Republicans Abroad Panama

NYT -- For it before they exposed it!

2006-06-27T09:12:00.000-05:00

From Powerline:

September 24, 2001 New York Times editorial ("Finances of Terror") (access limited to TimesSelect):

"Organizing the hijacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon took significant sums of money. The cost of these plots suggests that putting Osama bin Laden and other international terrorists out of business will require more than diplomatic coalitions and military action. Washington and its allies must also disable the financial networks used by terrorists.

The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies."

Given the NYT's recent article on tracking terrorist money trails, this proves that you can't make this stuff up -- they are truly barking lunatics and traitors to boot.

Read the rest here but be forewarned, it will raise your blood pressure.

Oliver Wendell Holmes sums it up

2006-06-16T09:21:00.000-05:00

"When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right."

Oliver Wendell Holmes in Schenck v. United States.

Compare and contrast today's MSM and the likes of Kerry and Murtha. The T word comes to mind.

What will change your mind about our mission in Iraq?

2006-03-16T10:07:00.000-05:00

A question like this always seems to pose problems for many democrats. Specifically, "What proof do you need in order to change your current belief that Bush lied about going into Iraq?"

Well, let's just assume we get a thoughtful response like, "Let me think about that for a moment."

How about documents? Will that change your mind? Oh, by the way, we assume that you have the smoking gun in 48,000 boxes of evidence that President Bush lied?

Let's recall the opening of Nazi Germany's inner secrets with the capture of their documents and filmed proof of their atrocities. They too were very good at documentation, thank god. It helped convict many of them after the war. It certainly convinced quite a few sympathizers of the depths of evil Hitler unleashed.

So, what type of documents do you want as proof that President Bush did not lie? How about audio tapes of Saddam? You can verify the voice with file footage of the Barking Lunatic of Tikrit for comparison if you like.

What about written proof?

The question is a fair one to ask ourselves about this subject.

For us, to prove that Bush lied, we'd sure like to hear it on audio much like Nixon on the Watergate Tapes. That sure convinced us of his hand in it. Bush talking about deliberately misleading the public would certainly let us down big time and we'd be ready to charge him appropriately. Note that word -- deliberately. It determines if there was a lie or not, but we know our democratic friends don't want to hear that, so never mind.

So, we ask our democratic friends, "What will it take?"

We look forward to the discussion...

The Mary Mapes School of Journalism at AP

2006-03-04T07:15:00.000-05:00

Last week's big AP news story with video proving the "storm could breach levees" has now been corrected by the AP. No doubt with little fanfare by the rest of media.

Okay, we know that CBS news lost whatever credibility they had left with Rathergate. Now it seems the former staffers for 60 Minutes II are now "Maping" news stories elsewhere.

Wizbang blog found a connection between the Rathergate/Mapes fraud and the AP story By MARGARET EBRAHIM and JOHN SOLOMON.

It seems that Margaret is a former -- wait for it -- CBS News producer for, you guessed it, 60 Minutes II! But then, you knew that was coming didn't you?

Read Wizbang here.

AP used to be a news organization with actual reporting standards. Editors without a political grudge to bear. I've heard that trees die from the top down so we really need to blame the management for letting the public trust down so badly and so often.

Shame on the AP for causing so much fuss about nothing when so many other important events are going on. Once again, the blogs are showing that you can't get away with this stuff anymore.

It's all about the oil, er...

2006-02-13T22:23:00.000-05:00

Or was it?

I submit without further comment a copy of a letter from the Mayor of Tall 'Afar, Iraq to the troops of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment and their families:

In the Name of God the Compassionate and Merciful.

To the Courageous Men and Women of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who have changed the city of Tall’ Afar from a ghost town, in which terrorists spread death and destruction, to a secure city flourishing with life.

To the lion-hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets for many months.

To those who spread smiles on the faces of our children, and gave us restored hope, through their personal sacrifice and brave fighting, and gave new life to the city after hopelessness darkened our days, and stole our confidence in our ability to reestablish our city.

Our city was the main base of operations for Abu Mousab Al Zarqawi. The city was completely held hostage in the hands of his henchmen. Our schools, governmental services, businesses and offices were closed. Our streets were silent, and no one dared to walk them. Our people were barricaded in their homes out of fear; death awaited them around every corner. Terrorists occupied and controlled the only hospital in the city. Their savagery reached such a level that they stuffed the corpses of children with explosives and tossed them into the streets in order to kill grieving parents attempting to retrieve the bodies of their young. This was the situation of our city until God prepared and delivered unto them the courageous soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who liberated this city, ridding it of Zarqawi’s followers after harsh fighting, killing many terrorists, and forcing the remaining butchers to flee the city like rats to the surrounding areas, where the bravery of other 3d ACR soldiers in Sinjar, Rabiah, Zumar and Avgani finally destroyed them.

I have met many soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment; they are not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism.

The leaders of this Regiment; COL McMaster, COL Armstrong, LTC Hickey, LTC Gibson, and LTC Reilly embody courage, strength, vision and wisdom. Officers and soldiers alike bristle with the confidence and character of knights in a bygone era. The mission they have accomplished, by means of a unique military operation, stands among the finest military feats to date in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and truly deserves to be studied in military science. This military operation was clean, with little collateral damage, despite the ferocity of the enemy. With the skill and precision of surgeons they dealt with the terrorist cancers in the city without causing unnecessary damage.

God bless this brave Regiment; God bless the families who dedicated these brave men and women. From the bottom of our hearts we thank the families. They have given us something we will never forget. To the families of those who have given their holy blood for our land, we all bow to you in reverence and to the souls of your loved ones. Their sacrifice was not in vain. They are not dead, but alive, and their souls hovering around us every second of every minute. They will never be forgotten for giving their precious lives. They have sacrificed that which is most valuable. We see them in the smile of every child, and in every flower growing in this land. Let America, their families, and the world be proud of their sacrifice for humanity and life.

Finally, no matter how much I write or speak about this brave Regiment, I haven’t the words to describe the courage of its officers and soldiers. I pray to God to grant happiness and health to these legendary heroes and their brave families.

NAJIM ABDULLAH ABID AL-JIBOURI
Mayor of Tall 'Afar, Ninewa, Iraq

Judicial Junkets

2006-01-30T09:47:00.000-05:00

PowerLine has a terrific post on Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia's recent trip to Colorado. If you heard ABC and the NYTreason's accounts, you'd have thought that Justice Scalia was snubbing Chief Justice Robert's swearing-in ceremony. Ah, but you'd be wrong and you probably already know what's coming -- the rest of the story. Seems the event's sponsor, the Federalist Society, reams the truth home with a blistering display of the facts behind the event.

Read it here.

The President's latest speech -- Kansas State

2006-01-24T14:31:00.000-05:00

President Bush spoke at Kansas State University yesterday (1-23-06) and I found the speech loaded with great material. He is so much better than people give him credit for when speaking his mind.

I especially found the passages on being the president profound. He spoke of decision making and good judgment. Two important qualities in any good leader. Here are a few paragraphs I liked and note his sense of humor:

...But they, oftentimes, they ask me, they say, what's it like, being the President of the United States? And my answer to them is, first, it's a huge honor. But, secondly, if I had to give you a job description, it would be a decision-maker. I make a lot of decisions. I make some that you see that obviously affect people's lives, not only here, but around the world. I make a lot of small ones you never see, but have got consequence. Decision-maker is the job description.

First of all, when you make decisions, you've got to stand on principle. If you're going to make decisions, you've got to know what you believe. I guess the best way to summarize me is I came from Texas and I'm going back to Texas with the exact same values I had when I arrived in Washington, DC (Applause.)

In order to make good decisions, you've got to rely upon the judgment of people you trust. I'll never forget the first decision I had to make as the President. I wasn't even sworn in yet, and a fellow called me on the phone and he said, what color rug do you want to have in the Oval Office? (Laughter.) You've got to be kidding me, man. (Laughter.) He said, no, what color rug would you like to have in the Oval Office? I said, I don't know. He said, well, it turns out that Presidents -- you've just got to know Presidents design their rugs. I said, well, to be honest with you, I don't know much about designing rugs.
So I called, I delegated -- that's one of the things you do in decision-making. (Laughter.) I said, Laura, how about helping design the rug? (Laughter.) Part of being a decision-maker, though, is you've got to help -- you've got to think strategically. And so I said to her -- she said, what color do you want? I said, make it say this: optimistic person comes here to work every single day. You can't lead the nation, you can't make good decisions unless you're optimistic about the future.

Read the rest here and his points on the NSA intercepts of terrorists was a great reply to the traitors out there:

This is a -- I repeat to you, even though you hear words, "domestic spying," these are not phone calls within the United States. It's a phone call of an al Qaeda, known al Qaeda suspect, making a phone call into the United States. I'm mindful of your civil liberties, and so I had all kinds of lawyers review the process. We briefed members of the United States Congress, one of whom was Senator Pat Roberts, about this program. You know, it's amazing, when people say to me, well, he was just breaking the law -- if I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress? (Laughter and applause.)

Great line, isn't it?

Hunter

2006-01-22T18:30:00.000-05:00

I thought this was a good presentation of the argument that Bush didn't "lie" about WMD. Maybe you can find the original article on the NRO site. I just decided to condense the article and post it for comment. AIK

**********************************************************************************

Précis of a National Review article: “Why We’re There” by David B. Rivkin and Lee A. Casey, partners in the DC law firm Baker and Hostetler, served in Reagan’s and Bush, Sr.’s Justice Dept.

The Law
The legal case for war against Saddam’s regime still stands. The actual existence of WMD has nothing to do with 1) the US’s inherent right to defend its security, 2) the unrepealed UN Security Council Resolution 678 authorizing force against Iraq in 1991 to… restore peace and security in the region, and 3) the 2002 Security Council Resolution 1441 finding Iraq to be in “material breach” of its obligations under various preceding resolutions.

It was never the responsibility of the UN inspection teams or the US or its allies to establish Iraq’s WMD capability; “the onus of proving that he had fully disarmed was always on Saddam.” This was one of the prices of the armistice. Saddam failed to meet this burden.

Living with Saddam
The threat assessment was fundamentally sound, based on the best intelligence at the time. The threat was so serious that pre-war planning, timing, and combat operations were conducted with the full expectation that Saddam would unleash at least chemical weapons. Troops carried gas masks and chemical suits into battle. Furthermore, politically it would make no sense to decry Saddam’s WMD if the administration knew there weren’t any, just to be found out after Saddam was gone.

WMD were only one of aspect of the threat. Other critical elements: Saddam was an aggressive and unpredictable actor in an important and vulnerable area; he had WMD capabilities previously (including a mature nuclear-weapons program) used against the Kurds and Iran; he had sheltered terrorists and aided active terrorist organizations; and never cooperated with the UN inspection teams. He was a dangerous man behaving as if he had something to hide.

No allies ever claimed that Saddam had met his obligations and was not a threat. But only the US and Britain patrolled the no-fly zones. The UN sanctions regime was crumbling against the US’s and Britain’s wishes: commercial reasons, reflexive anti-Americanism, the Oil-for-Food bribes, and diplomatic exhaustion caused France, Russia, and China to fold. And it was evident that sanctions hurt only the Iraqi people, not Saddam, who along with his allies used the people’s suffering as propaganda against the sanctions.

The fact that Saddam was still there after 10 years, to be reckoned with, raised his influence and prestige in the Middle East, meaning that the US/Britain were getting less cooperation from other Arab countries. A survival of Saddam would have worsened that situation, and spread a wave of fear throughout the area. He had spent billions of dollars developing chemical, biological, and nuclear programs for a reason, and once Saddam was thoroughly reestablished without sanctions, his undisguised ambitions to rule the Middle East would have undoubtedly have been realized.

And Then Came September 11
The Bush administration did not claim Saddam was directly involved with attack; he had supported global terrorist activities and harbored known terrorists (Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal) and Iraqi officials had numerous contacts with Al-Qaeda operatives. The idea that Baathist and Islamists wouldn’t cooperate against the US is fantasy: the US represents a common enemy for them, as it did for Nazi Germany and Japan, who cooperated with each other just fine.

Saddam’s decade-long resistance to his victors gave UBL the impression that the US was weak and would have no will against his attack. Once that attack was successfully carried out, to have left Saddam crowing would have been a highly dangerous strategic error. Regime change, always on the table, became vital. …..

Losing Iraq at this stage would light the way for every one of America’s future enemies. And US allies, like India and Japan with China hanging over their shoulder, would think twice about their friendship with us. So, obviously, winning the war in Iraq is imperative. Victory will be based on the physical war in Iraq and the verbal war in Washington. If the president wins the war of public opinion, there is little doubt that the US forces will win on the ground.

Conservative Hollywood?

2006-01-10T09:38:00.000-05:00

At a recent RA-Panama monthly breakfast meeting, we were talking about Hollywood and movies in general. While the thought of a Hollywood Conservative might bring to mind an endangered species, they do exist and if Brian C. Anderson's article in the City Journal is correct, we may see more Conservative films in the future:

Nevertheless, several indicators suggest that the film industry's cultural stance may be changing more dramatically than hiring some new marketers. For starters, Hollywood is home to a growing right-of-center presence, including hotshot young producers like Mike De Luca of DreamWorks and Gavin Pollone, and rising screenwriters like Craig Mazin, Cyrus Nowrasteh, and Klavan. What's more, if reports are true, other young Hollywood types are on the Right, but keep their views quiet, for fear of career trouble in a still-liberal town. "It's becoming increasingly clear that a significant majority of the young people coming into Hollywood are conservative," opined Chetwynd this summer.

We went to see "Chronicles of Narnia" last week at Extreme Planet's VIP theater. The best deal in Panama for a major flick. Most of the time, we are going to Wednesday nights since we spend $2 for a ticket and don't feel too badly when we walk out after a liberal bash fest of conservative values. Those would be the artistic movies Hollywood loves to celebrate come Oscar time.

As for Narnia, it's a tour de force and I found it compelling in it's morals and characters. Brilliant. Visually stunning too.

We added Libertas, a Conservative blog from Hollywood, to our links because we think they are getting the word out about what is going on in the entertainment world and Conservative thought. The business side of making movies is explored too and we find that aspect quite compelling to read.

Libertas is hosted by the Liberty Film Festival.

One last link: You may recall seeing actor Robert Davi as the heavy in a number of films including the James Bond feature, "License to Kill". FrontPage Magazine interviewed him last year about his Conservative beliefs and Hollywood. This is one actor who gets it. Click here.

Civil Discourse?

2006-01-08T10:45:00.000-05:00

I spent a little time this morning on Yahoo's groups for Panama. One poster's obvious hatred for Bush is the catalyst for the following question:

When did we lose the civil discourse in discussing politics?

Comparing Bush to Hitler and the Nazis is something that I used to think only come from ignorance or just plain old venom. However, National Review's Jonah Goldberg summed it up pretty well in an online column back in 2003:

"And that's how I think of all these people who e-mail me insistent that George Bush is a Nazi. They believe they are so important, so noble, their hatred and fear must be rooted things of Great Consequence. It's just so prosaic to hate Republicans. I am better than that. So, Republicans must be Nazis. They must be a threat to the whole world and to the sanctity of everything I hold dear because anything less would not be worth my time. George Bush can't simply be someone I disagree with. No, his popularity must be an indication of mass hysteria, of Nuremberg-style devotion to evil.

So desperate are these people to live in interesting times and play the hero, that they are willing Â eager Â to topple every significant moral and historical category so they can role play as the Heroes who Would Not Stay Silent. That would be fine if these losers were playing some multisided dice game in their basements. But they're not. There's a war going on and these guys are acting like we're the real enemy. That's not just shameful and stupid, it's unhelpful."

However, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

I see the same problem with people who support Bush. Some use words like "Hitlery" and "Hildebeast" to describe Sen. Hillary Clinton. Whatever one may think of Sen. Clinton, all the name calling doesn't accomplish anything.

There comes a point when a civilization loses it's common courtesies and falls into civil anarchy and frankly, I am worried about it. At some point, you have to work together to do something really important like, oh say, fight a war?

That's why we commit to not using the very words that we find so harmful in the present politicalal discussions of the day.

As my Dad said a long time ago -- "When you sling mud, you lose ground." It's past the time we start taking the high ground and actively remind our fellow conservatives to eliminate the mud slinging.

Merry Christmas and Season's Greetings

2005-12-25T08:58:00.000-05:00

For our Democrat Friends & Family:

"Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, our best wishes for an environmentally conscious,socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

We also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2006, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great.

Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. And without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee. By accepting these greetings you are accepting these terms. This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself or himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher."

For our Republican Friends & Family:

Here's wishing all of you a Merry Christmas, Happy Chanukah and a Happy New Year!

Former Clinton Associate AG Refutes NYT

2005-12-21T15:26:00.000-05:00

From my hometown newspaper the Chicago Tribune:

President had legal authority to OK taps
By John Schmidt

Published December 21, 2005

"President Bush's post- Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents."

This can't help the left at all :-)

Still waiting for the Wilson party to pick up the white courtesy phone...

Ring, ring, ring!

2005-12-21T11:47:00.000-05:00

Calling Joe Wilson and his supporters!

Please contact your nearest white courtesy phone. There has been a major leak about a NSA spy program that you need to speak out against.

Oh wait. It makes Bush look bad.

Never mind.

Update:

Max Boot at the LA Times had this to say:

"IT SEEMS like only yesterday that every high-minded politician, pundit and professional activist was in high dudgeon about the threat posed to national security by the revelation that Valerie Plame was a spook. For daring to reveal a CIA operative's name — in wartime, no less! — they wanted someone frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs, preferably headed for the gallows..."

The rest of the article is a worthwhile read.

Mary Mapes -- Lying for the Left

2005-12-20T12:13:00.000-05:00

Former 60 Minutes 2 producer, Mary Mapes, continues her lies against President Bush.

Powerline reports that the documents she is so fond of saying are authentic, are loaded with errors that prove they are not. One case in point:

"...Colonel William Campenni (ret.) served with then-Lieutenant Bush in the same unit of the Texas Air National Guard. He wrote some key columns debunking Mary Mapes's fraudulent 60 Minutes story on President Bush's service."

"... I was running out of paper in tearing apart her own arguments and exposing glaring errors. One example: Twice in the 6 fakes one finds Bush's service number. Problem here for Mary is that these memos are in 1972 and 73. The Air Force stopped using service numbers on July 1, 1969, and switched over to social security numbers, 3 and 4 years prior. All of Bush's released records had the SSNo blacked out as required by law. But old service numbers from Bush's earlier documents were not redacted..."

Read more at PowerLine:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/012610.php

NYT and Treason

2005-12-20T11:23:00.000-05:00

Perhaps it is time to resurrect the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

We submit the following evidence that the New York Times is once again guilty of willfully doing America great harm:

EXERCISE OF CERTAIN AUTHORITY RESPECTING ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE
EO 12139
23 May 1979

By the authority vested in me as President by Sections 102 and 104 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802 and 1804), in order to provide as set forth in that Act for the authorization of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, it is hereby ordered as follows:

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

1-102. Pursuant to Section 102(b) of the Foreign Intelligence Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(b)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the court having jurisdiction under Section 103 of that Act to obtain orders for electronic surveillance for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence information.

1-103. Pursuant to Section 104(a)(7) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)), the following officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or defense, is designated to make the certifications required by Section 104(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct electronic surveillance:
(a) Secretary of State.
(b) Secretary of Defense.
(c) Director of Central Intelligence.
(d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(e) Deputy Secretary of State.(f) Deputy Secretary of Defense.
(g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

1-104. [Deleted]
1-105. [Deleted]

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

1-104. Section 2-202 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at the end of that section: ''Any electronic surveillance, as defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, shall be conducted in accordance with that Act as well as this Order.''.

1-105. Section 2-203 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at the end of that section: ''Any monitoring which constitutes electronic surveillance as defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be conducted in accordance with that Act as well as this Order.''.

Jimmy Carter
1978

Source: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm

It's now being reported that President Bush summoned the editors of the NYT to his office and demanded that the story not be run. The NYT, seeking to cause as much harm to our president as possible and reduce the likelihood of the reauthorization of the patriot Act, decided to release it anyway. We won't even mention the fact that one of the story's authors, James Risen, has a book on the subject coming out in a few weeks.

Conclusion: The NYT puts the T in Treason every day.

Update:

The WSJ Opinion Journal has a fine piece today on the subject:

"...The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. But no Administration then or since has ever conceded that that Act trumped a President's power to make exceptions to FISA if national security required it. FISA established a process by which certain wiretaps in the context of the Cold War could be approved, not a limit on what wiretaps could ever be allowed. "

-- Though I think they fell short in questioning the NYTreason's decision to publish the story:

"Which brings us to this national security leak, which Mr. Bush yesterday called "a shameful act." We won't second-guess the New York Times decision to publish. But everyone should note the irony that both the Times and Washington Post claimed to be outraged by, and demanded a special counsel to investigate, the leak of Valerie Plame's identity, which did zero national security damage. "

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007703

Katrina Victims...

2005-12-13T09:03:00.000-05:00

Well, well.

For all the rhetoric during the last three months since Katrina made land fall and caused so much damage, you'd have thought thousands had died and most of them were, how shall we say, of a certain heritage.

The hearings on the matter were, to say the least, more of the same. Some even compared it to the Holocaust. Of course, there is no comparison but the veiled reference to the popular leftist refrain that Bush is a fascist or Hitler comes through load and clear.

The facts are coming through and, as usual, they are crushing the rhetoric:

Of the 562 victims identified -- out of 883 -- 48 percent were Americans of African descent and 41 percent were Caucasian. 13 percent were Hispanic and 8 percent were unknown.

Here's the link to the data from the State of Louisiana:

http://www.dhh.louisiana.gov/offices/publications/pubs-145/DECEASED%20Victims%20released_11-14-2005_publication.pdf

Gobble, Gobble

2005-11-24T12:26:00.000-05:00

Happy Thanksgiving to all our members!

We are so looking forward to turkey and the fixin's.

We also have a lot to be thankful for including family, friends, country and our service men and women in far off places defending our freedoms while creating new freedoms for others. Truly the mark a great nation and people.

Round Two

2005-11-24T11:45:00.000-05:00

It seems the technical support people at blogger.com are not quite up to the task, so we start fresh with a new blog address.

Please bear with us as we get the little details right.