Chicago Reader publishes anti-war message as a PSA

For all of you who think that the media is not liberal: In the past issue of the Chicago Reader, there is a PSA on page 45 of the music section.
The "Public Service Announcement" is from "World Can't Wait", a we-hate-Bush/ anti-war group. The ad is for an upcoming protest that they are planning. This full-page ad would have normally cost them $3,000. But they are getting it for free, courtesy of the Chicago Reader.
As a public service, I thought I'd let you know that...
Chicago Reader = free ad for anti-Bush group

This is the ad. I'm copying it as a public service to the people who support the war and want to be at the protest.

When you want to assassinate the president...

...then its time to re-examine your politics.

I've hated presidents and politicians. I really have. I thought that Clinton was a scourge on this country, and when people asked me why, I listed off a string of things that had nothing to do with Monica. So I understand- to some distant degree- how some liberals can dislike Bush.

However, when you make a movie about assassinating the president?

The first question is, why would you make a movie about assassinating any real person? Someone who actually exists? You have to break a lot of new ground on being a dick before you could even get me thinking about such things. But Gabriel Range, the writer of the docudrama, starts there.

The thing is, someone along the line had to green light this project. They had to think that it was a good enough idea to assassinate (on film) an actual living person. They had to make the concious decision that this wouldn't be a dick move to another living human being.
Which makes them... a dick.

Gabriel; I'm sure you are a human being capable of love and other human emotions. But the day you decided to write this? That day, your heart died. -And when I say "died", I don't mean that I'm killing you off for dramatic purposes. I mean you ceased to be a normal human being, and you fell into that abyss that I reserve for only the most disconnected of those I know: moonbats.

-John

Newsweek Prints the Plame Truth

Do you think they got it right this time?
I mean, this was the same rag... er, mag, that kept suggesting that Cheney, er, Rove, er, Libby was the leaker?
It must have hurt Newsweek to admit that Bush wasn't responsible for Valerie Plame's name becoming public. You can practically hear the reporter typing through clenched teeth.

"The disclosures about Armitage, gleaned from interviews with colleagues, friends and lawyers directly involved in the case, underscore one of the ironies of the Plame investigation: that the initial leak, seized on by administration critics as evidence of how far the White House was willing to go to smear an opponent, came from a man who had no apparent intention of harming anyone."

So Valerie Plame wasn't outed by, you know, Bush? Someone should put the members of the left on suicide watch. Isn't this going to just kill them?

-John

Further proof that anti-war jagmo's hate the troops

Cpl. Scott Vincent's name appears on an anti-war T-shirt. It is among 1,700 names on the shirt, casualties of the war in Iraq.
According to the New York Post, he T-shirt in question also says "Bush lied", "They died".


Now it would be ridiculous to assume that all 1,700 of those brave men would support the anti-war t-shirt that mocks their actions in Iraq.
Indeed, the mother of Cpl. Scott Vincent intervened, and asked jagmo and t-shirt entrepreneur Dan Frazier to remove her sons name from his shirt.


What do you think Dan's actions were?

Do you think, because he "cares" about the soldiers, that he would remove the name from the shirt?

Why... that would take a good $20 to create a new silkscreen.

Nope. Jagmo Dan Frazier sent out a public letter praising the "bravery" and "sacrifice" of the soldiers, and said that he would continue to sell t-shirts with Cpl. Scott Vincent's name on them.

I have a new headline for your t-shirt, jagmo Dan Frazier:
"Soldiers died", "So I could sell more t-shirts"

Asshole.

Ray McGovern's letter from "Camp Casey"

But hey, he's just some guy coming forward to question Rumsfeld. Right? He's got no axe to grind?
Here's his letter.

In it, he talks about a rumor going around that Karl Rove set fire ants off in the camp.
He says that he has a dream that "Camp Casey" can do a Selma-like march over the bridge, in protest.
But then he goes off and starts talking about how we can all help Cindy protest "an unnecessary war", and he goes into this part:

Ignore. That's what the vast majority of Germans did in the 1930s as Hitler curtailed civil liberties and launched aggressive wars. I was born in August 1939, a week before Hitler sent German tanks into Poland to start World War II. I have studied that crucial time in some detail. And during the five years I served in Germany I had occasion to ask all manner of people how it could possibly be that, highly educated and cultured as they were, the Germans for the most part could simply ignore. Why was it that the institutional churches, Catholic and Evangelical Lutheran, could not find their voice? Why was it that so few spoke out?

May I respond?

Nuts. That's what the vast majority of us think you are, when you compare our actions in Iraq to Hitler's Germany. America did not blindly support this war, nor do we look past when the very few of our men violate the rules of war.

Stop being a dick, Ray.
I don't mind if you have something of substance to add to this debate. But man, I cannot stand your ignorance and dishonesty.

-John

When all of the tin foil reaches critical mass

Sometimes you find something out that just makes soooo much sense.

Like... well, when you find out that Ray McGovern was planning on protesting with Cindy Sheehan. Or when you find out that there is a photo of him, David Swanson, and Cindy Sheehan at some "impeach Bush" rally.
(In case you haven't been paying attention, Ray McGovern is the self-appointed "CIA analyst with 27 years of experience" who told Rumsfeld that he lied about WMDs.)

The photo feels like the black hole of tin foil to me. Somehow, I imagine a swirling of Che shirts all around them, as all anti-Bush conspiracies reach critical mass.
You've GOT to see the photo. Honestly.

-John

The GAO final report on Clinton WH damage

Something I found while looking up other somethings.

It is the G.A.O.s final report on the damage to the White House when Clinton left. It was released in June of 2002, and kinda got lost in the news. I was curious so I started to read.

Damage, theft, vandalism, and pranks did occur in the White House complex during the 2001 presidential transition. Multiple people said that, at the beginning of the Bush administration, they observed (1) many offices that were messy, disheveled, or contained excessive trash or personal items; (2) numerous prank signs, printed materials, stickers, and written messages that were left behind, some of which contained derogatory and offensive statements about the president; (3) government property that was damaged, including computer keyboards with missing or damaged “W” keys and broken furniture; and (4) items that were missing, such as office signs, a presidential seal, cellular telephones, doorknobs, and telephone number labels. In addition, documentation provided indicated that some broken, missing, or possibly stolen items were repaired or replaced at the beginning of the Bush administration. Several EOP staff said they believed that what they observed during the transition, such as broken furniture and excessive trash left behind, was done intentionally.

Basically, it says that yeah, there was a lotta damage to the White House, but according to Clinton staffers, the White House was damaged when they got there, too.
Oh, and the Clinton staffers said that they have no idea how the damage happened.
I guess that so many people are allowed through the White House offices unescorted, that pretty much anyone could have been gluing the "W" buttons to the walls and putting Gore stickers on the inside of cabinets.

The Bush White House responded to it at the time (their response is included in the report) and basically accused the G.A.O. of trying to downplay the damage. Which, if you read the report, is entirely true.

Anyway, read away. It shows you just how juvenile the former Clinton staff was, and kinda explains why they have to spend their nights bad-mouthing the Bush White House.

-John

Ray McGovern Lied About Rumsfeld

Here's a little background primer. Ray McGovern is a former CIA member with 27 years of experience. You probably already heard that, because every liberal website wants you to know that.
What they probably haven't told you is that he has been out of the intelligence business since the early 90's. Instead, he joined one peacenik group and created a second. His is called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, or VIPs for short.

I wanted to try to skip over the part where I make fun of someone who calls their organization VIPs. But you can't. For God's sakes, he calls his group VIPs. What does that say about his ego? His maturity? His inflated self-opinion?

Of course, the real point is 'was he right?'
Rumsfeld was speaking in Atlanta on May 3rd at the Southern Center for International Studies, when McGovern took him on in this exchange (Relevant parts bolded):

RAY MCGOVERN: I'm Ray McGovern, a 27-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. (Light laughter.) I would like to compliment you on your observation that lies are fundamentally destructive of the trust that government needs to govern. A colleague of mine, Paul Pillar, who is the top agency analyst on the Middle East and on counterterrorism accused you and your colleagues of an organized campaign of manipulation, quote, "I suppose by some definition" --

SEC. RUMSFELD: Could you get to your question, please?

MR. MCGOVERN: -- that's been called a lie.

Atlanta, September 27th, 2002, Donald Rumsfeld said, and I quote, "There is bullet-proof evidence of links between al Qaeda and the government of President Saddam Hussein."

Was that a lie, Mr. Rumsfeld, or was that manufactured somewhere else, because all of my CIA colleagues disputed that and so did the 9/11 commission. And so I would like to ask you to be up front with the American people. Why did you lie to get us into a war that was not necessary and that has caused these kinds of casualties?

AUDIENCE: (Booing.)

MR. MCGOVERN: Why?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, first of all, I haven't lied. I did not lie then -- (applause). Colin Powell didn't lie. He spent weeks and weeks with the Central Intelligence Agency people and prepared a presentation that I know he believed was accurate, and he presented that to the United Nations. The president spent weeks and weeks with the Central Intelligence people, and he went to the American people and made a presentation. I'm not in the intelligence business. They gave the world their honest opinions. It appears that there were not weapons of mass destruction there.

MR. MCGOVERN: You said you knew where they were.

SEC. RUMSFELD: I did not. I said I knew where suspect sites were, and we were --

MR. MCGOVERN: You said -- you said you knew where they were near Tikrit, near Baghdad and northeast, south and west of there. Those are your words.

SEC. RUMSFELD: My words -- my words were that -- no, no, no. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Let him stay one second -- just a second. (Referring to security removing Ray McGovern from the press conference.)

MR. MCGOVERN: This is America, huh?

Do you think McGovern wanted honesty?
Did Rumsefeld say that he knew exactly where the weapons were to bring us to war? Did he say that they were in Tikrit, Baghdad, etc?

Here is the exchange from This Week With George Stephanopolous, March 30th 2003.
Note the date. The war was already under way.
So for McGovern to suggest that Rumsfeld said that he knew exactly where the WMDs were, as a justification for war, is a lie.
But let's move on...

SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think -- let me take that, both pieces -- the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Second, the [audio glitch] facilities, there are dozens of them, it's a large geographic area. It is the -- Answar Al-Islam group has killed a lot of Kurds. They are tough. And our forces are currently in there with the Kurdish forces, cleaning the area out, tracking them down, killing them or capturing them and they will then begin the site exploitation. The idea, from your question, that you can attack that place and exploit it and find out what's there in fifteen minutes.

I would also add, we saw from the air that there were dozens of trucks that went into that facility after the existence of it became public in the press and they moved things out. They dispersed them and took them away. So there may be nothing left. I don't know that. But it's way too soon to know. The exploitation is just starting.

So how is it that McGovern noted the first part of Rumsfeld's statements, but not the second?
How is it that McGovern noted where Rumsfeld said the WMDs would be, but he missed the caveat where Rumsfeld said that they might not be there anymore?

Why is McGovern quoting Rumsfeld's comments during the war as an example of what Rumsfeld said to justify going to war?
Is McGovern a liar? Or did he just a victim of bad intelligence?

-John

John Murtha, Democratic troll from PA, has opened his mouth against our troops. Again.

He held a news conference to talk about a November 19th action by our troops in Iraq. A pentagon investigation into the events in Haditha is pending, but Murtha has declared the troops guilty already.
According to The Seattle Times:

"There was no firefight. There was no IED (improvised explosive device) that killed those innocent people," Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said during a news conference on Iraq. "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them. And they killed innocent civilians in cold blood. That is what the report is going to tell."
How does Murtha come to this conclusion? Its hard to say, since he admitted not reading the report.
So basically, Murtha has come forward again to oppose any action in Iraq.

What a douchebag.
Hey, if you want to spout your opinion, that's one thing. But Murtha is the ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations committee. Which means that he shouldn't hold a press conference to give a verdict on an investigation that he hasn't read the report on.
It also means that he's using the death of Iraqis as a political football.
Which makes him a douchebag.
But we already knew he was. Right?

-John

Dixie chicks; Flipping and flopping

Apparently, taking their cue from John Kerry, the Dixie Chicks are flip flopping.

How, you say?

In 2003, singer / political pundit Natalie Maines was in London when she said, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

Natalie didn't expect the reaction from her fans, many who supported Bush. At first, she issued a kinda half-hearted "guess I shouldn't have said that out loud" kinda thing. That didn't go over with her fans. So, as CNN reported, she apoligized to the president:

"As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect," Maines said in her latest statement.

Of course, no one expects musicians to have convictions, thoughts, or consistency.
-But Maines seems to have none of these things. The Chicks put out the first single from their new album, "Not Ready To Make Nice." Which is kinda ironic, cause they already did. But now they don't want to be nice. Again.
From her Entertainment Weekly interview:

Every day a soldier dies, I am more proud that I spoke out. For the last three years, I am at a loss for words as to... what this country is. Who we are. I really think people have just gone insane. And they think we've gone insane. I think it's sad that you have to truly seek out the truth these days, because CNN and Fox News don't give it to you. So you can't really point a finger at individuals, because it's exhausting to seek out fact from fiction. I used to try and make sense of it but when Bush got reelected, I just didn't know what to do. Keep livin'. It's gotta change back.

Later, Maines says that the American people don't have a voice. She calls it a corpocracy, which makes her a corpocracy nut.

I want to be clear here; when someone hates the president, I'm cool with it. I'm even cool with the borderline conspiracy nuts who believe that CNN is on Bush's side. I would keep sharp objects away from them, but for the most part, they are pretty harmless.

But I can't stand people who apoligize for what they said, and then turn around and say it again.
You have no balls Miss Maines, which is why you don't understand what's going on in Iraq. We are putting a lot more then our reputation on the line in Iraq, and those of us who support the actions there, understand that. This isn't just about the safety of one soldier, or 100,000 soldiers. If you understand anything, please understand this;

There are people out there who want you and I dead because we do not worship their god.

They are not just upset with us because we traveled thousands of miles to kick a dictator out of Iraq. Its not as simple as "leave our country, and we won't hate you anymore."

You know those idiots who sent you death threats?
Picture tens of thousands of them, all organized, and ready to travel. That's our problem in the Middle East. Its not just some idiot sending you a "I hate when you speak" e-mail. Its a group of highly radicalized idiots who don't like it when you wear a low cut dress or talk dirty.

Now we can't pretend like those people don't exist. But what we can do is send over the people who are most qualified to kick their asses, and send them the message that they cannot sqelch the freedom to live as one chooses to live.

Anyway, I will now wait as that concept soars over the heads of those who aren't intellectually prepared to understand it. And I'll wait for Maines to get all whiny about the fact that I've called her a flip flopper.

-John

Translation: Democrats are gullible as perch

Yeah, I've been gone. But now its time to rant with a vengence.

My latest problem?
The un-fucking-believable tendency of the left to believe that everything that GWB says is a lie.

Yesterday, Kos went on a rampage because he found a Reuters article quoting Bush as sayng that he caught a 7.5 pound perch.
Which, as fishermen know, is damned impossible. Apparently, the record for perch is 4 pounds.

What did Kos leave out? Besides, you know, the fact that it was an interview with a German paper "weekly Bild am Sonntag"?
Kos left out the part that it was an English translation of a German article.

Which, of course, means that somehow Bass was translated into Perch.
Here's the White House version of the same interview.

Did I mention that the left is full of pillow heads?
This is the very example of moonbattery.

-John