RW-(the original) Dancing Madly Backwards Through A Liberal Minefield

I'll let you read the title link with no excerpts here. The thing that strikes me is that this is the English language Pravda and the sources are all English language outlets, not to mention this being nothing more than a well worn out set of liberal talking points. So what happened?

.....the antique media or what's left of Air America, you might not realize how much tougher she is on Republicans than Democrats. I understand her point, we expect Republicans to be competent strong leaders and we don't really expect anything but second guessing and hindsight from Democrats. That's why when Republicans shy away from something because the press may not like it Ann comes along to blister them. For some reason that's never "hate speech".

Thanks to The New York Times, the easiest job in the world right now is: "Head of Counterintelligence -- Al-Qaida." You just have to read The New York Times over morning coffee, and you're done by 10 a.m.

The greatest threat to the war on terrorism isn't the Islamic insurgency -- our military can handle the savages. It's traitorous liberals trying to lose the war at home. And the greatest threat at home isn't traitorous liberals -- it's patriotic Americans, also known as "Republicans," tut-tutting the quaint idea that we should take treason seriously.

Why they would savage him of course. Joe Lieberman is a good and principled man, with the exception of that year he got hoodwinked by Al Gore, so sometimes it's hard to remember that he ran for reelection to the Senate in 2000 while also running for Vice-President. He was easily elected in Connecticut that year, although he fought tooth and nail for six weeks to keep from taking the job. So what changed?

Lieberman supports the Bush administration's efforts in the overall war effort, including the liberation of Iraq. Beyond that Joe is a pretty much a straight line party man, but in today's Democratic Party you better toe the über liberal, moveon.org mark or you will be a pariah. That being said, Lieberman may be breathing a sigh of relief and beginning to cruise to his parties nomination, which will pretty much assure reelection, now. Yes babblin' Barbra Streisand has endorsed Lieberman's opponent.

Lieberman is facing the toughest challenge he's had since wining his Senate seat in 1988, a Greenwich millionaire cable company executive named Ned Lamont who is tapping into an anger from both local and national Democrats at Lieberman for taking positions at odds with the Democrat orthodoxy. The liberal blogosphere has made defeating Lieberman one of its chief causes of 2006, poring in thousands of dollars to Lamont's campaign and constantly bashing Lieberman, especially for his fervent support of the Iraq War and standing as the strongest Democratic supporter of President Bush's policies there. Even celebrity Democratic supporters, like George Soros and Barbra Streisand, have donated to Lamont's campaign.

Joe, it may not be much but I sincerely urge all my Connecticut readers to get out there and help you at the polls. (I hope that will be enough to make you forget that whole Sore/Loserman incident)

Talk about something we could reword into making some sense, but I would hate for someone to get the wrong impression that a Democrat operative actually came up with a sensible plan for America. I have decided instead to bring Rita's letter to life through the magic of illustration. Who knew Deaniacs could write?

Dear Rick,

I was so excited when Chairman Dean asked me to write to you about the real success that we have had in Mississippi because of the 50-state strategy. I know that the plan is working because I've seen the success first-hand.

I joined the Mississippi Democratic Party as a field organizer because I am concerned about our future. I just don't see the Republicans taking any real action on issues people in every state face, like access to affordable health care, education and jobs.

Our state has the highest unemployment rate in the country and no minimum wage requirements for the few jobs that people do have. Federal minimum wage legislation affects us as much in Mississippi as it does in any other state - no matter how "red" the state may be.

After Republicans in Washington killed the first minimum wage increase in nearly a decade this week, it's clear that this is a place where people need to hear about our party's values and our party's plans to make the changes that will improve people's lives.

Until now, Mississippi Democrats haven't had the resources to do that. I took this job to be part of the solution.

Before the 50-state strategy, the Mississippi Democratic Party had only one staff member. And though he worked tirelessly, he just wasn't enough. Now, our office has five staff members all dedicated to communicating with and organizing Democrats here. We're finally reaching those people who want to help, and we're expanding our support by getting the word out to everyone else that Democrats are ready to lead.

I've often heard people say, "Democrats can't win in the South." That's plain wrong. We can win in the South, and we are winning in the South. Last year, there were four open seats in the Mississippi Legislature. By organizing on the ground the way Democrats in Mississippi haven't had the resources to do in a generation, we swept all four elections. Now Gov. Barbour has four more Democrats holding appointments in his administration and the same number of Democrats sitting in the legislature.

We could not have done that without the grassroots network that the 50-state strategy has already put in place. Our program recruits and trains the precinct captains who were crucial to those victories, and who will be the core of the victories to come.

When people say, "We can't win in the South," that's pessimism and surrender. And we sure won't win if we give up before we even try. But the South is exactly where we need to be. Shame on us if we don't stand up for those most in need in this part of the country.

The 50-state strategy is the opposite of that pessimistic approach -- and it is giving us the tools and the hope it takes to win.

Sincerely,

Rita Royals
Field Organizer
Mississippi Democratic Party

**UPDATE** It's been pointed out that the lyrics per se are already about as twisted as possible, oh and DavidU is trying to play the youth card, so let's just do the chorus. I'll bold that and replace it on the main page as we go. Don't worry I'll post something real fairly soon.


In a comment on our sister blog, ml After Dark "getalife" has posted yet another story from the antique media, breathlessly citing their unnamed sources. I thought it might be fun to rewrite the lyrics to "A Horse With No Name". I have begun by changing the title. Ready, set, GO>>>>>


Lyrics for: A Source With No Name

on the first part of the journey
i was looking at all the life
there were plants and birds and rocks and things
there was sand and hills and rings
the first thing i met was a fly with a buzz
and a sky with no clouds
the heat was hot and the ground was dry
but the air was full of sound

(chorus)
i've been through the desert on a horse with no name
it felt good to be out of the rain
in the desert you can remember your name
'cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
la la ....

after two days in the desert sun
my skin began to turn red
after three days in the desert fun
i was looking at a river bed
and the story it told of a river that flowed
made me sad to think it was dead
(chorus)

after nine days i let the horse run free
'cause the desert had turned to sea
there were plants and birds and rocks and things
there was sand and hills and rings
the ocean is a desert with its life underground
and a perfect disguise above
under the cities lies a heart made of ground
but the humans will give no love
(chorus)

Soldier's Burden

Dear Nicole-I don't know what's going on with your site, but nothing I post comes through. Kind of makes it hard to participate in the FF. Please advise. Sincerely RW

***UPDATE*** Nicole has released me from the clutches of her spam folder so that I may contribute to her latest endeavor. Join us! Hopefully she won't get all pissy and ban you too.

House and Senate Democratic leaders held a press conference on June 16 to announce their bold, new policy initiatives in a plan called New Direction. Their accompanying press statement promises, “Democrats are ready with a New Direction, with policies to address the real challenges Americans face every day.” Their idea of the “real challenges Americans face every day” does not include fighting and winning the global war on terrorism, restructuring the Social Security and Medicare programs, rewriting the income tax code or cutting federal spending, because none of those issues are included in New Direction. Instead, they proposed more obstruction, more pandering and more deception with new rhetoric.

More from Townhall.com

Sorry, I was trying out a new moonbat channeling device.

Let's examine the three assumptions critics of Mr. Bush's Iraq policy make:

Bush lied about Saddam being a threat. Both the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee and the independent Silberman-Robb Commission found not one case in which Bush officials, quoting the Senate committee, "attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities." Recall that both the French and German intelligence agencies also believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Just two months before the war, the Los Angeles Times reported that chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix "disclosed troubling new details about Iraq's weapons programs and expressed frustration with what he described as Baghdad's refusal to resolve long-standing questions about efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons, as well as long-range missiles." Mr. Blix later told reporters that in his gut he felt that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. "These guys had played cat-and-mouse during the whole of the '90s, so I was suspicious of that," he told NBC's Tim Russert earlier this month. He later changed his mind when his officials uncovered no evidence of a weapons program. But the question remains: If President Bush lied about Saddam having WMD why did so many others also say the same thing at the time?

Some Democrats still believe Saddam was a threat, WMD or not. Former Nebraska senator and presidential candidate Bob Kerrey, now president of New York's New School, noted earlier this year that newly declassified documents from Saddam Hussein's office concerning a meeting between an Iraq official and Osama bin Laden show that "Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States." One document is a handwritten account of a Feb. 19, 1995, meeting between an official representative of Iraq and bin Laden, where bin Laden broached the idea of "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. The document reports that after Saddam was informed of the meeting he agreed to broadcast sermons of a radical imam, Suleiman al Ouda, requested by bin Laden. Several months later al Qaeda terrorists attacked the headquarters of the Saudi National Guard. The document specifically said the question of future cooperation "between the two parties [is] to be left according to what's open" in the future.

"I personally and strongly believe you don't have to prove that Iraq was collaborating [with] Osama bin Laden on the Sept. 11 attacks to prove he was an enemy and that he would collaborate with people who would do our country harm," Mr. Kerrey told the New York Sun. "This presents facts that should not be used to tie Saddam to attacks on Sept. 11. It does tie him into a circle that meant to damage the United States."

Read the rest here if you like. In case you've forgotten or the drive by media has successfully filtered it out, here is what President Bush actually said.

That was one policy statement from Democratic Congressman Jack/John Murtha aka Mothra, in typical jackass party fashion there are many, many others. (and why are the names Jack and John interchangeable?, but I digress) Here is an excerpt from Meet the Press where Mothra tries to explain having a quick reaction team in Okinawa:

MR. RUSSERT: You say redeploy. Again, Mr. Rove challenges that comment.
Let’s listen and give you again a chance to respond to the White House.

(Videotape, Monday):

MR. ROVE: Congressman Murtha said, “Let’s redeploy them immediately to another country in the Middle East. Let’s get out of Iraq and go to another country.” My question is, what country would take us? What country would say after the United States cut and run from Iraq, what country in the Middle East would say, “Yeah. Paint a big target on our back and then you’ll cut and run on us.” What country would say that? What country would accept our troops?

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: What’s your response?

REP. MURTHA: There’s many countries understand the importance of stability in the Middle East. This is an international problem. We, we use 20 million barrels of oil a day. China’s the second largest user. All these countries understand you need stability for the energy supply that’s available in the Middle East. So there’s many, many countries.

MR. RUSSERT: Who?

REP. MURTHA: Kuwait’s one that will take us. Qatar, we already have bases in Qatar. So Bahrain. All those countries are willing to take the United States. Now, Saudi Arabia won’t because they wanted us out of there in the first place. So—and we don’t have to be right there. We can go to Okinawa. We, we don’t have—we can redeploy there almost instantly. So that’s not—that’s, that’s a fallacy. That, that’s just a statement to rial up people to support a failed policy wrapped in illusion.

MR. RUSSERT: But it’d be tough to have a timely response from Okinawa.

REP. MURTHA: Well, it—you know, they—when I say Okinawa, I, I’m saying troops in Okinawa. When I say a timely response, you know, our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly. And—and—when they don’t know we’re coming. There’s no question about it. And, and where those airplanes won’t—came from I can’t tell you, but, but I’ll tell you one thing, it doesn’t take very long for them to get in with cruise missiles or with, with fighter aircraft or, or attack aircraft, it doesn’t take any time at all. So we, we have done—this one particular operation, to say that that couldn’t have done, done—it was done from the outside, for heaven’s sakes.

Expose the Left has the video. The transcript is here.

Has there ever been a political party that is so totally convinced that are just a tiny combination of words away from a rise to power? I don't know what is more pathetic, the fact that the Democratic Party thinks the American people are this stupid or that even if you tell them what they are doing wrong they dismiss you as a buffoon that clearly lacks their grasp of the world around you. When Ron Brownstein and the LA Times have figured it out you might think Dean/Pelosi/Reid & co. would listen. Don't count on it, their meeting of "Build a Better Bumpersticker" is about to begin.

Happy Father's Day everybody! I'm blessed with two wonderful children and waking up to a story of how clueless the Dems are doesn't hurt either.

I bet you think that 1893 was just a jumble of mundane events compared to the invention of Cracker Jack, but you might be surprised. On May 10, 1893 the United States Supreme Court made a declaration that stands unchallenged to this day. A precedent so set in stone it should forever be the benchmark for Stare Decisis. Yes the highest court in the land declared the tomato a vegetable.

Somehow I knew you could use a good laugh. I guess it would be more accurate to say reality is descending on them, but there isn't a chance in ten they will notice.

On the face Busby’s loss seems like a great improvement, a “moral victory” if you will, over her last general election. Her 45 percent was a marked increase from her 2004 showing of 37 percent. But in 2004 she was facing an entrenched, 7th term incumbent. Then, the Republican base was energized and the GOP picked up seats in the Senate and the House, and President Bush shattered the record for the number of votes received by a Presidential candidate. The opposite is expected this year.

In reality Busby’s loss was a dismal failure and shows the major uphill battle that the Democrats have just to save face in November. Figure everything that Busby had going for her:

I first laid out the sequence here and so far everything is right on schedule. At this point I would say that both chambers of Congress will remain in Republican control with about a 3 seat +/- change in the House and a net loss of one seat for the Republicans in the Senate. Of course if the Democrats ever lay out their plan this could become a Republican landslide.

Our very own Devil Doll has agreed to either sooth your soul or slap you silly. I don't think you get to choose which. For example:

devil doll said...
dear mystified,

there's actually a place near warner robbins' air force base that specializes in comedy and "redneck" music. i can't think of the name of the fourlane highway at the moment - but you can't miss it.

i supppose it depends on your "potential" date. personally, i'd prefer the motel bar - nothing like buck teeth and bud light to get you in the mood. the quick trip might be good - but only after the lovin' - some funyons and gatoraid can go a long way. and don't forget to dig deep in the wallet for some newport menthols.

Maybe it's finally time to acknowledge that the terrorist playbook says to make these charges. If it didn't work so well with the blame America Canada first crowd perhaps we could be done with this foolishness.

The treatment of the suspects, accused of plotting a number of terrorist strikes in Ontario that allegedly included bombings and taking senior politicians hostage, "constitutes torture," lawyer Rocco Galati said outside the court.

"That torture includes being kept in a room that's lit 24 hours a day, being woken up every half-hour, being beaten by the guards, on and on and on," said Galati, who represents Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, a 21-year-old health sciences graduate of McMaster University.

More from Little Green Footballs

I wonder what Jack Murtha (D-Okinawa) might think about this story. I'd say this is, at the very least, a reason that people holding positions of influence in our government might want to allow an investigation to take place before they start making the rounds calling our Marines cold-blooded killers and accusing Gen. Peter Pace of a cover-up.

The sum and substance of this thumbnail sketch on the Haditha claims is that it follows so closely the template for the TANG and Plame stories. Take a reporter with an anti-Administration agenda, an interested group (think of the Mashhadanis as the VIPS in the Plame case or Burkett and Lucy Ramirez in the TANG case) and a story too good to be checked and circumstances where the people attacked are limited in what they can quickly respond to and you get a story which smells to me like it will soon be unraveled.

This time, I’m betting the consequences to the press which rushed to judgment will be more disastrous than it was to Dan Rather. I surely hope so.

If you blow up the picture you will see that DavidU has broken past the mounted security detail and is distracting Bluegrass Cat.

Why don't they just run the picture of Abramoff way, way, way back in the far reaches of the room and charge President Bush with being a mob hitman.

Kidan and Abramoff had previously insisted, through their attorneys, that they knew nothing about Boulis's killing. Three other men are charged with murder in the case.

Kidan's attorney, Joseph Conway, confirmed that Kidan met with authorities but would not discuss what was said. He noted that Kidan's plea agreement to fraud charges stemming from the SunCruz purchase requires him to cooperate in state and federal investigations.

Abramoff's attorney in Miami, Neal Sonnett, said in an e-mail Friday that he had no comment "other than to repeat what I've said publicly before: that Mr. Abramoff has never had knowledge of any facts related to the Boulis case."

Maybe tomorrow we can pick up a Washington Post and learn that Abramoff claims to have no knowledge of the firebombing of the women and children in Waco. The Post could just put it in their style-book, all stories must contain an avowal or denial from Jack Abramoff.

The Belmont Breeze*
The Official Drink of the Belmont Race
*Original Recipe by Dale DeGroff

1.5 oz. Gentleman Jack (Jack Daniels)
.75 oz. Harveys Bristol Cream Sherry
.75 oz. Fresh Lemon Juice
.75 oz. Simple Syrup
1.5 oz. Fresh Orange juice
1.5 oz. Cranberry juice

Shake ingredients with ice and top with half 7up and half soda, approx. one ounce of each. Garnish with fresh strawberry, mint sprig and a lemon wedge.

One of the best parts of the Belmont Stakes is when a horse has won the Derby and the Preakness and is going for the Triple Crown, then you have this year. Barbaro's racing career is over and Bernardini decided not to run. However, I believe the Belmont Breeze is by far the best of the Triple Crown cocktails so all is not lost. Saturday's winner will get to pick first in next year's Kentucky Derby. Let's get some odds on anybody cashing that one in.

Liberals love to boast that they are not “religious,” which is what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. Of course liberalism is a religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, its own high priests, its own saints, its own total worldview, and its own explanation of the existence of the universe. In other words, liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as “religion.”

Under the guise of not favoring religion, liberals favor one cosmology over another and demand total indoctrination into theirs. The state religion of liberalism demands obeisance (to the National Organization for Women), tithing (to teachers’ unions), reverence (for abortion), and formulaic imprecations (“Bush lied, kids died!” “Keep your laws off my body!” “Arms for hostages!”). Everyone is taxed to support indoctrination into the state religion through the public schools, where innocent children are taught a specific belief system, rather than, say, math.

Read the rest of chapter one here and then buy it and read the rest.

I shudder to think what would happen if something like this was necessary today. Between the press that wants to paint every battle as the US overstepping it's place in the World and the Democrats desperately latching on to any hardship as their ticket back into power. The "free world" would be an historic rumor, except you wouldn't be able to read a history book.

Politics stops at the waters edge might sound like a stale slogan, but if we don't regain that united resolve we are destined to make a mockery of those that fought for us 62 years ago. It would be a damn shame to say that what they gave everything for wasn't important enough for us to remember or live up to. It's so much easier to claim that the real enemy is our duly elected President and to use any shortcoming by an individual member of the military to paint them all as psychopathic killers that are only out of control because your political party is out of power. This date in our history is memorable, but it really isn't that much different than many in our history. Our military has always been up for the hard and thankless tasks, but they have rarely been used as the political pawns that they are today.

Despite the warm glow of self-satisfaction that the liberal vision confers on liberals, ugly facts keep intruding to undermine that vision. Some liberals eventually jump ship and defect to conservatism when the facts keep piling up too high to ignore.

This takes time, of course, and in the meantime there is a never-ending supply of new young people to become charmed with the liberal vision and replace those who have become disenchanted with it.

Other liberals hang on to liberal ideas to the bitter end -- especially when the end is not that bitter for them personally, when they live insulated lives in academia, the courts, foundations and other places where there is no price for liberals to pay for being wrong, no matter how disastrous the consequences for others.

Still, facts are a danger to the vision. In recent times, those on the left have increasingly sought to suppress facts that go counter to the vision.

Part I...Part II...Part III (There is really no compelling reason to read these in order)

At least Governor Crazy Howie MD waited until a different appearance to contradict himself. Most of the Democratic moonbat parade does it in the course of a speech or in John F'ng Kerry's case a sentence.

Dean called opponents of homosexual marriage "bigots." He said, "At a time when the Republican Party is in trouble with their conservative base, Bill Frist is taking a page straight out of the Karl Rove playbook to distract from the Republican Party's failed leadership and misplaced priorities by scapegoating LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) families for political gain, using marriage as a wedge issue." It's not only morally wrong, it is shameful and reprehensible," said the enlightened Dean.

Now flashback a week or so and picture Dean on the set of the evil bigot Pat Robertson's "700 Club." Dean appeared as part of his effort to reclaim "values voters" for the Democratic Party. On that program Dean reportedly said the party's platform provides that "marriage is between a man and a woman." Later, Dean had to apologize to gay rights leaders for incorrectly stating the party's platform position.

Surely I'm misreading one of these two reports. Which is it, Howard? Or, perhaps I should say, "Which face will you be wearing today: the bigoted or the enlightened one?"

US director Michael Moore reacts as he holds the Palme d'Or for his winning film entry "Fahrenheit 9/11" during the awards ceremony at the 57th Cannes Film Festival , May 22, 2004. The film, by Michael Moore, is a documentary that criticizes US President and the war in Iraq. [Reuters]


Michael Moore's steadfast insistence that Fahrenheit 9/11 was truly a documentary, in spite of it's factual inaccuracies, seemed like a decent gamble as award season came around. Now he may well have to pay off big time or admit that the movie was less a documentary than a "based on a true story" feature film you might find on Lifetime.