whether gay marriage is strictly a civil-rights issue that shouldn't even be put to a vote. If this is the case, then it should be clear that the resolution of this issue isn't going to happen overnight, or even this year. The civil-rights movement in this country, as far as racial equality is concerned, is a battle that's been fought for decades, and still hasn't come to an end.

Baby steps. By steering the issue in the direction of a proposed constitutional amendment, both sides are now facing the prospect of total dissatisfaction with the end result. A smarter tactic would have been to propose "civil union" legislation, similar to Vermont's. I know it wouldn't necessarily address EVERY benefit afforded to heterosexual couples, or provide for recognition by other states, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Shooting the Beaten Dead Horse

OK, so this has been blogged to death, but I gotta get a few licks in.

I want to take a minute to highlight the sheer arrogance John Kerry put on display recently at a town meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. When asked to name the foreign leaders who he claims have offered their support for his run for the White house, Kerry tells the questioner that it's none of his business. But when pressed on the issue further, instead of answering the question, he badgers the man by asking repeatedly "Are you a Republican?" and "Did you vote for George Bush?"

The man gives Kerry honest answers to his questions, which Kerry then uses as justification of his refusal to respond to the previous questions. He then insists that the man reveal his voter enrollment status and his past voting record - things that ARE none of Kerry's business.

This arrogant prick honestly believes he has no obligation to answer questions asked by anyone who's not a liberal Democrat willing to follow him to the ocean like a lemming. Boy, it sure takes a lot of courage to field questions from people whose lips are stuck to your ass, huh? What office does he think he's running for? Massachusetts Senator?

The next time someone tries to tell you Kerry's a moderate, just say " Massachusetts maybe." Stick a fork in the Brahmin Noodle - he's done.

Update: James Taranto's Best of the Web has Limbaugh's transcript of the exchange.

Monday, March 15, 2004

Local Loozahs

Well, today's "Local Loozah" story was going to be about this Mother of the Year from Lawrence, but she got bumped from the top of my list by this comedian, also from the enlightened hamlet of Lawrence.

"A Lawrence man, charged yesterday with ripping a bag of cash from an elderly store owner and knocking him to the ground, said he grabbed the dough as a joke, said the prosecutor."

Ah yes, the old rob-an-old-man-and-knock-him-down gag. Cracks me up every time. Check the last line of the article.

"Eric Trainor was also charged with stabbing a bouncer at the Club City bar Thursday night."

No doubt another joke. Bob Saget should be so funny.

Are you a retrosexual?

Via Smallest Minority via Because I Say So!...


Pretty much nailed it. I personally think "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" is one of the funnier shows on TV today, although I HIGHLY doubt I'll be sporting an Orvis Multicolor Patch Piqué Shirt (see below) anytime soon.

Sunday, March 14, 2004

What the ...?

So, I'm perusing the junk mail that's sitting on the coffee table the other day, and I find the latest Orvis catalog. I decide to flip through it, because the last I knew (and someone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong), Orvis sold hunting and fishing clothes, or clothes that at least evoked the image of someone who might be inclined to go kill a furry critter or two. The catalog cover even stated something to the effect of "sporting tradition since 1856". Well, someone in charge at Orvis seems to have packed a little too much black powder in his bong.

The first (and only) thing that came to mind when flipping through the pages was Kim du Toit's essay, "The Pussification of the Western Male". You can read it here, and then check out the latest offerings from Orvis.

First, we have the Patch Madras Sport Coat.

Now the only real men who should be wearing this are rodeo clowns. They're some tough sons of bitches. I wouldn't want "get nuts stomped by cattle" in my job description.

Anyway, I could list half the catalog here, with, but I will just leave you with this manly number- the MultiColor Patch Piqué Shirt.

Saturday, March 13, 2004

Fenway Franks

So the Catholic Church in Boston has refused to issue a dispensation for the faithful who wish to eat hot dogs and sausages at the Red Sox' home opener on Good Friday. The jokes just write themselves sometime, where does one even begin? Myself, I'm torn between "Doesn't the Archdiocese of Boston already have enough problems in the wiener department?", "Seriously, people, how much actual meat is really in a hot dog?", and "Shut the hell up and eat your goddamn hot dog! See you in the Underworld!"

Any religion that says I can't have a steak on Friday...I'll pass thanks.

EDIT: here's the link to the story - LINK

In related news team officials announced that Fenway Park with be lifted from its foundation and turned 15 degrees so that home plate faces Mecca. Failure to do so would be SO insensitive to their Muslim fans.

Friday, March 12, 2004

Fisking Teddy K.

Kevin over at Smallest Minority has just saved me a lot of typing with THIS well-written dissection of Senator Kennedy's rantings on the floor of the Senate on his P.O.S. amendment he tried to tack on to S.1805.

Ted shows his colors right at the get-go in his opening line:

"As we all know too well, the debate about gun violence has often been aggressive and polarizing with anti-gun violence advocates on one side of the debate, pro-gun advocates on the other."

So he sets up his argument by declaring people are either anti-gun violence or not. But, liberals have no use for ideological labels, right?

It's not like I need ANOTHER reason not to vote for John Kerry, but he voted for this horseshit.

Thursday, March 11, 2004

Wicked Hahd

OK, who's seen the Dunkin Donut ad with Curt Schilling hanging out in the Red Sox locker room practicing his Boston accent with a tape in his Walkman repeating "Hahd...Wicked Hahd.....Pahk...I play wicked hahd when I come to the pahk."?

At the end, the equipment manager is shaking his head saying, "No, you can't do it like that..."

Well, I thought it was funny.

Eye of the Tiger

No, not that Survivor, the TV show. Boston Rob is the MAN! Agree? Disagree? Couldn't care less?

Another Gun Control Success Story

From the Boston Herald, a story touting the success of liberal gun control policy.

Cabbie picks up passenger. Passenger puts a knife to his neck, demanding all his money. Passenger then cuts cabbie's throat and a struggle ensues. Cabbie, immigrant father of four working to make a better life for his family, nearly dies. Bad guy gets away.

The solution proposed by city officials:

Meanwhile, a Hackney official said Joseph's brutal attack may have been prevented if cabs outside of the city were required to have barriers between the front and back seats, as the ones in Boston are.

"There is just no question in my mind that a barrier would have bought this cab driver time to get away,'' said Mark Cohen, director of licensing for Boston Police's Hackney Division.

Yeah, that'll solve the problem. Make the guy pay to have a barrier installed in his cab. That way the criminals can get back to preying on the elderly. And this crap about giving him time to run away? Typical liberal solution, do whatever you have to do to avoid facing the problem head on.

That would be just great. The guy runs away, bad guy gets his money and his cab. You think the cabbie's boss will be understanding when he walks back to the garage and explains what happened? Think he'll just give him a new cab?

Making it easier for law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm for personal defense will make it impossible for the criminal to know who's armed and who's not. Why can't the Feinstein/Kennedy/Schumer camp grasp this ridiculously simple concept?

Cuts Like a Knife

Yes, I will be using cheeseball 80's song titles for the titles of posts when applicable.

Now THIS young man's parents must be so proud of him. At least they can frame his Darwin Award nomination and display it in the living room.

The dead man was "known to police". I'm stunned.

Blithering Idiot of the Year Award

Yeah, I know it's only March, but I think we have a winner. You've probably all heard by now of the woman who tried to buy $1,675 worth of merchandise at a Walmart using a novelty $1,000,000 bill. Well, now she has THIS to say.

What's dumber, trying to pass it off as a real bill and thinking you could get away with it, or actually believing that the bill in your hand was worth a million bucks?

Lifeguard! Get this woman out of the gene pool!

Crappy 80's Song of the Week

Glass Tiger - "Don't Forget Me (When I'm Gone)"

Dicuss amongst yourselves.

Feels Like the First Time

Here it first post on my first blog. I think I'm doing this right.

Thanks for visiting. Let me tell you about myself...nah, screw that, read a couple posts, and I think you'll get a pretty damn good idea of where I'm coming from.

I will be posting thoughts, letters, and essays on life in the liberal enclave known as the People's Republic of Massachusetts. Uh-oh, did I just tip my hand there. Oh well.