January 25, 2007
"Sen. Hillary Clinton declared this weekend, "I'm in to win." Anyone who has watched her remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency. I wish she felt the same way about the war."The author of this Op-Ed goes on to point out several basic facts that Mrs. Clinton and her ilk on both sides of the aisle seem to have forgotten:
· We are at war. America faces an existential threat. This is not, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has claimed, a "situation to be solved." It would be nice if we could wake up tomorrow and say, as Sen. Barack Obama suggested at a Jan. 11 hearing, "Enough is enough." Wishing doesn't make it so. We will have to fight these terrorists to the death somewhere, sometime. We can't negotiate with them or "solve" their jihad. If we quit in Iraq now, we must get ready for a harder, longer, more deadly struggle later.Clearly all points that we should never forget, especially that our apparent weakness emboldens our enemies, at home and abroad.· Quitting helps the terrorists. Few politicians want to be known as spokesmen for retreat. Instead we hear such words as "redeployment," "drawdown" or "troop cap." Let's be clear: If we restrict the ability of our troops to fight and win this war, we help the terrorists. Don't take my word for it. Read the plans of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ayman Zawahiri to drive America from Iraq, establish a base for al-Qaeda and spread jihad across the Middle East. The terrorists are counting on us to lose our will and retreat under pressure. We're in danger of proving them right.
· Beware the polls. In November the American people expressed serious concerns about Iraq (and about Republican corruption and scandals). They did not say that they want us to lose this war. They did not say that they want us to allow Iraq to become a base for al-Qaeda to conduct global terrorist operations. They did not say that they would rather we fight the terrorists here at home. Until you see a poll that asks those questions, don't use election results as an excuse to retreat.
· Retreat from Iraq hurts us in the broader war. We are fighting the war on terrorism with allies across the globe, leaders such as Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan and Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. Brave activists are also standing with us, fighting for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the empowerment of women. They risk their lives every day to defeat the forces of terrorism. They can't win without us, and many of them won't continue to fight if they believe we're abandoning them. Politicians urging America to quit in Iraq should explain how we win the war on terrorism once we've scared all of our allies away....
· Our soldiers will win if we let them. Read their blogs. Talk to them. They know that free people must fight to defend their freedom. No force on Earth -- especially not an army of terrorists and insurgents -- can defeat our soldiers militarily. American troops will win if we show even one-tenth the courage here at home that they show every day on the battlefield. And by the way, you cannot wish failure on our soldiers' mission and claim, at the same time, to be supporting the troops. It just doesn't compute.
You can not negotiate with Terrorists unless you speak their language: senseless violence and unwavering resolve. Read the rest of this fabulous piece here.
The author of this piece? Liz Cheney, former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And yes, that Cheney.
h/t Dafydd
Posted by: caltechgirl at
08:45 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 644 words, total size 4 kb.
Check back early and often for updates!
h/t Malkin
Posted by: caltechgirl at
01:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.
January 23, 2007
Best line "You did not vote to lose" NICE
Nice summary of what is going on in Iraq.
What did you notice?
Posted by: caltechgirl at
07:19 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.
Also: The Good Cap'n is liveblogging the speech, there's an open discussion thread at LGF, and Aaron gives us his version of what the President WISHES he could say tonight!
Posted by: caltechgirl at
05:50 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.
h/t Emily
Posted by: caltechgirl at
03:31 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.
January 19, 2007
Other than "It's none of your business," which most people don't appreciate, try this on for size:
California would become the first state to explicitly ban spanking for children younger than 4 under legislation to be introduced next week.This is a normal spanking she's talking about, or a slap on the hand, or something similar. Abusive BEATING is already outlawed, you know.Slapping, smacking, whacking or kicking also would be outlawed.
Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, a Mountain View Democrat who is crafting the measure, said corporal punishment victimizes helpless children and contributes to a society "addicted to violence."
[...]
"To my mind, there's no amount of physical force that's appropriate on a child 3 years old or younger," Lieber said.
Sorry folks, but I believe in occasional corporal punishment. There's nothing wrong with a swat on the butt from an open hand every once in a while. And the threat of such a swat goes a long way when a kid KNOWS that the adults in their lives will make good on it.
But let's get back to what she said, specifically that part about corporal punishment contributing to a "violence-addicted" society. Umm, Ms. Lieber, I think an EVEN better argument could be made that as the use of corporal punishment has declined, violence has SKYROCKETED.
I would make mention of the fact that Ms. Lieber is childless, but I won't stoop to Barbara Boxer levels, so I'll simply ask her what qualification she has for telling parents how to raise their children, since she has no personal experience and is not a child therapist or pediatrician?
h/t Darleen
Posted by: caltechgirl at
01:31 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.
January 18, 2007
A group of Methodist ministers from across the nation launched an online petition drive Thursday urging Southern Methodist University to stop trying to land George W. Bush's presidential library.What the F*ck happened to "Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors", huh?The petition, on a newly created Web site, http://www.protectsmu.org, says that "as United Methodists, we believe that the linking of his presidency with a university bearing the Methodist name is utterly inappropriate." [emphasis mine -Ed.]
I guess it only applies to liberals. F*cking hypocrites.
I am done with the United Methodist church. DONE. Period.
See, I grew up in the UM church. My Dad is a lay minister in the church. We were married in a UM church. But no more. I stopped going to church a long time ago, for a variety of reasons, but I always loved the UM church for its very laissez faire approach. Gay? No problem. Divorced? No problem. Female? Who cares?
I would agree with these "pastors" if they were excluding him on the grounds that he had done something famously immoral. A church (or church-sponsored school) shouldn't associate itself with someone immoral. But because you don't like his politics?
Give me a f*cking break.
It's a church, people. CHURCH. Politics stops at the f*cking door. Not to mention that it is located in central Texas, Mrs. Bush went there, and the Bushes are IN FACT Methodists.
You never would have heard a PEEP from them if it was Clinton's library. And we all know the things HE did that ministers are supposed to frown upon.....
Posted by: caltechgirl at
12:00 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.
January 15, 2007
"Cuban leader Fidel Castro is in serious condition after a series of three failed operations on his large intestine for diverticulitis complicated by infection, the Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Monday.Either way, he ain't long for this world.
Castro, 80, suffered a serious infection that worsened to peritonitis, the newspaper's Tuesday edition said, citing two medical sources at the Madrid hospital where a surgeon who visited Castro in December works. The report was posted on the newspaper's Web site on Monday.
Castro's prognosis is "very serious" and he is being fed intravenously, the paper said."
Posted by: caltechgirl at
07:06 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 153 words, total size 1 kb.
January 14, 2007
Posted by: caltechgirl at
08:22 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.
January 12, 2007
"For World War II veteran Sam Stia, a legislative proposal that would cease requiring New Jersey schools to teach about Veterans Day and Memorial Day can be summed up in two words.Observe the holiday without understanding why, eh?"That's wrong," Stia, 83, said Thursday from his Hamilton home, where he flies an American flag at half-staff to honor fallen soldiers. "We're just giving our flag away and our patriotism away."
Stia and other veterans are steamed about the proposal, which the state lawmakers unanimously passed last month and now awaits action by the governor. It was included as part of a larger measure designed to help control property taxes, mostly by abolishing some laws on school purchasing and public hearings.
Other holidays about which schools no longer would be required to teach include Columbus Day, Thanksgiving, Arbor Day and Commodore Barry Day, which commemorates Revolutionary War hero John Barry.
New Jersey schools must observe the holidays under a 1967 law designed to promote "the development of a higher spirit of patriotism." Florida, Nebraska and Washington are among states with similar laws."
If you're a Jersey taxpayer (Jimbo, Kate, et. al.) maybe you should let your reps know how unacceptable this is.
Posted by: caltechgirl at
02:31 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.
Evidently this is no longer good enough: in attacking Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice yesterday, Senator Boxer said,
"Who pays the price?" Boxer repeatedly demanded. "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family."Yeah, so because Condi focused her life on a remarkable career and chose to make that a priority over marrying and having children she has no right to ask other people's children to sacrifice themselves for our country? Give me a fucking break.
No wonder American women are conflicted. We now MUST be superwoman. We can't be an important part of the political discourse of this country unless we're wives and mothers, evidently.
Ironic turn of events, no? 100 years ago wives and mothers were thought to be the least fit to have a political opinion. Now, according to Mrs. Boxer, the only women fit to make political decisions are wives and mothers.
And I guess this distinction even includes lesbians, since the democrat agenda is for them to be able to marry legally, and science makes it possible for any woman to have a baby without a man in the picture.
I am disgusted, frankly. Could you tell?
More on this, and far more eloquently from Darleen and Beth MVRWC
Posted by: caltechgirl at
07:37 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.
January 11, 2007
Dean Barnett has a great FAQ about the new Iraq strategy posted at Hugh Hewitt.
Here's a brief sample:
Now go read the rest!1) How in the hell are an additional 20,000 troops going to make such a big difference when we already have about 140,000 troops in Iraq? It makes no sense! Cut and run!!
First, calm down. We're going to walk through this analytically, not sprint through it hysterically. The current troop level in Baghdad is only 13,000. Most of the 20,000 new troops are going to be headed to Baghdad. That means we're going to increase our troop complement in Baghdad by roughly 150%. In other words, as regards the Battle of Baghdad, this is an enormous tactical adjustment, not a symbolic gesture.
Posted by: caltechgirl at
01:17 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.
"We can no longer endorse your strident and uncompromising position," the letter to Carter said. "This is not the Carter Center or the Jimmy Carter we came to respect and support."and
"We are deeply troubled by the president's comments and writings and are submitting the following letter of resignation to the Carter Center,"Perhaps most telling, however, is their indictment of Carter for,
"[abandoning his] historic role of broker in favor of becoming an advocate for one side." and "[confusing] opinion with fact, subjectivity with objectivity and force for change with partisan advocacy,"Yeeeouch.
Kenneth Stein, the first Executive Director of the Carter Center resigned a month ago over this same book.
Perhaps Mr. Carter should re-think his strategy here. Continuing to be "relevant" will do far less for his legacy than returning to his roots in fair-dealing.
Or maybe he's tired of hiding his true colors.
Update: This brings to 16 the number of advisors that Carter's book has alienated. Professsor Melvin Konner declined the honor even before joining the committee, saying in part:
"I am now carefully rereading parts of this very puzzling and problematic book, having read it through once quickly. I am not going to point out again here all the mistakes and misrepresentations pointed out by others (to take just one example, his flat contradiction of the accounts by President Clinton and Dennis Ross of events at Camp David at which they were present and he was not)˜none of which he has answered—nor explain the grotesque distortion caused by his almost completely ignoring Jewish history between ancient times and 1947 (he devotes five lines on page 64 to that millennial tragic story and mentions the Holocaust twice; his "Historical Chronology" at the outset contains nothing˜nothing˜between 1939 and 1947). However, I will call your attention to a sentence on p. 213 that had not stood out for me the first time I read it: "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."Give it up Jimmah. It's time to go.As someone who has lived his life as a professional reader and writer, I cannot find any way to read this sentence that does not condone the murder of Jews until such time as Israel unilaterally follows President Carter's prescription for peace. This sentence, simply put, makes President Carter an apologist for terrorists and places my children, along with all Jews everywhere, in greater danger. "-- Emphasis mine, Ed.
h/t Fausta
Posted by: caltechgirl at
01:04 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 482 words, total size 3 kb.
January 04, 2007
LA Drivers
Leftards who let power go to their heads
Feminists
People who pick on the weak
assholes who don't pay their child support
People who slam their siblings in public
People who don't pick up their dog poo
Egomaniacs
Incompetents
Cashiers who don't know how to use their registers
Target
jackass house guests who complain for a week. About EVERYTHING
Litterbugs
Fucktards who drive SLLLLLOW in the left lane. Especially on the Arroyo Parkway.
cagastro and pals
that little ronery North Korean fuck, too
TV network executives
Sales tax
Stuffed shirt bureaucrats
telemarketers
the replacement mailman
idiots who wash their sidewalks. Talk about wasting water. Fuckers. This is CA.
dook basketball
Nick Saban
Dan LeBatard. Where the Fuck is Wilbon, goddammit??
the NIH study section who told me that they love my science and acknowledge that I have the expertise to do the work, but they don't think I have enough experience.
Ads on the delete screen on the TiVo. WTF is that about? I pay enough for the fucking service as it is.
Sorority Chicklets
The Girls Gone Wild guy. And all the little sluts on those videos too. Cheap much?
vegan evangelists
enviroNazis
Clueless fucks who think that if they keep those Kerry/ Edwards bumper stickers on, that they can live in denial that the election is over.
John Kerry
John Edwards
sheeple who actually believe the media in all instances without question
and did I mention fucking stupid LA drivers?
Posted by: caltechgirl at
10:54 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 2 kb.
81 queries taking 0.0673 seconds, 245 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








