Real Thought

Maybe Mel Gibson and Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, ought to get together. In opening a new heavy water plant in Iran, Ahmadinejad was quoted in the Financial Times as saying that Iran’s nuclear program was peaceful and that “We are not a threat to anyone-even the Zionist regime, which is a definite enemy for the people of the region.” Again, we have the president of an oppressive, evil regime blaming Israel for the Middle East’s problems. Of course, we have to pay attention to this crackpot because his country is well on the way to developing nuclear weapons capability in spite of the United Nation’s concerns and blustering.

Perhaps Mel can receive Iranian backing for a movie in which the Holocaust is denied and Auschwitz is portrayed as similar to Stalag 13 from Hogan’s Heros. You could have a wily Jewish leader, Rudof Hoess could be an incompetent commandant and you could have the SS men led by a bumbling, good natured sergeant. The inmates of the camp could be shown as well fed and well treated and singing happily on their way to work. Or perhaps a film version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion would be better.

is not like the other. Remember that game from childhood? You know the one, where you are given a series of objects and you have to find the one which is different? It was an exercise to teach us all the concepts of difference, similarity and classification. As a young child it was one of my favorite games. Today, I give you a version of that, which does not involve apples and oranges or colors of marbles but news headlines. Each of these headlines appeared above the same story, the Defense Minister of Lebanon stated that groups who break the cease fire with Lebanon would be seen as traitors and face “harsh” measures. In another statement the Prime Minister also condemned Israel for “crimes against humanity. The four stories come from Fox News, Yahoo! News, Reuters and the BBC. Fox and Yahoo! News both use the Associated Press and the source for there stories. See if you can tell which one doesn’t belong.

Lebanese Defense Minister Warns Against Breaking Cease-Fire

Lebanon will be tough on any truce breach-minister

Lebanon prime minister condemns Israel

Lebanon sounds ceasefire warning

I won’t comment on the semi-literacy of the writers of the headlines but, I ask you, which one of these things is not like the other?

We have a cease fire between Hezbollah and Israel. The United Nations is sending in a French led multi-national force to enforce it. Of course, Hezbollah will be forced to disarm and end its terror campaign against Israel. No? Once again, Israel, the victim of years of terrorist attacks must accept a cease fire which gives its enemies everything and Israel nothing but a tangled web of half promises. Sending in the French to secure Israel’s safety is just about as effective as sending in Hamas or the Waffen SS, except that Hamas and the Waffen SS would actually fight and not lay down their weapons at the first wiff of cordite. We all know that the French have a historical anti-semitic and anti-Israeli bias. Why even pretend like the world cares what happens to Israel?

This.  That is all.

It’s Doug’s wife here, and I hijacked his blog.  Heh

I wanted to make a post and wish him a Happy Birthday!

I love you!

who believe that appeasment is the answer, read this or this. It is very clear that there are those in the Muslim world who will stop at nothing to destroy our culture and civilization. Of course, we could just give in and enter a new Dark Age. We must continue to hunt these muderous thugs down. We have no choice, our very survival depends upon it. Remember, we did not start this war but we must end it and it will not end until these twisted, evil people are removed from the face of the earth and their ideology is fully discredited. If you really believe that some sort of “accommodation” can be achieved, might I suggest that you go and buy a copy of the Qu’ran and a prayer rug now.

According to CNN, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are trying to find eleven Egyptian students who entered the United States on student visas and failed to report to Montana State University for classes. The eleven, ranging in ages from 17 to 22, entered the United States at JFK airport and then failed to report for classes in “US history and culture” at Montanta State according to a report on Fox News. Evidently, this program was part of a plan to bring more “international students” to Montana State because the university thinks that it is “important to have international students on our campus and in our community.” Also, an FBI spokesman is quoted as saying that there is “no threat associated with these men” and that they will “most likely be sent home” when they are found. What? “Most likely”????? I can tell you that if I travelled to Egypt and violated the conditions of MY visa, you can be sure that there would be no “most likely” about what would happen to me!

I am sure that there is a logical explanation for all of this. The FBI seems to think that the men are visiting relatives in the New York area. I have a few ideas of my own. The men could have decided to all become cabbies in New York. They could have gotten lost on their way to Montana. They could have all decided to open a falafel stand in New York. They all could be taking flying lessons or of course, they really could be terrorists entering the country under false pretenses. I’ll let you decide. What I really want to know is, why were these men allowed into the country in the first place to study “US history and culture”? Don’t we have enough experts on that already?

UPDATE: Fox News is reporting that three of the missing Egyptians are now in Federal custody.  One was apprehended in Minnesota and two others surrendered themselves in New Jersey.  Where are the other eight?

Joe Lieberman has lost the Democratic senate primary in Connecticut. According to this AP report, Lieberman promises to run as an independent in the general election this November. There is speculation that he will be asked to step aside by the Democratic party leadership. I sincerely hope that Joe has the fortitude to tell them to go take a very long walk off a very short pier. It is clear that the Democratic party has taken a very sharp leftward turn since the last presidential election and Senator Lieberman’s defeat in Conneticut is simply evidence of that turn.

This election result also shows that the Democratic party is beginning to fragment. Rather than have a unified. principled plan of opposition to the Republicans, the Democrats have decided to abandon one of the most principled men in the Senate today. Instead the Democratic party is becoming the home of disgruntled progressives, liberals, radicals, socialists and elitists who cannot fathom the possibility that the majority of Americans do not agree with their ideas. Most Americans, I believe, want peace at home, good schools for their kids, low taxes, good roads, free speech and, most importantly, to be left alone. They do not want a “nanny government” telling them what they can and cannot do nor do they really give a rodent’s rear end about gay marriage, “reproductive rights”, affirmative action, gender equity, display of the Confederate flag or most of the “issues” that seem to inflame Democratic passions.

The Democrats have been throwing a temper tantrum ever since the 2000 presidential election and this time it has claimed one of their own. Perhaps they need to grow up and get over it.

According to a story in Reuters, Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, will probably lose the primary election in his state on Tuesday. How can this be? How can the people of Connecticut be willing to give up on a man who has been and honest, faithful, loyal public servant since he was first elected to the state senate in 1970? Simple, Joe supports the Iraq war. He is supportive of free trade and Israel. He has also developed a warm and working relationship with the President. Never mind that he is in lockstep with his more liberal collegues on abortion, gay rights, gun control, education, environmental issues, social security reform, taxes and a host of other issues, apparently supporting the Iraq war and even talking to the President is the kiss of death in Democratic politics. Let’s not even mention what happens to you in Democratic circles if you admit to supporting Israel. Let’s just say that you might as well put on a white sheet and burn a cross in front of the capitol building. Oh, wait, putting on white sheets and burning crosses is a good thing in Democratic circles, after all, Robert Byrd did it.

Al Walsh, a Bridgeport city councilman quoted in the article claims that Lieberman “has become more and more conservativethe longer he has been in Washington and the Iraq war brought it all home.” Actually what has happened is that, since Senator Lieberman has been in Washington, the Democratic party has become more and more liberal, even radical, and it has left poor Joe behind. Unfortunately, the Democratic party’s twin obsessions with the Iraq war and defeating the President at all costs have claimed a good man. While I didn’t agree with Joe Lieberman on many, many issues, he earned my respect for his unwavering fortitude.  After his many years of public service, he does not deserve this shabby treatment.  I, for one, will be sad to see him leave the Senate and that is much more than I can say for Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd and a host of others.

The Associated Press is reporting that the USDA has expanded the shopping list for the Woment, Infants and Children program to include more fruits, vegetables and whole grains. The idea is to try to get those on the public dole to try to eat healthier. OK, I’ll buy that, but I find the following quote from the Associated Press Article just a bit disturbing:

The grocery shopping list for the far-reaching Women, Infants and Children program is getting its first significant update since the 1970s. Fruits, vegetables and whole grains are being added to the program, which helps feed more than half the babies born in the U.S. (emphasis mine) To cover the cost, WIC will pay for less of the juice, eggs, cheese and milk that have been staples of the program.

Now, let me get this straight, the majority of children in the United States are born to women who qualify for WIC assistance? The article goes on to state that some 8 million people nation wide get WIC assistance. The last time I checked, the population of the United States is about 300 million which means that 8 million is roughly 2.5% of the population. Am I to believe that 2.5% of the population includes the majority of infants and children under the age of five? Something doesn’t add up. Furthermore, am I to believe that the majority of children in this country are born to families of four who earn $37,000 or less a year? Something is rotten here.

If the claim that WIC really does assist feeding more than half the children born in the US is true, that leads to another issue; since when does a government program, originally designed to help the truly poor and indigent, supply food to the majority of the child population? How is that the government’s job?  Why was it allowed to expand so?  Perhaps there is massive fraud. Perhaps there are middle class and wealthy people taking advantage of loopholes in the program. Perhaps the entire WIC program needs to be reviewed and curtailed or done away with.

I am truly shocked that, according to this article, more than half the children in America get some form of public assistance to meet their basic food needs. I am not sure that I believe that claim, but if those who administer the WIC program do, there is something rotten and it isn’t the cheese and milk.