I know, I know. The title to this post is a real shocker. I hope you were sitting down.

Frankly, the effort’s of Congress to dictate foreign policy and war strategy is nothing new in the history of armed conflict and American politics, and virtually all presidents in time of war have had to deal with congressional interference.

The deja vu with this Congress and it’s effort to micro manage defeat using similar Vietnam era style tactics is most disheartening. 3,000,000 Vietnamese were massacred or died in re-education camps because of the American cut and run forced on our troops by the Democratic Congress of the time.

Abandoning Iraq and letting the bloodbath begin isn’t an option for America, a nation rich in law and practice regarding the value of human life. Unless, of course, your a liberal Democrat, with millions of aborted babies under your belt, a burning desire to make suicide as acceptable as getting a drivers license and even putting the deformed out of their misery because of “quality of life” issues. With that record, what’s a few more bodies?

Only the Socialist Left in America wants to cut and run from Iraq, consequences be damned. Why? Because anything even perceived as an American defeat, is a source of glee and pleasure. Anything that damages the reputation, dimishes the influence or injures cohesion or security of the American nation is what these people are all about.

Imagining the lie about “supporting the troops, but against the war” is believable is another example of self delusion and shows an arrogance about the aptitude of their fellow countrymen. No culture, society or nation on earth honors cowards, or those who break their promises. Fighting the enemies of this country at home is every bit as important as fighting those abroad.

Never give up.

Excerpts from The Politico article:

“In 1973, Congress sought to deal with its de facto exclusion by passing, over President Richard Nixon’s veto, a War Powers Resolution. It required the White House to cease hostilities within 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes military force or extends the time. Every president since Nixon has viewed the key provisions of the resolution as unconstitutional.”

“During the Korean War, there was hot talk on Capitol Hill of impeaching President Harry Truman for having sacked Gen. Douglas MacArthur for insubordination.”

“As the war went on, it often solicited testimony from both high-ranking and junior officers. It leaked secret testimony to newspapers to sway public opinion. And it repeatedly pressed President Abraham Lincoln, sometimes successfully, to dismiss generals not to its liking.

Shortly before taking on the committee’s chairmanship, Wade wrote a friend that Lincoln’s views on slavery “could only come of one born of poor white trash and educated in a slave state.”

“On numerous occasions, they browbeat the president to remove a general or endorse a piece of legislation they thought was important. They were angered when Lincoln did not give in. They complained about the president’s humor and his penchant for handling conflict by telling anecdotes.”

The Politico is new, but right on top of the facts for now. Read the rest here.



Socialist/pacifist house liberal Democrats, quaintly labeled progressives, are fired up and ready to mutiny against Speaker Pelosi. Ending the war in Iraq trumps anything else on earth. Any measure will do, cutting off funding for the troops, ending the war procedurally, whatever. Get out NOW! And, don’t let the door hit you in the ….

A great WSJ article gives the ugly, hateful details.

Here’s what the Democrats had to say about WMD. (video) Thanks Pat Dollard


flagusa.gif They say perception is reality. I suppose that cover’s it, for the most part. But, why do you think there are such widely diverse and contrary understandings of the exact same set of facts? Frequently in conversation, I’m baffled to hear recounted something I’d said, the substance of which was unrecognizable to my memory. I’ve learned most people don’t truly hear what you say, but rather remember how they FELT about what you said. I should include myself as having made that mistake, as well. Do you ever get the message that when using words such as patriotism, liberal, conservative, faith, that people hold private definitions which often make honestly communicating impossible?

Chronic concern for the feeling’s of others often leads to deceitful negotiation of differences. Who can speak honestly if the emotional reaction of others are at all times stifling, contorting, and preventing a frank, candid discussion? Political correctness is a weapon of denial, deceit and manipulation. Nothing more, nothing less.

I’m not saying blurt out your perception of the truth, feeling’s and consequences be damned. Adult’s learn to make the view’s known without being a clod or unneccessarily harsh. After all, not everyone agrees on just what patriotism is…

I am saying that if you, at first, measure your responses because you pre-determine the other person hold’s fragile position’s and may not be able to handle the truth, you will always stop short of expressing your true views.

I realize this can be endless…pre-conceived notions, raw bigotry, willful ignorance. However, don’t you wonder where the people who see America as the evil, greedy opressive terrorist nation that needs an attitude adjustment learned this point of view? Weren’t they here with us enjoying the same personal freedom, opportunity and rule of law? Weren’t they eating the same food, enjoying the same entertainment, have the same heroes? Doesn’t a sense of gratefulness and patriotism accompany the benefits and advantages we all share?

Apparently not.

The usual socialism vs. capitalism stuff often needs simplifying. Give it a go. Thanks Charles


Understanding just how familiar Muslim political proponents in America have become with some of our most embarrassing, foolish concoctions, like political correctness, which is essentially a scheme to force everyone to lie, and pretend, so no one’s feelings are hurt, is important to bring truth to light about claims of “discrimination” and “prejudice ” from Muslim “civil liberty” groups, including “prayer rooms” in airports and a blind eye to anyone “traveling while Muslim”.

Misinformation and clever manipulation of civil right’s legislation designed to protect the deserving are being usurped by the latest newly minted, opressed minority, Muslims. “Islamophobia”, a UN creation giving label to the cause, is rarely used to point up serious injustice dealt to Muslims. Rather, this badge is worn proudly by those seeking a myriad of special rights and privileges sought by this group.

CAIR presents language that might be mistaken for Dr. King, not pleading for justice, but rather demanding punishment or censure accompany anyone who speaks against their agenda. Clever manipulation of US law has enabled CAIR to begin the process of entrenching Muslims in the victimology of the nation, with the attendant sympathy and contrition shown by the Left. Even the AP has gotten into the act.

I’m not advocating profiling of Muslims at airports, because not all terrorists are young, middle eastern men with beards. I’m not saying all Muslims are terrorists, but certainly 99% of terrorists are Muslim. I’m not saying the US isn’t full of clandestine, America Last organizations that seek to use our liberal laws regarding personal freedom against us.

I am saying that some of these groups present a much more sinister, immediate threat than others. The gentleman who wrote the article below has many years of experience with these groups and is widely respected and supported in his efforts.

When a “moderate” Muslim group says one thing, but supports the opposite, Americans need to know about the hypocrisy and deception.

Apparently, even local School boards aren’t too small to target. Attacks on Christian and Jewish holiday recognition are but one of many areas of aggression by Islamist front groups. Thanks Neil for your vigilance.

Our friend at Ironic Surrealism has a fine expose of CAIR lies as well.

pdf for Muslim Council of Britain‘s public school requirments
By Joe Kaufman | February 19, 2007

Islamists around the United States are playing games with the American public. While supporting extremist causes and the hate-filled ideologies of the Muslim Brotherhood – the violent group that spawned Hamas and Al-Qaeda – they have gotten involved, as well, in interfaith activities. Of course, it’s difficult to criticize someone that is engaged in something so innocuous as interfaith. It highlights a danger in our society of a fifth column disguised as a friend.

Ahmed Bedier is a leader in the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that has its roots in Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. His role in the organization is as its Florida Communications Director and as its local Tampa Executive Director. Apart from this, Bedier co-hosts a radio show, True Talk, on Tampa’s WMNF. Within both venues, he is able to spread his dual message, one of peace and love and one of vile hate. We will focus on a latter radio show of his to bring out this point.

On Monday, January 15, 2007, Bedier addressed a crowd at an interfaith memorial service for Martin Luther King, Jr. To advertise this fact, Bedier placed an attractive picture of the late civil rights leader on his web blog, along with the audio of the speech. He played some of it on his show.

Bedier stated, “As I look out on the ground tonight, how beautiful you all look, right here in Tampa, and how diverse that we are. We’re not just black and white or Hispanic or Arabs. We’re a spectrum of colors.” With this, he received much applause, as he did for other things he stated, including how Muslims are “reaping the benefits of [King’s] work,” through what Bedier called a “post-9/11 environment.”

While he underhandedly exploited the occasion of the death of Dr. King to work in CAIR’s pseudo claim of anti-Muslim bigotry, most of what Bedier said was inoffensive and harmless. But no matter the kind words, on this same radio show, another message was being sent — that of undeniable hatred.

There were three guests on this particular show. The first was Khalil Bendib, an Algerian-born, Berkeley-based, racially-charged cartoonist, who likes satirizing the September 11th attacks. On Bendib’s website, one finds his work categorized into different groups. One of the categories is titled “BLACK CARTOONS.” The logo for this category is a picture of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s head. Rice and numerous other members of the African-American community – even those that Bendib seems to support – are made to look as if they came straight out of an Amos and Andy skit.

During the program, Bendib admitted that he had been called an anti-Semite for his work. Looking at many of his drawings, one could easily understand why. Jewish stars are liberally used within and/or alongside symbols of violence. Ariel Sharon, the former Prime Minister of Israel, is seen as bloodthirsty. In one cartoon, the word “CANNIBAL” is emblazoned next to Sharon’s face. Mid-East expert Daniel Pipes is depicted as a pro-Jewish zealot. Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman is labeled a “Zionist Extremist.” All three of Bendib’s victims are drawn with the same type of exaggerated features found in anti-Semitic publications throughout the Arab world.

Bedier’s co-host, Samar Jarrah, rabidly anti-Israel herself, stated, “Y’know people say that Muslims and Arabs don’t have a sense of humor, but he has very funny cartoons…”

The other two guests were New York imam Talib Abdur-Rashid and Kentucky academic Ihsan Bagby. Both Abdur-Rashid and Bagby are leaders of the Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), an African-American Islamist group founded in May of 2000, in response to the arrest of cop killer H.Rap Brown, a.k.a. Jamil Al-Amin.

It took little time for the MANA duo to let out invectives directed at the white community and those black Christians that they believe are tools of the whites. The following exchange between Abdur-Rashid, Bagby and Bedier (who felt the urge to chime in with his own prejudice) took place on the radio show and exemplifies this hate talk:

Abdur-Rashid: “One of the problems with many of the black churches is that they’re really controlled by the white church. They’re kind of local chapters of larger white churches, many of whom have Evangelical influence or leaning… [U]sually when you’ll find an African-American pastor speaking in that negative kind of way, there’s a hidden devil, so to speak, somewhere in the background egging him on.”

Bagby: “If I might add, I’ve seen some of the material produced by black and white Evangelical Christian groups that are aimed at Muslims. The black material is a lot more objective, if you will. Just as pointed to try to convert someone from Islam to Christianity, but a lot more objective…”

Bedier: “More intelligent.”

Bagby: “More intelligent – probably because black people are more exposed to Islam, and therefore, they really can’t get away too much with slanting stuff completely, totally out of line, that everybody knows what that just doesn’t hold water. Whereas the white Evangelical material is a lot more venomous, as you said, and hateful.”

Normally Bedier’s radio show is used to defend terrorists and their support network, but as illustrated above, True Talk is also a showcase for racism. Bedier’s participation in Martin Luther King, Jr. memorials and interfaith events is just a way of concealing his and his colleagues’ real motives. This author will never be fooled.

Click Here to support

Joe Kaufman is the Chairman of Americans Against Hate, the founder of CAIR Watch, and the spokesman for Terror-Free Oil Initiative.


Have you ever wondered how an actual Imam, with authority over the very thoughts, actions and attitudes of fellow muslims, would answer actual questions from the “flock’? Do you think you might gain valuable insight from reading questions and answers for everyday living regarding muslims? Well, your in business. I’ve provided a link to just one of many “Ask the Imam” types websites, which field questions from mundane, minor theological matters to terrorism, treatment of women and finance.
Just pick a topic, and enjoy.

If your reading this, your probably not muslim, and wouldn’t have a clue where the nearest mosque or madrassa was in your neighborhood. Now, with a few keystrokes, you can locate everything from Islamic houses of worship to the most convenient middle eastern grocery store. Never be without a first hand knowledge of muslim centers of religion and commerce in your town again.

One continual complaint of Islamic leaders, that tend to be vocal about the need for an active fight against the enemies of Islam, is that Western authorities trot out former muslims to do their bidding, and that they shape, bend and twist “true Islam”. Well, the people behind this website are just that, former Iranian worshippers, who now wish to expose true Islam for what it is, and what it has always been. Hint: the penalty for converting from Islam to anything else is death, no Q&A, period. These folks are committed.

Finally, a static resource I rely upon, among many, is this website which has many layers and works to provide depth of understanding about Islam, not just from a religious perspective, but culturally, politically and with an eye toward presenting reams of information in a reader friendly style.


Self deception starts at an early age. What if you had staked your reputation on an idea that made perfect sense? It sounded plausible, probable even, and held an allure that endowed you with a sense of pride just by being involved. In the larger picture, it met certain needs that you might have. For instance, you may have felt parental. Maybe obedient. Possibly superior to those who ignored the message and failed to act. You might have issued stern warnings to others of the seriousness and validity of your cause that fell on deaf, and stupid, ears.

Then, what if it’s discovered you were wrong? What if the nobility and smug self-assurance was just a self-indulgement mirage? Imagine being totally committed, your time, talent and treasure invested in a grand cause…that never existed in the first place, other than in the group psychoses of those involved?

At some point, your forced to stop, reconsider your actions, face facts and (I realize not everyone can or will do this), admit your zealous efforts, so gleefully exercised, were in vain. Eventually, you must halt your personal crusade, stop pretending and swallow your pride. In an ideal circumstance, you would work to make amends for any damage you had caused, including half-truths you may have told, intentional deceit you had used to your advantage, and ask the forgiveness of anyone you judged as unwise or just plain evil for disagreeing with you.

But, will you?

Pride is truly the greatest sin. Everyone knows that, right?


Fearmongering political commentator Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956) warned that “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” The Weather Channel has taken up that task with its series “It Could Happen Tomorrow.”

The Weather Channel started its “It Could Happen Tomorrow” series in January 2006. The program includes episodes where a tornado destroys Dallas, a tsunami destroys the Pacific Northwest, Mount Rainier erupts and destroys nearby towns, and San Diego is devastated by wildfires.

A climber walks past a glacier at the summit of Mount Kilimanjaro, one of the world’s largest volcanoes and the highest free-standing mountain, in Tanzania in this January 4, 2006 file photo. The mountain has become an icon for environmental campaigners, with scientists predicting that the its glaciers will vanish within the next 20 years because of global warming. On January 10, 2007, the European Union urged for the cut in emissions of greenhouse gases by at least 20 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels as part of a new energy policy to fight climate change. It also called on developed nations around the world to cut emissions of gases blamed for global warming by 30 percent by 2020, saying the EU would go beyond its unilateral target if others followed suit. MALTA OUT REUTERS/Darrin Zammit Lupi They omitted a program showing a meteor striking my house, for it, too, could happen tomorrow. Of course, any one of these events could happen tomorrow, but I’m reminded of a passage in Shakespeare’s “Macbeth,” where after Macbeth listens to the predictions of the witches, Banquo warns him that “Oftentimes, to win us to our harm, the instruments of darkness tell us truths, win us with honest trifles, to betray us in deepest consequence.” That is, gain our confidence with trifle truths to set us up for the big lie.

The big lie, conceived by the Weather Channel in cahoots with environmental extremists, is to get us in a tizzy over global warming, and they’re vicious about it. Dr. Heidi Cullen, the Weather Channel’s climatologist, hosts a weekly program called “The Climate Code.” Dr. Cullen advocates that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) strip their seal of approval from any TV weatherman expressing skepticism about the predictions of manmade global warming, according to a report by Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works.

Dr. Cullen has had a lot of help in demonizing skeptics of catastrophic manmade global warming. Scott Pelley, CBS News “60 Minutes” correspondent, compared skeptics of global warming to “Holocaust deniers,” and former Vice President Al Gore calls skeptics “global warming deniers.” But it gets worse. Mr. Morano reports that on one of Dr. Cullen’s shows, she featured columnist Dave Roberts, who, in his Sept. 19, 2006, online publication, said, “When we’ve finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we’re in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg.” (See the Morano report He didn’t say whether the death penalty should be administered to those found guilty of global warming denial.

The environmental extremists’ true agenda has little or nothing to do with climate change. Their true agenda is to find a means to control our lives. The kind of repressive human control, not to mention government-sanctioned mass murder, seen under communism has lost any measure of intellectual respectability. So people who want that kind of control must come up with a new name, and that new name is environmentalism.

Last year, 60 prominent scientists signed a letter saying, “Observational evidence does not support today’s computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. . . . Significant [scientific] advances have been made since the [Kyoto] protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.”

They added, “It was only 30 years ago that many of today’s global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.” These scientists have probably won The Weather Channel’s ire and might be headed toward a Nuremberg-type trial.

Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics and is the author of More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well.

Read Dr. Williams at


Does anyone reading this imagine for a minute that Al wasn’t going to grace the nation with another offer to lead America out of it’s difficulties and into a brave, new world of worship of Mother Earth, among other seriously objectionable things?

I didn’t think so.

Wasn’t the point of the chicken little version of the end of the world docu-drama all about establishing Al as a concerned, wise voice that deserves to be President?

I think so, too.


Rumors continue to swirl about whether or not former Vice President Al Gore will enter the race for the presidency in 2008. According to an article today in the New York Observer, Gore wants to keep the buzz going about whether or not he’ll enter the Democrats’ crowded fray because delaying a decision helps him if he runs for president.

Steve Kornacki writes that according to the latest rumors, Gore will consider entering the race for the Democratic nomination in September “if an opening presents itself.” The former vice president’s spokesperson issued a classic “non-denial denial,” about Gore’s plans, and Kornacki says that there are multiple reasons for Gore to hold off on entering the race.

First, he can bank on his name reputation getting stronger in the intervening months as he continues to promote his message on controlling global warming. Meanwhile, Kornacki writes, he can “steer clear of any early skirmishes between Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards, instead allowing the three front-runners to drive each other’s negatives up.”

The moment Gore is looking for, he adds, is one in which the race becomes about Senator Hillary Clinton. The likely scenario for Gore to become a candidate is one in which he is “convinced that he could quickly and bloodlessly push [Obama and Edwards] aside, setting up a Hillary-versus-Al contest for the nomination.”

But there are also reasons Gore might not choose to enter the race. If Obama or Edwards make gains against Clinton, Kornacki writes that he may not want to further crowd the fray. He also must fear “the risk of being branded, for all of history, as a two-time loser.” But, Kornacki concludes, Gore has wanted to be president most of his life, and so he wonders “Can he resist?”

The full article can be read at the New York Observer’s website.

UPDATE: Al’s going to host a concert series on the order of Liveaid. Gotta have Hollywood on board for the run to Prez!

Next Page »