- WARNING TIGHT-ASSED LIBS: IF YOU CAN'T TAKE A JOKE, DON'T READ THIS BLOG!
- JOHN F. KERRY'S COMMENTS REFLECT WHAT THE DEMOCRATS TRULY THINK ABOUT OUR TROOPS
- WE ARE "pro-America" "pro-Wal-Mart" & "pro-Israel" BLOGGERS
- HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE LIBERAL MEDIA REPORTS ON LIBERAL SENATOR "DINGY" HARRY REID AND HIS LAND SCANDAL AND ILLEGAL USE OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS?
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Film Review - The Winds of War (1983)
I had remembered The Winds of War mini-series based off Herman Wouk's book, and aquired both the books during the war. This past year I bought the seven-disc set, to both The Winds of War, and War and Remembrance, of which both series total nearly 50 hours of viewing time. Watching both of those mini-series brought back many memories not only reading the book, but of the place wear I read the book. I can remember exactly how my tent set-up was, I still remember the sun's rays hitting The Winds of War as I read, and all was right with the world.
The Winds of War follows a U.S. Navy family -- The Henry's. Cmdr., later Capt. Victor "Pug" Henry, played by long time actor Robert Mitchum, is the Navy attache in 1939 Berlin, and he is stationed at the American Embassy in Berlin prior to the Nazi invasion of Poland, which he predicts. Pug's wife Rhoda, played by Polly Bergen accompanies him on his assignment to Berlin, and while on the ocean voyage meets instrumental people he will come to know over the next couple of years. German General von Roon, played by Jeremy Kemp, as well as the Tudsbury's, 28 year-old Pamela and her elderly father British journalist Talky, played by Victoria Tennant, and Michael Logan, who meet up with Pug on their journey through 1939-1941. Pug and Von Roon, also become social friends, and even play tennis and hunt together before the Polish invasion seperates their friendship forever.
Pug, a fictional character is thrown into situation after situation a foreign diplomat could only dream of -- from meeting Adolf Hitler right off the bat in Berlin, to then later meeting Mussolini, then Churchill, Stalin, as well as President Roosevelt himself on many occassions. I imagined myself as Pug Henry as I delved initially into the book but today watch the DVD, because I've been to many of the places that Pug visited.
Pug develops a special relationship with President Roosevelt, played by Ralph Bellamy, and the President uses Pug as a way to gauge America's reluctant entrance toward entering the War.
Wouk introduces us to Pug's defiant son Byron, played by an aging Jan-Michael Vincent, who eventually falls for the headstrong niece of a famous Jewish-American author Aaron Jastrow, played John Houseman who lives in Sienna, Italy. Natalie Jastrow, played by Ali McGraw, eventually finds herself with Byron under fire from the German blitzkrieg at the onset of the attack that crushed Poland in 1939. In that time, Leslie Slote, played by David Dukes, who works with the foreign service, whom Byron met in Sienna, and they part ways from Warsaw, Byron and Leslie going on to Berlin, while Natalie back to Sienna.
Byron is fearlessness in Poland, and takes chances by sketching maps from the top of a church tower under fire near the German lines, or and bringing water to the beleaguered American Embassy in smokey Warsaw.
In Berlin, Pug meets Palmer Kirby, played by Peter Graves, who happens to be working on the secretive atomic bomb, and Pugs other son Warren, played by Ben Murphy is qualifying as a naval aviator. Pug is called to The White House to meet with the President to explain how he predicted the Polish invasion, and its there he begins his relationship with Roosevelt. As the same time, Palmer and Rhoda start off their relationship with Pug away, and blosoms into a full fledged affair when they meet again in Washington.
Pug meets up with the Tudsbury's in London and Berlin. From London he witnesses a British bomber crew bomb Berlin. He witnesses the Atlantic Charter, he goes to Russia and convinces Stalin to give up codes and harbor charts so that America can provide Lend-Lease assistance.
Bryon and Natalie's love brings them to wed in Lisbon, Portugal. Natalie later becomes pregnant and is forced to have her baby in Rome, but her and her baby, along with her uncle are trapped in Italy, and thus starts her ordeal till the end of WWII as a prisoner of the Nazis.
Pug and the Tudbury's as well as Slote all meet in Moscow, where Pug is inspecting the Eastern front for Harry Hopkins, Roosevelt's aide, just before he is sent to Pearl Harbor prior to December 7th. It is in Moscow that Pug realizes that Pamela is in love with him, even though she has a beau in the RAF. Pug loves her but can't leave his wife yet, even though Rhoda has been having an affair with Palmer, of which he knows nothing about.
In Pearl Harbor, Pug meets up with Warren and wife, and their son, Vic, and by that time it is too late. The attack has occurred and his battleship is lost for a year to 18-months. That's where The Winds of War ends, in Pearl Harbor, just as World War II is beginning.
Herman Wouk has already written close to 1000 pages, and he has only gotten us through Pearl Harbor. Wouk is kind to the German Generals treating them calm to the megalomania of Adolf Hitler, who fights German on her way to greater ruin. Wouk's brilliance is that the real protagonist is war itself, and it is calmly revealed in the complicated breakdown of events that the book and mini-series pursue,
I melded with Wouk as I initially read his work, and it inspired me to write my own story of my experiences in Desert Storm, of which I have a manuscript in Hollywood at this time. Wouk is a writer that can put unseemingly innocent people into incredible situations, and make it look like its nothing after you meet with the likes of Hitler, Churchill, Stalin, Mussolini, and Roosevelt himself. As for Pug Henry, its just part of the job.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Attacking Non-UH liberalism 'Liberals want to harm teens' (Dems oppose Teen Endangerment Act that House passed on 4/27)
An ACLU press release dated 4/27 that denounces the House measure that approved the Teen Endangerment Act.
In an age where liberal parents gets pissed if their children come home with a piercing they did not approve of, the House on Wednesday "passed by a vote of 270 to 157" in favor of the "Teen Endangerment Act."
The ACLU doesn't care about liberal parents or any parents for that matter, because they support "a teenager's ability to obtain an abortion outside of her home state with or without her parents' knowledge" which is just a bit more invasive than getting an ear, brow, or navel pierced.
The ACLU calls the Teen Endangerment Act, "a dangerous measure" and they fear that this measure will result in less abortions for minorities, thus in the future minorities will take power from white liberals, who currently hold minority democrats in intellectual slavery.
Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office said that the Teen Endangerment Act would "force teens from troubled families into dangerous situations" and finally force teens to accept responsibility for their actions.
"The 'Teen Endangerment Act' (H.R. 748), called the 'Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act' by its sponsors, would make it a federal crime to provide an abortion to a teenager outside of her home state unless the doctor has notified a parent at least 24 hours in advance." GOOD. As long as it's pissing off liberals I'm for it.
H.R. 748 "contains no exception for when an abortion may be necessary to protect a teen's health," which has been used for so long by liberals to force abortions, even partial birth abortions; where if a pregnant mother on the last day of her pregnancy has a cold gives her the right to abort her fetus.
It "requires a 24-hour waiting period and written notification even if a parent accompanies his or her daughter to an out-of-state abortion provider." When we insist on a "5-day waiting period to purchase a handgun", an object that takes live if used in a certain way. The 5-day waiting period is a mandatory "cooling off" period, and is done to get a person to think about their actions.
So why not have a waiting and "cooling
off" period for requesting an abortiion, in a procedure that actually takes life and destroys it."
If you give a young teen a chance to think with a waiting period, that teen will more than likely "choose life," which leaves Planned Parenthood and the ACLU out on a limb.
The Senate version (S. 8/3. 396/S.403), "would also make it a crime for a person other than a parent -- including a grandmother, aunt, or adult sibling -- to help a teen cross certain state lines for an abortion." Which brings tons of responsibility to the teen and their parents. Again. GOOD!
One thing I've been wondering about. Why is the ACLU and the libs so concerned about physical, emotional, and sexual abuse towards a pregnant teen from parents? To me its a ploy to trick the public into supporting a teen for abortion, because in this day an age, where if you so much as lift a hand towards your child CPS will be on your case and take your child out of the household.
It's fear. They are and have been imposing fear into tricking millions of teens and minorities into abortions that most probably regret that they had.
The ACLU and libs want the "my body, my choice" only at the time of abortion. They are not talking "my body, my choice" in preventing pregnancy, whether by condoms or abstinence.
The ACLU lies again when they say that "the act serves no purpose other than to create a confusing maze of requirements throughout the country, criminalizing doctors and caring relatives." Murphy said. "It dangerously and unfairly imposes extra hurdles on some teens and leaves others with no safe options." Which is bunk when you really break it down and think about it.
"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence, but it doesn't mean crap to the ACLU nor the libs.
Screw the libs!
Thursday, April 28, 2005
UH Daily Cougar Eddys wonder where abortion protesters went?
Pro-Life Cougars vs. The Anti-Aborts
In their tripe today "Oh protesters, activists, where art thou?," the DC Eddys again fall short in writing an editorial that should have not been written in the first place. They try to open old wounds that have since started healing, and in doing so like they do most of the time -- fall flat on their faces.
The Eddys try to re-live the good 'ol days when "the controversy surrounding the Pro-Life Cougars, an anti-abortion group that brought 15-foot-tall displays featuring pictures of aborted fetuses to campus," stirring up trouble and making everyone puke up their lunch on Butler Plaza.
The September 4, 2002 story "Abortion display returns to plaza" was decidedly bad to start off with -- "It's back," as if it was something that UH liberals back then had to deal with the Pro-Lifers as often as the libs received an anal exam.
Quotes like "if Bushes (sic) mama had abortion (sic) the world would be a better place," really brought equal time to the story. Yeah right.
An opinion column a few days later "Fetus photos won't change minds" wasn't much better, but really didn't answer any questions. That's OK.
So why are the DC Eddys hoping and praying for the Pro-Lifers to make another appearance in Butler Plaza? Um. Could it be to bring credibility to the Pro-Abortion issue. Right. That's if someone is protesting against abortion that it's good news for the Pro-Deathers.
So "Where'd you guys go, anyway" the Eddys ask? They admit "the controversy is missed," and not to mention "it's decidedly duller." Of course, the Eddy's "think [the] campus is better without the displays" of aborted fetuses; what's next to go -- the open affection of the gay males on campus.
The Eddys are aware of the smaller "number of students involved in" liberal activism, but are relatively unimpressed. They want action. Hot girl-on-girl action because a "university education should be about being exposed to ideas, and exposing others to them as well." About abortion that is -- the days of their parents liberal days in the 1960s are over and "a little controversy is needed to keep things on campus from becoming stagnant." Hence the invitation to invite the Pro-Lifers back to campus.
So instead of quoting the Eddy's solution to getting liberals to take a stand on issues and messing up the new Butler Plaza lawn, let's look at why they Eddy's wrote this editorial.
A 4/22/05 San Antonio Express-News story Bill eyes use of courts for abortion requests by Lomi Kriel stated the Pro-Lifers support of a new bill in the Texas house "that would increase abortion-reporting requirements say it would help the state understand how the judicial bypass procedure is working, how often it is granted, and in what counties." In addition it "would require physicians to report the number of abortions they perform and any ensuing complications."
Back door information in the bill can disclose "information by county still could identify a judge, depending on how many judges in that county handle judicial bypass cases," especially "in rural areas." Incredibly, liberal "Bexar and Travis counties have disproportionately more bypasses than the state's most populous counties, Dallas and Harris." All that information is bad news for abortion lovers.
Naive Judson High School senior Jessica Moffett, and member of the San Antonio Express-News Teen Team wrote recently of Roe vs. Wade "the groundbreaking decision helped pave the way for many women who desire a safe and effective way to terminate their pregnancies." Oh what to do -- Oh I know, it's "plain and simple: If you do not wish to carry a child for nine months, then you shouldn't have to."
What it all boils down to is that women do
have a right to do with their bodies want they want. True.
Women have the "my body my choice" of whether or not to have sex in the first place, and that is where the choice should stop. This brings us back to the old actions vs. consequences debate.
Abortion is assuming responsibility after the fact, when precautions should have been taken in the first place. As far as rape and incest, perhaps exceptions could be made, but not for abortion as a convienence.
Jessica Moffett continues instilling fear with her readers if abortion is disallowed, that "adoption agencies will be flooded with unwanted children, who we can only pray will find safe homes." And not to mention that "Child Protective Services will see a surge of child abuse and negligence by parents."
Wow, its incredible how liberalism has penetrated public schools already. Now with thinking like that, poor Jessica will not be able to get into Our Lady of the Lake University.
Jessica Moffett, who if she is not fat and unattractive, is probably just plain ugly, believes its time for her "voice to be heard" on abortion." To all those within the sight of her writing she says, "we cannot let them take away the right to an abortion." Hence, she wants to keep her keep her options for the odd chance she does have sex with a man during college.
But back to the question of "where'd you [pro-lifers] go, anyway?" Simple. The Pro-Lifers won the battle in Texas, and they went home.
Screw the libs!
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
UH Daily Cougar Columnist Giugi Carminati 'Hater of Senate Republicans' (Doesn't believe Lincoln deemed minority rule "totally inadmissible")
One perhaps two people in the UH Daily Cougar office are worthy enough to wash Tyler Nelson's feet for the worthless prostitutes of liberalism that they are, let alone the libs capable of writing anything that has a clear, concise, objective that is positive and uplifting for America. All we hear from Carminati and the other libs is their doom and gloom forecast for how bad a country we are; no wonder liberal talk radio, liberal nightly news, and everything liberal is failing by leaps and bounds. It's designed to be negative; and it does turn people OFF. If the DC wasn't free, they would go out of business in a week for the filth they perpetrate.
In Giugi's tripe today "Both parties should muster for filibuster," the malodorous pride of the Honors College, Giugi Carminati, the UH Daily Cougar columnist and UH College Democrat officer, continues her 'Hate America Series' this time with the premise that the Republicans are mean and evil and stand for everything that's bad for America. So what's new when it comes to liberal accusations -- nothing, just like their playbook.
Carminati is so vain that she does not understand politics. This is the Republicans time. They, like the Republicans in 1860 won the election fair and square, and like Lincoln in 1860, the Republicans of today are fighting to keep the Union whole, and are not about to let some petty liberal minority take over the country, just because they're a bunch of nansy pansy liberals. Lincoln deemed minority rule in the 1860s as "totally inadmissible" because it was breaking up the country -- and history has judged him right.
The liberals had the Congress for 40 years prior to 1994, that they simply cannot stand being in the minority. Hence all the crybaby stuff that they portray as the truth. I saw a sign on Westheimer this morning while I was making my way back to UH from the modeling agency, it said:
"You can't lie forever"
and that sign couldn't be more true. The nations embarrassment of the Clinton Administration has shown that sign to be true. The whole administration at that time lied, and the Clinton's and their followers still keep the lie going. While President Clinton is still looking for a legacy other than 'oral sex,' something is dreadfully wrong. But I digress.
Carminat's lies to the UH weak minded student that the Republican effort to remove the filibuster option from Senate rules in "very dangerous one for our country." It's Senate rules Giugi, and they change all the time. Each house of congress has the pleasure to change any rule at any time. It's been that way for hundreds of years.
God (my apologies to the liberals), Giugi Carminati is suppose to be the 'cream of the crop' of UH students, a so-called member of the Honors College, which means they are suppose to be coming up with original stuff. Yet, all we get from Giugi is the chewed 'cud' of liberalism which is them processed again and shat out the other end for digestion for the weak minded liberal masses.
Carminati who was spotted around Noon today by one of my spies, coming from the UC Satellite to the crest of the hill heading to the College of Socialism wearing that black skirt she wears that exposes her long legs making her look as slutty as ever, is by with her agreeing with today's Democratic Senate that they are no better than the Southern Democrats that tried to hijack the government prior to the Civil War. The argument was fruitless then as it is now for the liberals.
This 'Rights of the Minority' crap that the liberals are pushing like 'crack' on the street corner is just an argument they use to gain credibility in the eyes of the public and with their friends in the liberal media they hope to achieve the view.
It's ironic that the Republicans of the 1860s were fighting to free the slaves of the day, and the Republicans of the 2000s are fighting to free African Americans from the bonds of intellectual slavery from white liberalism. How much longer will the black liberal depend of the good graces of the white liberal. Let themselves make up their own mind if they want to be treated down with liberalism or up with Conservatism.
Carminati and the libs are always fighting to keep liberal issues on the table. Have they every suggested solutions to issues. After generations, they are still fighting for Civil Rights. After decades they are still fighting povery -- after trillions have been spent. Giugi argues that if the Senate rules are changed it will be "changing the way government operates" which is complete bunk and smells worse than the last crap she took. The liberals have to many perpetual issues, that will keep the weak minded liberal masses dependent on them and them alone with issues that have been solved decades ago yet still tout as a crisis today. Liberals have no use for someone that can think for themselves -- thus being able to embrace Conservatism as the true 'ism' in American politics.
Carminati prostitutes herself saying that by removing the filibuster it will "give the minority no possible recourse. It is a fundamental attack on our governmental institution" which again another bunch of crap. Her side lost -- and now she has to live with that defeat, which was based on lies by the way. The liberals are trying their best, even with the help of their allies in the liberal media, to put to death like a fetus or Terri Schiavo the Republican image, and the libs are still losing. Maybe America is a lot smarter than the liberals think it is. GWB still won in 2004, and GOP seats were gained in Congress despite being tarred and feathered in the liberal media and by the liberals themselves.
If Carminati were Lincoln, she would have given in to the minority South, there would have been no Civil War, and the country would have still have had slavery for many decades to come. Perhaps the Confederate States of America would still be a country today. That is what giving into the minority can do for a country.
If the left wins an election 'fair and square' then they can try and push their liberal social agenda, but will the country buy it? But just winning 'fair and square' may be hard enough, which is something that is impossible with the current liberal mindset.
What will the libs do if the Democrats win in the future -- take over the country and force their agenda down Americans throats communist style, and even if Americans don't like it? What then.
Carminati goes on with her tripe saying "the concept of democracy itself does not lie on majority rule alone," this coming from someone destined to graduate from the UH College of Socialism. That's like saying that the white South African people prior to Mandela were correct because they were a minority of the people in the black dominated South Africa. Giugi argues that "the regulated interaction between a majority that has the people-given right to pass legislation and the minority that has the right to be represented and protected. If either one of these elements disappears from the government system, the representative element of that government would become a mere sham." Again, the minority lost, how often does that have to be said.
We are talking about judges here, and a Senate right under Advice and consent that does not even call for supermajority vote. It was a rule change about four years ago that the Republicans were tricked into that is causing all this liberal fuss. And even the UH weak minded student know that rules can be changed very easy.
Carminati is trying to instill fear by saying that by "removing filibustering from congressional procedures is one step toward making this country a one-party state," which is again complete bunk. This country ran fine with the Republicans and Democrats since the 1860s, and even I wouldn't want the super leftist libs to become Republicans.
Liberalism is a disease, and those that go to far gone like Carminati need to be helped before its to late.
The fate of the country rest on controlling restless liberals. Carminati and the liberals reminds me of that five year-old liberal girl in Florida, who was uncontrollable even when a Principal intervened in the situation, then the police had to cart the loving tike away in handcuffs before she hurt herself. (Of course the Mother is suing to make a buck).
Liberals act just like that five year-old girl. If they don't get their way they pout, hit, spit, holler, and tear up the Principals office. Now what's the difference between that five year-old girl messing up and disrespecting a respected official in the school, and a liberal activist throwing a pie in the face of a Conservative speaker, dousing them with water, spitting on them, or wearing the face of GWB in a monkey suit. It's the same type of behavior exhibited by that five year-old girl that liberals are displaying, and it needs to be corrected -- now.
Carminati is fearful of Republicans cohorting with the religious officials because of the "philosophical implications" that will galvanize the country. It used to be that religion and politics were the domain and Blacks Democrats, where endorsements were handed out openly on the pulpit -- of course which is totally against the rules of course.
Carminati sees supporters of the "nuclear option" as "short sighted" and that the "majority [of today] will be tomorrow's minority." It might be true on the latter, but the Democratic Party will have to lie, cheat, and steal in every aspect of their campaign to win. The Democrats, if and when they control the House, Senate, or Presidency, will have to fool the American people just as they did with the Clintons. The can never be honest with the American people, or the people would run from the liberals for the 'child-molesters' they are.
Think about it. Liberals are crappy people. They feel crappy, and most are walking mental cases and won't admit that they need help. I know, my Father is a liberal -- he feels like crap all the time, and has to tear down those around him to make himself feel better. That's what the liberals do, tear down those around them to make themselves feel better. Dr. Phil could make a whole lot of money by converting liberals to conservatives.
Carminati, who will never give up at ousting "the Republican majority at the national and state levels" is alway hopeful that "there will indeed be a reversal."
Carminati's grilling of Senator Frist's "denouncing of Democrats as 'against people of faith' is another example of the liberal not being truthful with the public. I'd bet $100.00 that Giugi hasn't been to church in five years, and the only time she goes down on her knees is definitely not to pray. The truth is that Democrats and their friends in the liberal media have a free shot on Christianity, and I saw frustration in their eyes when Pope John Paul died until Pope Benedict was named. God was getting to much attention in the media, while liberal causes were not.
Liberals see themselves as God's on Earth. Whenever you deal with a liberal prof, how tall do they may you feel knowing that they can fail you at their whim. Knowing that the liberal professor treats you like a seven year-old, making you feel like a slave asking a liberal professor "masta' can I take a pee?"
Carminati believes that "God and faith [turn] into the partisan limelight and [thus] turns partisan politics into a religion versus non-religion debate" which she says "precisely what the founding fathers feared." Again bunk.
The Founding Fathers were God fearing men, and they fought against the liberal loyalists, whom if the loyalists and Carminati had their way, America would still be subject to the British crown.
Carminati, a person who almost makes you want to bring back the Alien & Sedition Acts just to jail her ass for being un-American. She's practically Italian, loves Europe more than America, and who knows have many secrets her family has divulged to America's enemies.
Carminati the opponent of the 'nuclear option' sees only doom and gloom if Senator Frist pushes the button. Of course with any liberal there is doom and gloom. Has any of their doom and gloom predictions over gun law, lower taxation, increased speed limits ever come true?
Carminati sees the 'nuclear option' as "the abolition of the minority's ability to stop majority tyranny by taking away the ability to filibuster," when the constitution claims that the President is allowed an up or down vote, but not the delaying of that vote. Delaying is just what the Democrats are doing, and that's not allowed for in the constitution. Vote 'em up or down. It's been that way for over 200 years, and now for the last four, the liberals have been claiming that four years equal two centuries.
Carminati does not feel for the Republicans when they as the minority were hampered with their ability "to fight the majority" liberals. No, its only now that she brings their case forward when the liberals are in the minority. To the American public one can imagine her saying "screw you America," the Democrats should be in charge, and be damned with ladylike politics, we are still in charge even though we are in the minority -- the media makes it so. "The 'nuclear option' is Democrats being able to [obstruct a] vote on a" judical nominee. Plain and simple. When the Constitution calls for a regular vote, without a supermajority rule, the libs are livid that their public policy makers (liberal judges) may soon lose total effectiveness.
Carminati can tout that "Republicans are not united on the issue," but in the end they will be. Carminati tries to end on a high note of so-called "withering support for Tom Delay" but on capital hill who are scrambling to amend Congressional travel records -- liberal Democrats.
Carminati is so sure that Conservatives are on the run; she is almost giddied to an organism. What she needs to do right now is start to line up a good shrink after the liberals lose the next election. The democratic playbook is so old; they practically telegraph their plays so easily as if there was a Conservative liaison standing right beside them. The politics of personal destruction play is older than Carminati herself, and she thinks its the newest thing since sliced bread.
Screw the libs!
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Attacking Non-UH liberalism 'DC slow because of upcoming finals' (Liberal Democrats do not want to see Black Americans achieve)
The liberals way of blocking President Bush's nominees list of qualified judges is not only hypocritical but is a most egregious example of partisan politicking at its worst.
Senate Republicans have been working to just to get a "fair and final up-or-down vote" for judicial nominees.
DON'T BE FOOLED.
Judges have been getting up-or-down votes for over 200 years. All this despite what they liberal media is telling you.
During Clinton's time, "Democrats demanded up-or-down majority votes on judicial nominations, but, now that they are in the minority, they have become the party of obstructionism and double standards."
"The Constitution guarantees an up or down vote, but the [liberal] Democrats don't want to perform their duty."
Incredibly, the liberal Democrats are holding up the nomination of an African American woman. Now if Judge Janice Rogers Brown were a liberal nominee we wouldn't be hearing the end of the hold up of her nomination in the Senate in the liberal media. But with the liberal media on their side of the Senate Democrats, the liberals come out looking like the good guys.
We can only hope that there are more smart Americans than there are liberal ones. We know that liberals can't stand Conservative Blacks and Hispanics, much less Conservative Whites.
I liken Black Conservatives to freed slaves located just off the plantation of white liberalism. They are dangerous to black liberals, or slaves to the white liberal, because they see the success of the Black Conservatives, and wonder why the white liberal does not promote policies to allow black liberals to succeed in society.
Judge Brown "is the first African American elected to the California Supreme Court and was reelected by California voters with 76% of the vote." Judge Brown is the "daughter of Alabama sharecroppers who grew up in segregated schools in the midst of Jim Crow policies in the South." She's "a single mother who worked her way through college and law school."
She worked her way up on her own, and did not need liberalism to help her along the way. Judge Brown's excellent credentials were brushed aside in favor of liberalism which blocked her nomination. In addition to her skills and qualifications, no other judges just like her case are being denied a vote by the Senate liberals use of "hypocritical double standards to block their nominations." Some judges have been waiting for a vote for up to 4 years.
Liberal Democrats are lying when the "filibuster is a sacred tool of the Senate. But in 1995, Democrats, including nine who still serve, voted to rid the Senate of this tool."
Yes, "nine current Democratic Senators voted to get rid of the filibuster" in 1995.
The hypocrisy of the liberals is incredible. "Now that [the filibuster] suits their needs," the liberals praise it.
Liberalism is a sham, and the liberals know it. Their hypocrisy is catching up with them. The liberal Senators obstruction and threatened shut down of the Senate will further label them for the babies they are.
The liberals say they are loyal to and hold reverence for the Senate's traditions, but in actuality it is another liberal Senate sham constructed to keep their hypocrisy hidden.
Screw the libs!
Monday, April 25, 2005
Foley's Modeling Gig & Closing on my house soon
Got my e-mail from Chicago Title today, and I can close as soon as Friday. Won't be able to move till after the semester though.
UH Daily Cougar slow today (Dead squirrel mourned on front page: To hell with dead fetuses!)
Why did the squirrel die? It looked pretty young and healthy to me.
Was it West Nile virus? Did someone poison the pesky squirrel? Was there an autopsy? Should Animal Cops Houston be investigating? Or better yet, why wasn't Harris County notified of the dead squirrel?
See how the yahoo's at the DC office can overlook something so simple as a dead squirrel and leave so many issues open for questioning. Wayne Dolcefino's the DC reporters are not. Anyway, what nuthead from the DC office would be roaming around the campus on a Sunday afternoon looking for a picture. Obviously it was staged. I wouldn't be surprised if someone from the DC strangled the squirrel, and poor Andrea, who happened to be walking by the power building, was asked for a photo opportunity.
On the opinion page, the only thing that made sense was the Editorial Cartoon bringing light to the growing UN Oil-for-Food Scandal, of which the only reason that it did make sense was because the DC editorial cartoonist did not do it.
UH Daily Cougar columnist and UH College Democrat officer Nick Somarkis, ever the socialist, showed why he will never be de facto drafted since his rich liberal parents can pay his way to France for the summer.
Screw the libs!
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Attacking Non-UH liberalism (It's now or never for a simple majority rule change in the Senate for approving judges)
The liberals are so afraid of the so-called "nuclear option" because the liberals control the judiciary and fear that the libs are spreading is unreal.
When the speed limit was raised, the libs were afraid that traffic deaths would rise beyond belief. Last week I saw a report noting the lowest fatalities on the nations streets in the last 20 years.
When concealed carry laws were passed, the libs were afraid that blood would be spilling in the streets. Again they were wrong.
Now the fear being spread about judges and nothing will come of it. Republicans are not asking that the minimum wage be lowered to $1/hr or that the Clean Water Act be resinded by the Congress.
The Republicans are asking for a more review of law. One that does not rely on foreign law, but looks to American law as its basis, with no liberal intent as put upon it by liberal federal judges.
The liberals are afraid of the loss of their "progressive advances" all of which have been won in the courts. These leftists cannot deal with the fact that they are in the minority, already ten years now, and even sadder, the Republicans won't fully stand up and put the whiney leftist liberals in their place, and stuff their words down their neck.
The audacity of MoveOn.org to say that Republicans are practicing "judicial activism to roll back our rights," is a farce since the libs have been practicing judicial activism since Roe v. Wade if not earlier.
I assure on my honor that the Republicans do not have any intentions to hijack the federal courts like the liberals have, and they certainly have no intentions of using the courts like the liberals have none whatsoever. The Republicans win with legislation. The Democrats cannot win with legilslation, and that's why gay marriage, abortion, and other wacky liberal programs cannot pass legislative wise and must be passed via courts.
The Republicans efforts to pass judges that follow the law without inputting their personal opinions into law is vital to the survival of our country. The Democrats calling of the "nuclear option" an "extraordinarily devious plan" is intended to spread fear among America's weak minded.
If they liberal media is against the "nuclear option," and they are good at their job. If Jesus Christ came down today for the 'second coming' the liberal media would find some way of labeling him some 'Conservative hack' worthy of know ones attention, while if the devil came up from below, he would be lauded as the hero of Bill Clinton.
You will be hearing about "MoveOn members across the nation [that] are organizing emergency Rallies to Stop the Judicial Takeover," which are in place to scare Americans.
The loons will "gather in front of courthouses and federal buildings to send a clear message: Americans want fair judges," and the bunk part of the rally that the Republicans are in "favor [of] corporate interests and right-wing fringe groups."
Screw the libs!
Saturday, April 23, 2005
A Few Random Thoughts - XI
- Air America radio sucks and is on life support in Boston, and dying in New York. Can anyone say E-U-T-H-A-N-A-S-I-A. A national radio show cannot charge $250 for a 30-second radio commercial spots and expect to survive.
- 'Post-Baccalaureate in German Studies' means you can't find a job.
- Why do Democrats support criminals voting and illegal immigration. To expand their shrinking base of liberal weak minded citizens.
- LaRoucher's have some plans while the rest of the liberal democrats like the MoveOn.orger's do nothing but obstruct public policies.
- Real immigrants to America want to be called 'Joe.' They are the ones that want to assimilate into America.
- Two words that make liberals cringe when they hear together: Black + Conservative.
Friday, April 22, 2005
UH Daily Cougar Eddys, Liberal Columnists, and Eddy Cartoonist pissed over banning gay foster parents: GOOD!!!
In an era where liberals are clamoring for equal time in talk radio, the inept Daily Cougar EditorialStaff and the inept Daily Cougar liberal columnists ganged up on the righteous Tyler Nelson as if he were a young UH nymph at the Carminati's Bukakke party -- it was a one sided affair.The excuse for the Univerity of Houston's daily newspaper was wrong in running the Friday Forum, the editorial cartoon, and the staff editorial practically all for one viewpoint, with nearly a smidgen for the opposing viewpoint in such a public record. This isn't the Soviet Union, of which I've actually met and befriended Soviet soldiers.
In both the Staff Editorial "Ban on gay foster parents is unfounded, unfair," and OPED 1 "Forum Friday: Family Matters in Texas," in which the tripe is thick touting, if they could get away with it, that gay parents are better that heterosexual parents and "it's the Republicans' goal to steal kids away from gays," as proclaimed by David Salinas -- where is the outrage there. It's mindful of the stupid Democrat argument that Republicans want to steal the food out of the mouths of babes. Pure poppycock.
The fear that these liberals are spreading to the UH weak minded students is astounding. When looking at this situation, I always give it "The Birdcage" test. How will it affect the kids? Even though the movie ends on a happy note, it still began with a lie. The DC liberals support of gay foster parents is one that is totally in the gays favor. Its their chance to expose the little crumbcrunchers in their young age, when they see two guys kissing each other or going at it on the living room couch.
The only sane person writing on the whole page, Tyler Nelson, speaks the truth when he says "the ban is necessary. Foster children need to be put in a stable home, one with a father and a mother." Foster children are the last children (like any should be) who need to be exposed to homosexuality at such a young age. They have no one in their lives they can go to ask the personal questions, like a mother figure, who can really get to the hearts of those kids. I know the gay males and lesbians will argue that they have a feminine side, but quite frankly its not feminine enough.
Nelson continues with knowing that "there are a lot of bad heterosexual homes out there as well, and foster children should not be put in such families. Protecting them is priority No. 1; after that, they need to be placed in a family that will teach them principles that will produce moral citizens."By continuing to expose foster children to gay households, the gays are getting their way by further breaking down society. Liberalism is the only tenet that will accepts crazy activist gays as actually contributing to the goodness of America, and by simply using the idea of 'what liberals are against is good for America,' the only choice here is to ban gay foster parents.
Sarah Morgan should stick to writing her worthless tripe on the environment. Morgan believes "sexuality should have nothing to do with adoption as long as the child is provided with a caring and supportive environment." But you cannot avoid sexuality when both parents are of one sex, the tripe that "children don't care about sexual orientation" is bunk, and when it comes to school functions, children know that their parents are different when the other parents have a man and a woman.
Giugi Carminati should stick to hating America, instead of caring for children she would have supported aborting in the first place. Her tripe is riddled with hateful and arrogant remarks for kids she only cares about because it involves gay couples. Nothing more.
Lynn Meyers' and David Salinas' tripe are equally hateful with Salinas' outright stating "Republicans thrive off attacking the weak to make themselves stronger," which is completely bunk. David Salinas continues his tripe by saying "when it's not the poor, it's minorities, and in this instance, it's gays."
Remember that there are consequences to actions. The environmentalists wackos have forced high prices, abortion has killed off 30 million social security contributors, and now gay foster parents will teach their children how to be gay. Where will that lead us?
Screw the libs!
Thursday, April 21, 2005
UH Daily Cougar Columnist Nick Somarkis 'Hater of Bush 43' (Misses in worthless attempt to link high gas prices to GOP)
On the other hand there is Nick Somarkis, ever the socialist, UH College Democrat officer, unfrequent bather, and quite frankly should follow the way of the 'Dodo Vann.' Just looking at his ugly mug in the DC makes one want to puke up their breakfast and hide their infant daughter. Today Somarkis tries to lump several decades of events together and simply place them on President Bush's doorstep by simply stating 'W did it,' and hoping that the UH weak mind students will simply buy his waste of trees. Well I'll tell you something 'Sh*t for brains Somarkis,' even the people that are a little weak of brained at this moment in time will start to realize the same old tricks out of the triple decades old Democratic playbook, and when you graduate your attitude will carry you right into the lifestyle string of service industry jobs, barely making $10 an hour, if that. So keep it up.
In his tripe today "Pricey petrol a Republican problem ," Somarkis again lacks originality by taking hearsay from Democratic sources blaming President Bush for high gas prices and believing that 43's friends are happy as clams over high gas prices.
The reason for today's waste of trees was because Somarkis believes he wasted to much money helping Sarah Morgan fill up her Yugo last weekend, which is why they were late to the NRA protest at the George R. Brown. "Gas prices stink," Somarkis said, and goes on to ask of GWB "our great leader [how does he] propose helping us to cope with these high prices?" Well, I don't know, but its going to be a whole hell of a lot more than the Democrats would do which is let gas prices continually go higher and higher.
Somarkis continues ranting "Bush is supporting an energy bill that gives tax breaks to businesses in the oil industry and does nothing to help lower the cost of gasoline." Well wouldn't you think that those companies would need some relief in order to pass along those savings to the masses. My God (apologies to the liberals), get your head out of your ass.
Somarkis mentions Exxon-Mobil's profits and how they "increased so much that it had a record-breaking year" while "its chairman received a $38 million bonus." Um, I wonder how good 'ol George Soros did. Of course you know he has an office building of which the top half makes him billions and the bottom half dispenses tripe around the world. Its Exxon-Mobil's shareholders responsibility to maintain the actions of the board members, and my only regret is not buying Exxon-Mobil stock when the price was low.
I got an idea, why don't all the liberals by one share of Exxon-Mobil, and when proxy voting time comes around, write in your own candidates. Maybe then the chairman won't get such a big bonus, instead of you guys complaining about it.
Somarkis definitely needs to see a psychiatrist because his obession with Bush 43 is borderline psychotic. Of course we know that President Bush was "a former oilman with close ties to the oil industry" but he is not to blame for the whole gas price mess.
You know who is to blame for the high gas prices Somarkis. It's you Nick and the Sarah Morgan's of the world. All you loud mouth pansies have scared the regulators into forcing refiners into all those special blends of gasolines, and that you have been crying for because it's good for the environment. In that time, the refiners were forced to cut back production and concentrate on those special blends, which cost money for the refiners to retool their equipment and rebuild, while their competetors overseas get a free ride.
In the meantime, America went from a refinery count of 350 over 20 years ago to now having only about 150 refineries, all of which are running at near or full capacity. Why of course gas prices are going to go up, which they have been rising since Carter was in office. Somarkis where was your blame of President Clinton when gas prices went up during his Administration? You couldn't possibly blame Bush 43 back then for what is going on now, and I won't even mention China and India who are now consuming more oil.
Somarkis has the audacity to write that only President Bush can "come up with something like this."
Somarkis rails against the "energy bill [which] allows for drilling in the pristine area known as Arctic National Wildlife Refuge." At least it is a plan, of which the Democrats no nothing about. Of course since Nick has never been north of the Arctic Circle, has never seen Coldfoot, Alaska, he doesn't know anything he is talking about.
Somarkis doesn't know anything about business either, and of course it will be some time till drilling in ANWR takes place and even begin to lower gas prices. But here Nick goes again with the class envy agument that the "oilmen  are going to get a tax break from the energy bill" which he is totally against. People, whatever you do, do not vote for Nick Somarkis if he runs for office - even dogcatcher.
The liberal argument of the rich receiving tax breaks is old. There are always going to be rich and poor. There were rich people in the Bible, a book which liberals never read, we've seen the rich during the founding of our country, and now the rich liberals send their sons and daughters to UH and other liberal institutions so they can avoid the de facto draft thus avoiding military service, thus leaving the poor to serve our country at the benefit of the rich liberal. I've got over the fact that there are rich people; I hope to be one myself someday; some even argue that I'm already rich as well as happy.
Once liberals figure out that there will always be rich people and you cannot 'poor them down' like 'dumbing down' our smart students, then you will realize that the only way to go is to treat everyone as equally as possible and let the chips fall where they may. Class envy which Nick is pushing, simply does not work anymore.
Somarkis claims that the GOP has been "bought and sold by big oil." OK Nick prove it, but of course he runs to the liberal Center for Responsive Politics, which amounts to about the same amount of confidence that the Democrats have in the hope of slamming Tom DeLay. Why do you think that DeLay wants a meeting before any house committee that will hear his case. DeLay knows that the liberals in Congress and the liberal media have nothing on him. Which is what liberal Senator Harry Reid can't say in his case -- actually using legislation to benefit his sons and son-in-law, or that liberal Congressman publicly aired Newt Gingrich's recorded strategic phone call. That's why.
Somarkis' last ditch effort to impress the UH weak minded students comes when he states "big oil contributes to the Republicans and then Republicans win." Well duh. Shouldn't the Democrats be courting the big oil vote. But his argument that the Republicans are beholding to big oil is unfounded. The one who is beholding to someone is Air America Radio who is beholding George Soros for proping up the failing Radio Network of 52 to 53 stations nationwide. We probably have more radio stations in Houston that AA has in its entire network.
Somarkis' solution to high gasoline prices, "rather than drilling in ANWR and rather than ensuring even greater profits for big oil companies through tax breaks, the president and Congress should be pushing legislation that would lower the cost of gasoline in the short term and help to move us away from using gasoline at all." Somarkis -- THAT IS A CROCK.
Somarkis, you cannot legislate gas prices down, hell, it was regulation that got us into this mess in the first place. We all know that Detroit has the means to produce 50mpg cars, and that's where the liberals should be focusing their efforts. Congress has done enough regulating, and its time the wimpy limp wristed liberals finally stand up for themselves, and take action without the liberals in Congress and without the courts looking on as their big brother.
You would get a lot more respect by going directly to the automakers themselves like Nader did with seatbelts, instead this time demand a minimum 50mpg rating in all vehicles.
Did government solve the Montgomery Bus Boycott by mandating that all the Blacks in Montgomery must ride the bus instead of walking to work for those 381 days. No. So why should Somarkis "beg Congress  to increase fuel standards on vehicles so that cars can use less gasoline." Which is what Detroit should be doing voluntarily. Personally, I believe that many more liberals have sold "out like they have done for so long." If we didn't have such a liberal media, the liberals in Washington would be running for the hills.
Screw the libs!
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Challenging liberals at the UC Satellite (Unconfirmed Breaking News: JUSTIN VANN QUITS THE DAILY COUGAR)
I wasn't going to put up with it. When the Hispanic lady at the counter said "next person in line please" obviously looking to the traditional line, I smartly stepped right in front of those liberals and placed my order. They said nothing because they know they cut the line, and would have had something coming from me if they tried to speak up.
I stood for what's right, and didn't let the liberals get away with their indiscretion. I know I risked the prospect of a confrontation, but when they looked at the back of my book bag and saw all that military insignia, I heard nothing but silence. Those liberals know that they cut the line, and could not stand up on their morals.
So I say to you Conservatives, challenge liberals. If you know your on good standing, then take the risk. Why, because until liberals know we Conservatives are completely serious, they will not back down.
Just as I was finishing this small piece, I received an anonymous e-mail
"Justin Vann quit the paper. Feel free
to begin rejoicing."
Justin, I don't relish victory in your quitting the DC if it is true. I would hope that you have had a life change with the understanding that what you write does affect people. There are a lot of people out there don't have a life direction and look to the opinion page for advise. I look forward to reading your work in the future provided it comes from a more right of center perspective. I have a lot more respect for you Justin than I do for Giugi Carminati, who prays for my death on a nightly basis. Good luck.
UH Daily Cougar slow today (I need to read and prepare for finals)
While good 'ol David Salinas reports on rats and roaches, and the high cost of food in the famed Moody Towers. Perhaps he ought to be like Tom DeLay and start his own pest control business.
There is hope for tommorrow since if memory serves me correct, we have not heard from our limp wristed friend Justin Vann yet this week. And whatever happened to good 'ol "hatemail4warren" dumbassk, who runs and hides when Conservatives start shooting his liberal tripe right back to him.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
New Pope Elected
Apr 19, 2005 11:12 a.m.
A little after 11 a.m. this morning a new Pope was elected. Liberals are hoping for the name Clintonus I.
Renewal of April 19th Liberal Baptismal Promises (Only for liberals)
through the political mystery,
we have been overcome with conservatism in all aspects of life except in the liberal media and the courts,
so that we as liberals may fall below the fray of all conservative influence.
Now that we have completed our liberal political observance,
let us renew the promises we made during the Clinton Administration when
we accepted Bill Clinton and his works,
and promised to serve the Democratic movement
as one espouses themselves to the secular theology of Moveon.org.
UHLH: Do you reject the Pope as God's representative on Earth? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject Ronald Reagan as the father of modern conservatism, and prince of goodness to those who hold America in high regard? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject George H.W. Bush's works, and his Presidential library? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject George W. Bush's works, and the good deeds that have transpired in the Middle East? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject Social Security Reform and all the good that it can do for America. All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject Tom DeLay and accept the evils of Sen. Harry Reid? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject the United States and its good works towards making the world safe for democracy? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject the First Amendment only as it applies to Conservative Speech? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject the Second Amendment only as it applies to Conservative Gun Rights, thus allowing the only citizens to carry guns are police and criminals? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject Rush Limbaugh, Conservative Senators and Representatives, the spirit of Abraham Lincoln and the resurrection of true Republican power in Congress? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject Christianity yet accept liberalism and islam as your true religions? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you reject all forms of Conservatism herein not mentioned, even if it means subjecting yourself to eternal damnation? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept Bill Clinton as the father of modern liberalism, and prince of McDonald's hamburgers? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept Hillary Clinton as the Senator from New York and future Presidential candidate? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the European Union and the United Nations and more rightful governments than the United States? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept abortion as a form of contraception and an easy way for minority liberals to dispose of their offspring thus averting the loss of the DNC from the white liberals? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept euthanasia as an easy disposal of life for the convienence of the living? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept homosexuality and same sex marriage as the only "true marriage" that should be recognized by the land? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept affirmative action and wish to expand it to include white liberals over white conservatives? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept rap music as the best music that represents the Democratic party? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the Deomcratic Party's treatment of Blacks as intellectual inferiors thus keeping them on the political plantation always needing help and guidance from the white liberal? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept liberal lawyers and all the good they stand for to the DNC? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the glamour of Hollywood, and promised to be mastered by the sin it portrays? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the liberal media and all its liberal biased reporters and commentators? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the Democratic Party and the true force of liberalism? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the Congressional Black Caucus and all other liberal caucuses not herein mentioned? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept Air America as the 60 watt lighter of liberal talk radio that reaches 53 stations? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept liberal PACs such as MoveOn.org, True Majority, EMILY's List, Godless Americans Political Action Committee,National Organization for Women, Green Power, Pac for a Change, Great American Shout Out, and all other liberal PACs not herein mentioned? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept liberal militant environmental groups such as Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, Earth First, and all groups not herein mentioned? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept Abortion as a sacrament of liberalism? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the unborn fetus as equal to the Nazis view of the Jews as devoid of life and deserving the death? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept Santa Anna's notion: "What are the lives of soldiers more than of so many chickens?" That his soldiers, like fetuses and the vegtabled, their lives don't have that much meaning.
UHLH: Do you accept the leadership of Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, and their belief that America is bad for the world. All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept the appointment of liberal judges? All: I do.
UHLH: Do you accept all the concepts of liberalism herein not mentioned, and all that it stands for? All: I do.
Bill Clinton, the giver of liberalism and the deliverer of Al Gore and John Kerry,
has given liberals a new birth following eight years of cool sex in liberal politics. May Bill Clinton keep liberals faithful to the goal of pursuing the true art of deception amongst the American people, so that they may lose more their rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness.
Each year at Easter, Catholics renew their baptismal profession of faith, and here I thought it would be interesting to see how this would apply to liberals on their beloved April 19th, the day the Earth stood still in Oklahoma City and in Waco.