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

Watching the services for Gerald Ford and having been riveted by the beautiful services for Ronald Reagan I have a lingering thought that I can't shake.

It seems that U.S. Presidents have to start planning for their own funerals the day they take office and those plans are constantly reviewed and updated throughout their lifetime. The President gets to plan exactly how he or she will be presented to the mourning public every step of the way, which brings me back to my lingering thought.

Does anyone know if there are any limits? I have a vision of Bill Clinton being taken on a year long International farewell tour and doing it Barbra Streisand style. That is, having a "This Time I Really Mean Farewell" tour every couple of years for a decade or so. Say it ain't so Billy Jeff!

...and is rapidly assuming room temperature.

Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been hanged, according to s tate-run Iraqiya television.

The report gave no furthers, but Arab television stations Al-Hurra and Al-Arabiya reported Saddam was hanged around 6 a.m. local time Saturday (10 p.m. ET Friday) in Baghdad's Green Zone.

But there has been no official confirmation from either the Iraqi or U.S. governments.

Also hanged were Saddam's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, the former chief justice of the Revolutionary Court, according to the reports.

*with apologies to James Taranto

**UPDATE** Defiant to the end, via MSNBC.

**UPDATE** Hot Air has all the angles and is updating constantly.

**UPDATE** LGF has the after hanging photo, along with the typically slanted AP story

In many ways that have largely gone unappreciated Gerald Ford put this country back together after the debacle of Watergate. He was the only person ever to serve as both Vice-President and President of this country without ever being elected to either office. Because of Watergate there was never a chance that he would be elected in 1976 so the Democrats were able to name anyone in the world to represent them, assured that that person would gain the Presidency.

When you read all the condescending articles in the next few days about President Ford and how he came to serve, be mindful of who that "anyone in the world" was that the Democrats chose to push him out of office with.

As Noel Sheppard points out, the Washington Post has surely known most of this information long before now. We all know that were Murtha a Republican we would have seen this story on the front page from about the first of October and it would have been hammered all the way to the election.

The reason this is done on Christmas Day soon after an election is for a variety of reasons. The main one is that it won't harm the Democrats during the election since that was last month. It also allows the antique media to pretend that they fairly cover scandals no matter where they find them. The Christmas Day release is so that nobody will ever read the main story and it will be buried in the Holiday season.

Another reason, that Noel doesn't bring up, is perhaps the most sinister and shows to what lengths American media will conspire with the Democrats. When the next election rolls around they will be able to say that this is old news and was fully covered back in 2006, leaving the impression that the voters saw the story back then and deemed it irrelevant.

Washington Post story here.

Years ago I worked in a big name entertainment club in Augusta Georgia. James Brown would come in many nights and often be asked by the night's entertainer to do a song or two, or at least be recognized for a spotlight and a wave. As much as he loved the limelight and as brilliant as he was as an entertainer, I always thought he cherished the chances he got to be a regular guy even more.

JB would often get to the club early while we were setting up. He loved to tell us stories from his youth, give us boxing lessons, and even help us stock up or move some tables around. Later that night he would usually end up on stage thrilling the audience and reveling in the attention he received, but the smile was never quite as big as the one he had earlier that day.

RIP Godfather!

This is DNN.......I wonder if they got James Earl Jones to do their sign on? The title link is a different clip that was shown on Special Report with Brit Hume set up as a Windows Media View file. If you need a different format you can see it at Clear Glass Productions.

OK, I'm not a collectivist or a globalist or even a big proponent of the whirled peas movement, but I think we can all give a little for this effort. Click the title for some background music and have at it.

Hat tip to Buy Danish, whether she wanted one this time or not!

WASHINGTON – Former ambassador Joseph Wilson asked a federal judge Wednesday not to force him to testify in the CIA leak case and accused former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of trying to harass him on the witness stand.

*The real one, not the vicious-lib™ blogger also known as getalife.

In a conversation about taxes at Jim Wooten's Thinking Right blog, a poster named Diogenes that's a full fledged Darwiniac and unwilling to provide any proof or listen to anything that questions his/her beliefs, the subject popped up today. Then we got a surprise visit from "Jessie" who is going to unlock the mystery for us. Well probably not, but I'm going to invite him/her over to provide us with this enlightenment that escapes paleontologists, but is well known fact to a blogger. The relevant conversation begins here:

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

Diogenes,

I’m going to butcher it, but there’s a famous quote that advises to never argue with an idiot. He’ll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Your posts on public policy are great, but RW doesn’t deserve so much of your attention. Like so many Dittoheads, he’s absorbed and institutionlized (sic) the lies and no longer has the capacity for learning, thinking or growth.

Good luck.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

Dio,

Maybe you should munch a few of those mushrooms.

Jim and others have said they want to stick to the subject of taxes. After this response to you I’ll get out of the way as I’ve said all I need to on topic. I know they don’t want to turn this into an evolutionary debate and frankly the liberals over at luckovich’s are far more informed on the topic than you’ll ever be, so it’s more of an intellectual challenge to debate them.

As for your latest misguided assumption, I have never said I’m opposed to Darwin being proved to me through the fossil record. Paleontologists have been trying for decades and are largely giving up on Darwin. The myth of Darwinism is primarily promoted by evolutionary biologists that need the funding to continue and anti-religious zealots like you.

As for the “beautiful monster” I bring up that IS YOUR THEORY remember? You called it punctuated equilibrium and you use to claim that the lack of proof is proof.

I hope you have the decency to allow Jim his own wishes on his own blog. I know I will and I won’t be sucked into this childish game of name calling that you can’t seem to shake.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this

Oh and your little dog Jessie too!

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this

RW (1257) “The myth of Darwinism is primarily promoted by evolutionary biologists that need the funding to continue…”

See what I mean?

Jessie,

The comments are open and unmoderated, please tell us all about the proof that you have and no one else is privvy to.

**UPDATE** Jessie has been formally invited.

**UPDATE** Well it's been twenty four hours and there has still not been proof of any species evolving into another either here or on the blog this came from. We do have several links to the "talk origins" web site, which I highly recommend for insomniacs, but it basically says to trust them and not ask questions. It really makes you wonder why worshippers of Darwin are so petrified of questions. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't just linked to this and claimed it as proof.

Next time someone tells YOU that YOU should trust some new global ice age theory or twenty years later they want to sell you oven mitts just to touch your car doors because they read about global warming in Time magazine, keep in mind that in 2006 Time named YOU it's Person of the Year. And yes, that applies to anyone on the planet that reads this.

**UPDATE** Michelle Malkin took the time to read Time and it seems most of us aren't really a part of their little scheme.

(Hat tip: Buy Danish)

I suppose certain puffed-up congressmen are feeling their oats since the election, but that's no excuse for their unauthorized trips overseas to meet with leaders of foreign nations. This destructive practice must be stopped.

Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson traveled to Syria and met with its president, Bashar Assad, without the authority and contrary to the wishes of the Bush administration, including the State Department.

The well-known policy of the Bush administration is that the United States has limited diplomatic ties with the Syrian government because of its support for terrorist organizations Hezbollah and Hamas, its support of terrorism and ethnic strife in Iraq, and its policy toward Lebanon.

The Constitution firmly places the conduct of U.S. foreign policy in the hands of the executive branch because the Framers understood the pitfalls of conducting foreign policy by committee.

As amended, the Act states:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without
authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any
correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or
agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States,
or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his
agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury
which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or
subjects.

Source

And it's not a pretty sight.

The dialogue went like this:

Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?

“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”

“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.

“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.

He couldn’t have been more wrong.

Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.

That’s because the extremist Sunnis who make up a l Qaeda consider all Shiites to be heretics.

Al Qaeda’s Sunni roots account for its very existence. Osama bin Laden and his followers believe the Saudi Royal family besmirched the true faith through their corruption and alliance with the United States, particularly allowing U.S. troops on Saudi soil.

It’s been five years since these Muslim extremists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center.

Is it too much to ask that our intelligence overseers know who they are?

Civil War
And Hezbollah? I asked him. What are they?

“Hezbollah. Uh, Hezbollah...”

He laughed again, shifting in his seat.

“Why do you ask me these questions at five o’clock? Can I answer in Spanish? Do you speak Spanish?”

“Poquito,” I said—a little.

“Poquito?! “ He laughed again.

“Go ahead,” I said, talk to me about Sunnis and Shia in Spanish.

Reyes: “Well, I, uh....”

I apologized for putting him “on the spot a little.” But I reminded him that the people who have killed thousands of Americans on U.S. soil and in the Middle East have been front page news for a long time now.

It’s been 23 years since a Hezbollah suicide bomber killed over 200 U.S. military personnel in Beirut, mostly Marines.

Hezbollah, a creature of Iran, is close to taking over in Lebanon. Reports say they are helping train Iraqi Shiites to kill Sunnis in the spiralling civil war.

“Yeah,” Reyes said, rightly observing, “but . . . it’s not like the Hatfields and the McCoys. It’s a heck of a lot more complex.

“And I agree with you — we ought to expend some effort into understanding them. But speaking only for myself, it’s hard to keep things in perspective and in the categories.”

If reports are true that Chelsea Clinton and her boyfriend Marc Mezvinsky are considering marriage, the father of the groom won't be able to attend the wedding until he is released from prison in November 2008.

Ed Mezvinsky, a former Democratic Congressman from Iowa, is serving a seven-year sentence for fraud after getting caught up in a series of Nigerian e-mail scams.

Now why would I call special attention to the word Democratic? Would it be because I want to highlight that a Democrat is a crook? Could it be that I don't the "ic" on the end is appropriate in this sentence? Or could it be that the report didn't say that when first posted?

Read the first several user comments to find the answer. I find it awfully difficult to believe that all these commenters made the very same mistake.

Any time you go to Oahu take a left out of the airport and visit Pearl Harbor. Every time you take the ride out to the Arizona Memorial will be different until you step off the shuttle, then it all changes to the most serene emotion you will ever feel. The aura of standing on the Arizona Memorial is something I won't pretend to be able to describe in words, but I will tell you that as powerful as it is the first time, the experience never diminishes. A visit to Pearl Harbor should be the first stop on any visit to Oahu to reflect on the past and more importantly to see the future,

...the new head of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence says this.

“We’re not going to have stability in Iraq until we eliminate those militias, those private armies,” Reyes said. “We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq … We certainly can’t leave Iraq and run the risk that it becomes [like] Afghanistan” was before the 2001 invasion by the United States.

What do you suppose the moonbats will have to say about this?

When a reporter suggested that was not a position that was likely to be popular with many House Democrats, Reyes replied: “Well again, I differ in that I don’t want Iraq to become the next Afghanistan. We could not allow Iraq to become a safe haven for Al Qaeda, for Hamas, for Hizbullah, or anybody else. We cannot allow Iran or Syria to have a free hand in there to further destabilize the Middle East.”

Did Nancy Pelosi know about this?

Reyes added that he was “very clear” about his position to Pelosi when she chose him over two rivals—Rep. Jane Harman of California and Rep. Alcee Hastings—to head the critical intelligence post. One widely cited reason that Harman, a moderate Democrat who supported the war, didn’t get the nod from Pelosi is that the Speaker-designate wanted somebody who would be more aggressive in standing up to the Bush White House—which Reyes promises to be on other issues like domestic wiretapping and CIA secret prisons.

Why it appears she did, which only adds to my speculation here.

Professional golfer Jerry Kelly on a recent visit to Iraq:

Kelly said everywhere he went in Iraq, the soldiers were showered with affection.

"They're spreading so much goodwill," he said. "All the kids are coming up to them and hugging them and mobbing them. People were waving at us. They want us there...

"If we left now it would be so bad for those people who want us there and need us there and are getting the freedoms now they never had."

In this incredibly lazy front page report from today's Washington Post, Jonathan Weisman and Peter Slevin go into great detail telling us why Alcee Hastings was not tapped to chair the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, but give only the skimpiest of possibilities on why Jane Harman, who had been the ranking Democrat, was also snubbed.

The fight over the top spot on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has exposed the kind of factional politics that bedeviled House Democrats before they were swept from control in 1994. Harman, a moderate, strong-on-defense "Blue Dog" Democrat, had angered liberals with her reluctance to challenge the Bush administration's use of intelligence.

The details about Hastings are interesting, but a matter of public record and letting your readership know that he was impeached by a vote of 413 to 3 in the House and subsequently convicted by the Senate and removed from the bench, is really all you need.

A much more interesting report would detail the reasons Jane Harman was overlooked. The reporters might have actually had to do some work for those answers, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt by calling them lazy. The real problem might be that they know the real reason and it wouldn't reflect very well on Nancy Pelosi.

As the ranking Democrat on the committee Jane Harman was privy to the details of the NSA wiretap program. She was also sworn to secrecy on those details. It appears that Nancy Pelosi is punishing Harman for doing her job and keeping her oath, so what kind of message does that send to the new members? National security isn't a partisan game and the Speaker-designate has just told the Democrats that will work for her to either make it a game, national security secrets be damned, or pay the price.

**Clarification** This front page Washington Post story is from Wednesday November 29. The story was collected then and my text is somewhat misleading as to the publication date.

It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.

Because plans for implementing the commission's recommendations are still fluid, Democratic officials would not speak for the record. But aides on the House and Senate appropriations, armed services and intelligence committees confirmed this week that a reorganization of Congress would not be part of the package of homeland-security changes up for passage in the "first 100 hours" of the Democratic Congress.

"I don't think that suggestion is going anywhere," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), the chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee and a close ally of the incoming subcommittee chairman, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). "That is not going to be their party position."

So what was the pre-election story?

Reid said if Democrats take power, they would work to redeploy troops off the battlefields. Renew efforts to fire Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Fully implement the 9-11 Commission's recommendations. Rebuild the military, which some estimates show needs a $75 billion investment to bring it back up to pre war levels of readiness.

That was Harry Reid in an October 9. 2006 article. So wahat did his House counterpart, Nancy Pelosi, say back on June 13th?

"Republicans' misplaced priorities mean America is not as safe it should be. Democrats have a new direction for the American people -- one that will fully implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and make the security of the American people a top priority."

As much as I agree with the fact that a commission's, especially one as partisan and sloppy as the 9/11 commission, recommendations can't be followed without careful consideration, the Democrats were put into power with nothing more than a promise that they would do just that. Now that they have been elected they don't want to follow through. This isn't some new recommendation that came before them, they said the whole time they were planning to do it all. The only reason they aren't doing this one is because it would take power away from the corrupt John Murtha. Oh yea, they did have one other thing. They said they were going to end corruption in the halls of Congress. Nice start!