Monday, July 31, 2006

Judge In Britain Dismisses Case For Recognition Of Gay "Marriage"

Who knew there was a conservative in Britain, let alone a conservative judge? Reports Fox News:

A British judge on Monday dismissed a bid by two female professors to have their same-sex wedding in Canada recognized as a marriage in Britain.

Judge Mark Potter, head of Britain's High Court Family Division, dismissed the claim by Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger that in defining their relationship as a civil partnership — rather than a marriage — Britain had violated their human rights.

Granting their request would risk undermining the time-honored institution of marriage, he said.

"To accord a same-sex relationship the title and status of marriage would be to fly in the face of the (European) Convention (on Human Rights) as well as to fail to recognize physical reality," Potter wrote in his ruling.

Looks like sound legal philosophy to me! Now, if only we could get a few more judges like that here in the States, you know, the kind who uphold the law, rather than write it.

The sob story continues:

"We are deeply disappointed by the judgment, not just for ourselves but for other gay couples and families," Wilkinson said after walking from the courtroom hand in hand with her partner.

"It perpetuates discrimination and it sends out the message that lesbian and gay marriages are inferior."

Well, gay "marriage" is inferior, isn't it? The only real purpose of civil marriage is the creation and rearing of children, something gay couples really can't do. Sorry to rain on your gay parade, Ms. Wilkinson, but if it really takes the word "marriage" to make you happy about your life-commitment, what does that really say about you as a person?

Friday, July 28, 2006

Congress May Increase Minimum Wage For Small Tax Breaks

Reports MSNBC:

Congress would pass an increase in the minimum wage before leaving Washington for vacation, but only as part of a package rolling back taxes on the heirs of multimillionaires, a Senate leadership aide said Friday.

The GOP package would also contain a popular package of expiring tax breaks, including a research and development credit for businesses, and deductions for college tuition and state sales taxes.

The wage would increase from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, phased in over the next two years, the aide said.

You want an example of the Right favoring the rich? This would be it. A tax break for the heirs of multimillionaires, who I assume don't create many jobs, in exchange for an increase in minimum wage, which will absolutely destroy many low-skill jobs, the only kind most "poor" people are capable of getting.

Tax breaks are almost always good for the economy. Even tax breaks for the "heirs of multimillionaires" are most likely better than the alternative; the government taking the money, spending a large chunk of it on bureaucracy, and then spewing out what's left at random, destroying the free market's ability to provide economic indicators which lead to a healthy, efficient, and vigorous economy with more of the jobs, services, and goods we need.

Minimum wage laws, on the other hand, force employers to hire less employees than they need or want, and cause low skill workers, also known as "the poor," to be unable to find jobs. Wages usually increase for everyone when there is a minimum wage increase, since most people say "if he got a raise, I want a raise." Other employees, such as union members, use there terroristic union representatives to get contracts that base their wages on minimum wage, meaning an increase in minimum wage almost always means an increase in unionized workers' wages as well.

This artificial increase in wages across the board leads to less jobs and more expensive goods and services. Generally, not a good combination for the economy.

Is this a good bill, then? I haven't looked into it much, but I'm betting it will do no good, and will probably do some bad. But hey, people think, Higher wages! More money for me! which gets politicians more votes. Wait a minute! Isn't there an election coming up? Curious...

Lefty-Kook Abuses Children, Calls It Art

Reports The Guardian (UK) (Via: Malkin):

Photographer Jill Greenberg has whipped up a storm of controversy with her new exhibition, End Times. The pictures in the show, for which she deliberately provoked tearful outbursts from children by taking away lollipops she had just given them, have been described by some as tantamount to child abuse...

...[H]er concern was to depict what she says reminded her of the "helplessness and anger I feel about our current political and social situation."

I guess if the Left thinks pictures of nude children is art, why wouldn't they assume pictures of abused children can be art, too?

This is a good example of the so-called "compassionate Left" being, well, not compassionate.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Media Ignores Hezbollah Tactics

The BBC reports that "Israeli Troops 'Ignored' UN Plea," while failing to mention that the mainstream media is ignoring Hezbollah's dirty tactics. The article refers to a bomb that hit a UN post in Lebanon.

UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon contacted Israeli troops 10 times before an Israeli bomb killed four of them, an initial UN report says.

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile after six hours of shelling, diplomats familiar with the probe say...

The four unarmed UN observers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland, died after their UN post in the town of Khiam was hit by an Israeli air strike on Tuesday.

However, quotes Michelle Malkin:

Jed Babbin explains: "The U.N.'s years-long record on the Israel-Lebanon border makes mockery of the term "peacekeeping." On page 155 of my book, "Inside the Asylum," is a picture of a U.N. outpost on that border. The U.N. flag and the Hezbollah flag fly side by side. Observers told me the U.N. and Hezbollah personnel share water and telephones, and that the U.N. presence serves as a shield against Israeli strikes against the terrorists. "

Malkin also quotes Charles Johnson:

It was also reported that Hezbollah fired from the vicinity of four UN positions at Alma ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashit, and At Tiri. All UNIFIL positions remain occupied and maintained by the troops.

It looks like the terrorists are doing what they have always done: hiding behind the innocent in an attempt to curb the retaliation of their enemies. It is reminiscent of Saddam and the PLO hiding ammunition in schools and fighters in mosques.

There will be innocent causalities in any war, but the fact that Hezbollah and Hamas try to increase the number of innocent deaths should be enough to get the world community, especially the UN, off of their butts and into the battlefield.

Why Do Liberals Hate Israel?

By: Shane

Why do liberals hate Israel? An interesting question with a simple answer; Israel stands for everything liberals seem to be fighting to destroy: peace, freedom, and democracy. Israel, for a long time, was the only functioning democracy in the Middle East until we ("we" being conservative Americans) blew the crap out of Saddam's regime and the Taliban, planting the seeds of democracy in the Middle East. Soon we had a free Iraq, a free Afghanistan, the people of Lebanon crying for freedom from the occupying Syrians, Egypt holding free but faulty elections, and even the Saudis implementing some semblance of local government, freely elected but without real power.

Liberals have long hated the idea of the United States, or anyone for that matter, battling large, totalitarian, oppressive regimes. Liberals chose to contain rather than combat communism. Liberals chose to ignore rather than combat islamo-fascism. Liberals chose to appease and ignore rather than combat terrorists. Israel, a free society in a sea of oppressive Islamic states, no doubt angers liberals because it stands for freedom.

Liberals hate war, fighting, and violence. However, they see the only reasonable response to terrorism to do nothing at all. Why escalate the violence? Why fight back? If we just sit back and take it, maybe less people will die! Less terrorists maybe, but not less of us! Terrorists will never stop attacking innocents until either all the innocents are dead and gone, or all the terrorists dead and in hell. American conservatives know this, the Israelis know this, and terrorists know this. Liberals might know this, but if they do, they pretend not to.

Liberals probably agree with the old communist way of thinking (as is common of liberals); there will be no more fighting when people stop resisting communism. The same may be true of terrorism, but is that any reason to stop fighting it? No! Absolutely not!

If Israel where to give up its freedom and stop fighting against terrorists, liberals might begin to respect them. However, the point would be moot as Israel would soon be wiped off of the map.

The fight for freedom in the world should not be a political issue. Left and Right should agree that all people deserve to be free. Conservatives believe this, and have shown that they are willing to fight for it. Regardless of liberals' feelings on the issue, they have shown that they believe there is nothing worth fighting for. The majority of Israelis agree with American conservatives that freedom is worth fighting and dying for. Israelis therefore disagree with liberals, and there is the root of liberal hatred of Israel.

Israel has had to put up with constant military and terrorist attacks since its very forming. When Israel was created (or rather, when the Jews where given back the land that God originally bestowed upon them) Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq soon attacked to destroy the nation. The Israelis fought back and fended off the attacks, and have since had to put up with various military campaigns against them, not to mention decades of terrorist attacks.

The Israelis have finally grown tired of the ridiculous concept of a "proportional response." For decades, every time a terrorist blew up a restaurant or checkpoint, the Israelis responded with puny, "proportional" retaliatory attacks. These "proportional" attacks really did nothing but kill a small portion of the terrorists, kill some civilians, and forever vilify Israel in the eyes of American liberals.

Israel has finally decided to go all out on the terrorist organizations of Hezbollah and Hamas, two of their oldest and worst attackers. Now the very liberals who treated Israelis like war criminals for their decades-long policy of "proportional responses," are begging them to return to the policy. But Israel has decided it is time to put a serious dent in the terrorist organizations.

Israel has begun a very large military campaign against terrorist, including Hezbollah, who currently occupy Lebanon, and Hamas, who is in the "territory" of "Palestine." Word has it that Israel is prepared to stop the attacks in exchange for a two-kilometer "security" buffer between their nation and Lebanon. But the damage is done.

Israel has shown the world, including liberals, that it is willing to fight for freedom, even if it means killing thousands of terrorists and causing possible civilian causalities. There is no forgiveness from liberals for the great "sin" of defending one's self through the mechanism of war. Let's be honest, liberals never liked Israel because they were a beacon of freedom in the Middle East and were willing to fight for freedom. Now that they've shown they are still willing to fight for the right to be free, they aren't going to be winning any popularity contests with liberals anytime soon.

Shane is a writer for the conservative news blog His other articles can be found here.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Peace Prize Winner Wants To "Kill George Bush"

Reports The Australian:

Nobel peace laureate Betty Williams displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday, lashing out at US President George W.Bush during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren.

Campaigning on the rights of young people at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane, Ms Williams spoke passionately about the deaths of innocent children during wartime, particularly in the Middle East, and lambasted Mr Bush.

"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.

"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.

First of all, you have to love the liberal-media's harsh treatment of the fringe-left, "displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday?" What the hell is that?

This is just another example of "peace" activists who really don't care about peace at all. I find it hard to call myself "non-violent," Ms. Williams, because when I see a despotic dictator torturing, oppressing, and killing his people, it makes me want to kill him. Get the point? No, probably not...

Monday, July 24, 2006

Right-Wing Summer Reading, Part II

The second book I've chosen for my "Right Wing Summer Reading List" is The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, by: Byron York.

In this book, Byron York - author, writer, and newsman - chronicles the work of the left to organize and build a vast political machine through gaps in campaign-finance law. He shows how the left used so called "non-political, non-profit" organizations, such as, to try and destroy a sitting President. He covers the left's backers, including the nutty George Sorros, who gave tens-of-millions of dollars to left wing causes, and shows how Democrats embraced the fringe-left, by supporting people like Michael Moore.

The entire book is written in an easy to follow and informative style, almost like a news report. Byron York obviously did a lot of investigating and a lot of interviews, and the effort shows in this wonderfully written, hard to put down book.

Related: Right Wing Summer Reading, Part I: Godless, by: Ann Coulter

Apologies (Again)

Once again, I apologize for the lack of posts over the weekend. Not that I would normally post much over the weekend, but I posted none because I was vacationing. My apologies.

Bush Sends Aid To Lebanon

Reports Fox News:

President Bush has ordered helicopters and ships to Lebanon to provide humanitarian aid, but he still opposes an immediate cease-fire that could give relief from a 13-day-old Israeli bombing campaign.

A "cease-fire" may "give relief from a 13-day-old Israeli bombing campaign," but continued fighting may give Israel relief from decades-old terrorist attacks.

I would like the world community to notice how the US can blow the crap out of an evil dictator, and then pay to rebuild his nation, or, in this case, provide weapons to Israel to fight terrorists, and also provide aid to those civilians who are supposedly being hurt by Israel's campaign of defense. And we're the evil "war-mongers" that have the "World community on edge?"

The story continues:

Announcing the assistance program, White House press secretary Tony Snow said Monday there was no reason to believe an immediate cease-fire would stop violence in the Mideast and said instead the world should confront the destabilizing force of Hezbollah and its practice of using the Lebanese people as "human shields."

Once again, Tony Snow tells it how it is, instead of sugar-coating it or pandering.

Also, the media seems to enjoy giving so much attention to "Americans trapped in Beirut;" have they talked to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice lately, who apparently didn't realize that she was traveling to a war-torn hell-hole?

Snow said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discussed the assistance with officials during a surprise visit to Beirut Monday and would talk about further about the U.S. commitment later in the day as she continued on to Israel. Snow did not give any more details about what the United States would send, other than to describe it as "a significant U.S. commitment."

Missle Falls Off Truck In New York

Boy, if liberals were mad at conservatives for weapons in the inner-cities, wait till they hear this one!

Reports Reuters:

A missile fell off a truck and onto a New York highway on Friday, but the weapon did not have a warhead and posed no danger, police said.

WCBS radio reported it was a Tomahawk cruise missile. Police and fire department officials could not confirm that.

The cargo came loose when the truck carrying it collided with another truck on a motorway in the Bronx.

"It was a military-type missile but it was inert. There was no danger and no one was harmed," a police spokesman said.

Friday, July 21, 2006

Lesbian Couple "Split"

The AP reports that the lesbian couple whose lawsuit began gay "marriages" in Massachusets has split up. That speaks volumes...

"Julie and Hillary Goodridge are amicably living apart," Mary Breslauer, a local political consultant, said Thursday night on their behalf. Breslauer declined to comment on how long they had been separated or whether the couple planned to divorce.

The Goodridges were among seven gay couples whose lawsuit helped thrust Massachusetts into the center of a nationwide debate on gay marriage. The state's Supreme Judicial Court issued its narrow 4-3 ruling in November 2003 in their favor -- saying gays and lesbians had a right under the state constitution to wed.

The Goodridges were married May 17, 2004, the first day same-sex marriages became legal under the court ruling, by a Unitarian Universalist minister. Their daughter, Annie, now 10, served as ring-bearer and flower girl.

Gays Get Feisty

From Reuters:

Provincetown, New England's summer gay capital, is facing a rise in harassment and discrimination. But this time it's straight people who say they are being ridiculed as "breeders" and "baby makers."

Less than a decade after a successful campaign to end violent paroxysms of "gay bashing" in the beach town at the tip of Cape Cod in Massachusetts, police and town officials report a resurgence in tension between gays and straight people.

Police Chief Ted Meyer said straight people complained of being called "breeders" over the July Fourth holiday weekend, and that in one serious incident a man was charged with assaulting a woman who signed a petition to ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, the only state where it is legal.

I don't even know what to say, except that I'm surprised a gay man could beat up a woman.

Felons Opperate Phones In Italy

Reports Reuters:

The next time you call directory inquiries in Italy, you may speak to a convicted murderer.

Italy's biggest phone operator, Telecom Italia, Thursday presented its new call-center in Rome's largest prison, where 24 inmates are glued to a computer screen to answer thousands of requests for phone numbers and addresses every day.

"This is a unique initiative in Europe and it helps the detainees get some work experience and prepare for when they'll get out of prison," said Telecom's Chairman Marco Tronchetti Provera as he toured the Rebibbia jail, a huge concrete block housing 1,600 inmates on the northern outskirts of Rome.

"Good afternoon, this is Gianluca speaking, how can I help you? Thank you for calling Telecom Italia," said Gianluca Descenzo, who is serving a 13-year sentence for a drug-related murder, politely answering the umpteenth call of the day.

"It's good because people don't know who we are, so we don't feel like we are in a ghetto anymore," he told Reuters as he paused before taking another call.

Oh how Sweet, the inmates feel more human. I'm touched beyond words. Oh wait, now I'm using that darn brain we conservatives are so prone to using! Something tells me it's not a good idea to give convicted felons access to millions of people's addresses and phone numbers. But hey, whatever, they're Italian...

Thursday, July 20, 2006

President Bush Addresses The NAACP

I guess I need to make time for this post:

I knew the President was going to be addressing the NAACP, I just didn't realize he did it today! Here's the transcript; I don't know if I'll bother reading it. I couldn't really stand to listen to President Bush suck up to those racist hate-mongers.

Apologies (Again! How Sad...)

Unfortunately, I once again can not seem to make time for posting. However, to update you on the news: Israel is still blowing the crap out of terrorists, as are we, and liberals hate it. There.

And if you need something to read, scroll down. I wrote an article yesterday!

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Article Archive

I've decided to make an article archieve post that lists all of the articles written by the staff here at UnrestInTheForest. I will try to update it everytime there's a new articlle. It will be linked to in our side bar (to the left of the page).

From newest to oldest:

10/02/06 - With school beginning, I won't be writing articles, probably until summer. There may be one every once in a while, but probably not. Sorry.

"Fan Mail? I Wish..."
By: Shane

"Hezbollah's Victory Over Israel"
By: Shane

"Liberals Are Still On The Terrorists' Team"
By: Shane

"Plan B: Just Another Abortion Pill"
By: Shane

"Minimum Wage Hurts More Than It Helps"
By: Shane

"Why Do Liberals Hate Israel?"
By: Shane

"Missing The Point In The Stem Cell Debate"
By: Shane

"Liberals: Afraid Of Honest Debate"
By: Shane

Missing The Point In The Stem Cell Debate

By: Shane

There are many good arguments against embryonic stem cell research - from the fact that it has never yielded any promising results, to the fact that it turns human beings into commodities to be used for spare parts. However, liberals are missing the point. Conservatives' number one reason for opposing stem cell research is that it involves the destruction of human life.

You don't hear liberals arguing this point because there's really no way to argue it. What can they say? Are liberals really so far from natural law that they believe a judge has the right to decide at what point life begins? Putting thousands of years of religion and morality aside, isn't the obvious answer that life begins at conception? First liberals tried saying that life began at birth. When that wouldn't fly, they claimed that life begins when the embryo (AKA, "the unborn child") is "viable," or capable of survival outside of the womb.

But what moronic a point to pin the start of life at! For one thing, the age at which the unborn is "viable" is constantly getting smaller. Also, there have been children born at the point that they could have been aborted (AKA, "brutally murdered"). What makes liberals think that they have a right to decide at what age a child can be murdered? These are the same people who think that humans don't have a right to kill baby seals for their fur, but it's alright to kill and unborn child for one's convenience?

Embryonic stem cells are taken from embryos, which are unborn children, the result of sperm fertilizing an egg. In other words, the embryo is created by conception, the obvious point at which something goes from biological material to human life. Now, liberals have no problem killing an unformed fetus, because it is not cute. But then, when is the last time you saw a cute California Condor, and yet we're not allowed killing them.

The study of embryonic stem cells involves the development and destruction of embryos. Many liberals will say We have thousands of unused embryos as it is from abortions and "test tube babies"! (apparently forgetting that we conservatives also oppose abortion and "test tube babies"). However, this is an intentional misguidance on the behalf of liberals, because they know full well that if the study of embryonic stem cells were not only allowed but funded, scientists would desire many millions of embryos. They would begin marketing women for their unborn, telling them that "they could be part of the fight against disease!"

We've already seen it happen in California, where a scientist from South Korea attempted to open a clinic at which to harvest embryos to ship back to South Korea for scientific study. Conservatives would oppose embryonic stem cell research regardless, however, it is just foolish to say that there wouldn't be an increase in the destruction of life were embryonic stem cell research allowed in the US.

And why would conservatives oppose embryonic stem cell research, even if it didn't increase the number of embryos destroyed and even if it did show some medical promise? Because conservatives, unlike liberals, believe in right an wrong. It is wrong to destroy life, and therefore no good can come from it. Allowing embryonic stem cell research would be like saying, "abortion is alright, as long as the destroyed life is used to heal those humans who have already been born."

But this logic absolutely confuses liberals. They just can't grasp why someone would not want to destroy life if it means a better life for those of us who are born and alive. After all, it's not like fetuses can vote! Liberals' selfish hedonism leads them to use the "survival of the fittest" mentality that is supposedly programmed into their animal brains from millions of years of evolution. I'm going to kill that unborn baby so that I can live longer and have more fun before I die and cease to exist. I don't know what all this talk about Democrats being the "party of the little guy" is all about, considering they've killed and thrown out about a hundred million "little guys."

Liberals are missing the point on this issue. They're so busy with their "Bush doesn't want to heal diseases" demagoguery that they fail to even see the argument conservatives are making. Liberals can pull out all of the botched statistics and poorly researched graphs they want, but when it comes to debate, conservatives will still be saying the same thing: It is not alright to take a human life, especially that of an unborn infant and we will not treat people like a commodity to be sold for spare parts.

And so I say to liberals, if you want a debate on this issue, than at least try to grasp the point we're making. It doesn't matter if embryonic stem cell research were to cure every disease (it probably wouldn't cure any), the destruction of human life is never alright, even if it can get you more votes.

Shane is a writer for the conservative news blog His other articles can be found here.

"Science's Stem Cell Scam"

Rush mentioned Michael Fumento's NRO article " Science's Stem Cell Scam" on his radio show today. This article says more than I could hope to about how the "support" for embryonic stem cell research, just like "support" for global warming, is no more than junk science skillfully mixed with demagoguery.

Bush Vetos Stem Cell Bill

First and foremost, I said we'd be keeping an eye on the Bush veto situation (President Threatens Veto Of Stem Cell Funding Bill ). Well, about 20 minutes ago President Bush announced that he will in fact veto a recent bill that passed the House and Senate that would provide federal funding to embryonic stem cell research.

First of all, let's look at the importance of this. Not only was this the President's first veto - ever - but this was an important instance of the President standing up to congressional Republicans. The President condemned Congress' demagoguery on this issue, and insisted that he would not make humans a commodity.


"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life of the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our society needs to respect, so I vetoed it," Bush said at a White House event where he was surrounded by 18 families who "adopted" frozen embryos that were not used by other couples, and then used those leftover embryos to have children.

"Each of these children was still adopted while still an embryo and has been blessed with a chance to grow, to grow up in a loving family. These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said.

Liberals don't care about embryonic stem cell research because they don't value human life. Embryonic stem cell research involves destroying an embryo, a fertilized human egg, an unborn child. Not only has embryonic stem cell research contributed nothing to science, cured absolutely no deceases, but adult stem cell research, the study of stem cells that are harvested without murdering children, has shown great promise.

Liberals only support embryonic stem cell research for two reasons. One, they see it as an opportunity to make conservatives look bad. It gives them the opportunity to say Why don't conservatives want to heal disease? They would rather please the religious-right than cure cancer and Parkinson's! And two, it further lowers the value of human life, something liberals don't believe in.

This is just another instance of liberals using demagoguery and junk science to further their agenda. They do it with global warming, and now they're doing it with human life. If the US continues on this path it will only be a matter of time before we're just like that liberal utopia; Denmark.


Sorry, folks, for the lack of posts yesterday. It was due to a mix of laziness, technical difficulties, and a busy schedule. But I'm back and ready to begin posting!

Monday, July 17, 2006

President Threatens Veto Of Stem Cell Funding Bill

We'll have to keep an eye on this one. Forbes Reports:

The White House emphatically renewed President' Bush's threat to veto a bill heading toward Senate passage that would authorize federal funding for embryonic stem cell research , a practice Bush loathes.

"If (the bill) were presented to the president, he would veto the bill," read a fresh official statement of administration policy Monday, with the sentence underlined for emphasis.

"The bill would compel all American taxpayers to pay for research that relies on the intentional destruction of human embryos for the derivation of stem cells, overturning the president's policy that funds research without promoting such ongoing destruction," it said. Bush says the practice forces a choice between science and ethics.

This is interesting to me, because in his entire time in office, President Bush has never had to veto a bill. It is interesting to see if he will stand up to not only Democrats, but Republicans. The President needs to remind Republicans that we vote based on morals, not politics.

More Illegals Committing Violent Crimes

Reports the Journal-News (via: Malkin):

Shots were fired at a Hamilton Twp. construction site in Warren County Friday and the owner of a construction company beaten in retaliation for the firing of an undocumented worker, according to Hamilton Twp. police.  

Police responded to a "shots fired" call around 1 p.m., in which the male caller told them "Mexicans were shooting at him."  

Two men were injured, according to police, after the man who earlier had been fired from a construction company allegedly returned with about eight other men — armed with three handguns and several baseball bats.  

Hamilton Twp. Police Lt. Jeff Braley said police are looking for a "vehicle of interest" — a white Chevrolet SUV with Ohio license "CDGOMEZ."  

Braley said he believes the suspects have been residing in the city of Hamilton, although investigators say they have not been able to fully identify the suspects.  

According to police, the suspects arrived and rammed the construction foreman's truck with their vehicle, jumped out and damaged the truck with baseball bats, then sought out the foreman and rushed him. At that time they displayed the handguns and fired 10 to 12 shots in the direction of the foreman and another employee, James Parsons Jr., who was coming to the foreman's aid.  

Parsons was struck multiple times with a baseball bat, police said. The suspects re-entered their white SUV and fled the scene, police said.   

Parsons was taken to the hospital with multiple injuries. The foreman was treated at the scene for minor injuries.  

A construction company supervisor said the incident began when a worker at the 21 Oaks subdivision construction site off U.S. 22/Ohio 3 was asked to produce paperwork to prove he was a legal immigrant. When he failed to produce the paperwork, he was fired.

You know, I'm sick of brushing off instances of illegals committing crimes with jokes about "well at least they're all good people who just want to send money back to their families." It's gotten to the point where I've made that joke so much, I start to wonder what the statistical crime rate is in the illegal population.

One also has to wonder, if these men where caught, would they even be deported, or would the police be forbidden to ask them of their immigration status, as many police districts are? God forbid we hurt some one's feelings! It's not as if lives are on the line. Oh wait...

Operation "Return To Sender" Ships Illegals Home

Despite the media telling me that we can't ship illegals back home, it looks like some how we've managed with a few of them. Reports

A federal task force swept through Tulsa Wednesday, netting dozens of illegal immigrants. Dubbed 'Operation Return To Sender', it's being run by the Department of Homeland Security.

The cool name aside, what a great program! And it gets better! The story continues:

That's the only soundbite you will hear in this story, as federal officials tried to keep the wraps on the Oklahoma chapter of Operation Return to Sender, a nationwide crackdown by US Immigration and customs enforcement to apprehend illegal aliens with federal warrants. It began May 26th and has netted over 21-hundred aliens.

Today's target was Tulsa. Three passengers were off-loaded from a white van entering the sheriff's barbed wire yard when we were there. Roughly forty are expected to be taken into custody by days end.

Statewide, approximately 120 illegals are earmarked for arrest. Specific crimes are unknown, but of those arrested in other states, 146 were for sex offenses, 367 for gangs, and 640 fugitives previously told to leave the US.

Sources say the operation is set to conclude Friday in Oklahoma, by which time more details regarding the fugitives will be released.

21-hundred illegals apprehended! Good work. Unfortunately, it is sad to think that that many illegals could be arrested and there's still only about 20 million left!

I can't wait to hear the liberal-reaction on this one, except that it will probably come through in the form of some activist-federal-judge stopping the deportations...

Israel Still Kicking Islamic-Butt

Israel is still kicking Islamic-terrorist-butt, continuing its campaign of offensive strikes. Reports Fox News:

Israel sent a warplane to bomb the Palestinian Foreign Ministry building in Gaza City early Monday, the second airstrike on the ministry in a week, pushing ahead with its three-week offensive in Gaza after militants killed two soldiers and captured a third.

Another story quoted Olmert, who possibly stated the best defense of Israel's actions I've heard yet:

In his first address to the Knesset since the nation began an offensive against Hezbollah six days ago, Olmert pledged that Israel would "not be a hostage" to terrorists and the fight was one "for the right to live a normal life."         

"When missiles are launched at our residents and our towns, our answer will be war waged at full strength, with all determination, courage and sacrifice ," he said after a day of attacks on the Lebanese border, including a hail of Lebanese-fired rockets raining down on the northern Israeli city of Haifa.         

"We are not looking for war or direct conflict, but if necessary we will not be frightened by it," he added.

Notice that Israel attacks Palestine after they kidnap and kill Israeli soldiers, and they bomb Lebanon after they launch rockets at Israel, and yet Israel are the war mongers? If I were a race-bating liberal, I would accuse the media of racism towards Israel, or at least reverse-racism in Muslim favor.

Bush Condemns Terrorists, With foul Language!

I guess today's big story is President Bush condemning Hezbollah to Tony Blair, when he "didn't know a microphone was recording him." Reports Fox News :

Bush expressed his frustration with the United Nations and his disgust with the militant Islamic group and its backers in Syria as he talked to British Prime Minister Tony Blair during the closing lunch at the Group of Eight summit.         

"See the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this [sh*t] and it's over," Bush told Blair as he chewed on a buttered roll.

I don't know what angers liberals more, the President's use of an expletive, or his condemnation of terrorism. Actually, I do know. The condemnation of terrorism angers them more. Having no morals, why would an expletive bother a liberal?

I think President Bush is right, Syria needs to stop Hezbollah from doing all of this, uh, crap. However, I think that Israel has a pretty good strategy. Nothing is quite as convincing as several thousand tons of explosives launched at the terrorists you're harboring to make you cease protecting them.

Friday, July 14, 2006

Vatican Denounces Israel

As a Catholic I feel I should point out that the Vatican's denunciation of Israel for attacking Lebanon was not delivered as official church doctrine and that the Vatican pretty much denounces every war. They also denounced the terrorist attacks.

Official church teaching certainly gives the right to defend one's self, and since Israel has been dealing with attacks from Hezbollah for years, and Hezbollah is part of Lebanon's government, this is certainly self defense. Just thought I'd put that out there before liberals start pretending like they understand religion and using this against Israel.

Poll Shows Democrats Winning. What's New?

A new AP-poll shows that most Americans plan to vote for Democrats in the up-coming mid-term elections. I'm not surprised that the liberal media would make such a prediction, nor do I take much stock in polls since most showed Kerry as having a strong lead in the 2004 election.

I would chalk this up as another dirty trick from the left and not worry about it. After all, as I said in my recent article, we conservatives, unlike liberals, know that Americans are too smart to fall for liberals' dirty tricks.

One wonders how acurate a poll that questions 800 people can be. My guess would be, not very.

Valerie Plame Keeping Low-Profile, Suing Vice President

Reports Fox News:

Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, said Friday they decided to sue Vice President Dick Cheney and presidential adviser Karl Rove because they engaged in a "whispering campaign" to destroy her career.

The couple said they are also suing because they want media attention again. Oh no, wait, that was just implied...

It's good to see Valerie Plame keeping a low profile, by suing the Vice President of the United States! I don't know who's supposed to be trying to destroy who's career here - the man defending himself from Joe Wilson, or the woman complaining she can't keep a job as a covert spy: to the press!

The story goes on:

The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children's lives at risk by exposing Plame, who left the CIA in January and is writing a book about what's happened to her.

Yeah, I can see how the whole families life may have been at risk when it was revealed that Valerie Plame was not an ordinary desk-jokey, but a desk-jockey for the CIA! And the inhumanity of the treatment Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson have received. Personally, I think this reeks of McCarthyism; poor Valerie Plame has been reduced to writing a book she'll no doubt receive millions for. Is there any justice in America?

It will be interesting to see if this lawsuit goes anywhere or, if like the investigation before it, it just wastes a lot of important people's time.

Is It True What They Say About Ann?

So I finally rented and watched Is It True What They Say About Ann? , and it was very good. This is the documentary about Ann Coulter, pundit extraordinaire, that follows her around to her various interviews and speaking engagements.

This documentary will probably not be enjoyed by members of the left, as it is full of Ann's trademark liberal-bashing. It is very funny, and I especially suggest it for anyone who has not had the pleasure of seeing Ann speak in person.

Israel Turns Up The Heat

So, it looks like things are heating up between Israel and Hezbollah. Fox News reports:

Israeli warplanes destroyed the residence and office of Hezbollah's leader Friday as it tightened its grip on Lebanon to punish the guerrilla group over the capture of two Israeli soldiers.

Apparently Hezbollah isn't going to be friendly to Israel anymore, either (major sarcasm there):

In an audiotape aired on Hezbollah's Al-Manar television less than an hour after the Beirut attack on his house, Nasrallah addressed himself to Israelis, saying: "You wanted an open war and we are ready for an open war."

Hezbollah then embarrassed itself by saying "Look at the warship that has attacked Beirut, while it burns and sinks before your very eyes. " Israel later reported minor damage had been done to a warship by rocket fire. Not quite sinking and burning...

I'm glad to see that Israel is finally stepping up its defense against terrorism. Maybe once they destroy Hezbollah they'll move on to Hamas, the PLO, and Iran.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Liberals: Afraid Of Honest Debate

By: Shane

Liberals have shown their incredible skills of debate in response to Ann Coulter's latest best-selling book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. Instead of addressing the issues raised in the book, they began their attack by pointing out one of the many frank comments that Coulter made; her reference to a group of liberal-activist 9/11 widows as "harpies." Although this statement made many people angry, it mostly only bothered those who didn't bother to read her book.

Liberals tried to use Coulter's refusal to adhere to the ridiculous laws of political correctness to shroud the points made in her book. In-fact, by attacking Coulter's criticism of the liberal-activist 9/11 widows, liberals have proved her point that the left hides behind widows, war heroes, mothers of fallen soldiers, and other victims whom they deem immune to criticism. Many people refuse to read Coulter's book, since the only hype the media has given it was to criticize Coulter as a brutal, rude demagogue attacking poor helpless widows (a move Coulter probably saw coming).

This tactic worked for a few weeks to distract from Coulter's damaging remarks on liberalism, but when the media firestorm over the "harpies" comment started to subside liberals panicked. They had to think of a new attack on Coulter, or people might start realizing what she was saying. And so now we have news stories with titles like "Company that syndicates Coulter probing plagiarism" and "Blind eye to Coulter plagiarism."

A sure bet that Coulter was proved innocent of the accusation is that the media has said nothing of it. Had Coulter been guilty we all know that the liberal media would be jumping all over her. No news from the liberal media is usually good news for conservatives.

Now, it doesn't take much thought to realize why liberals constantly attack conservatives rather than argue a point. It is much easier for liberals to say Coulter is mean than it is for them to defend, say, killing a partially born baby, just as it is easier for them to say You can't criticize her! Her son died in Iraq! than it is for them to defend leaving millions of recently liberated Iraqis at the mercy of foreign Islamic terrorists.

FDR said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Well, this is one point where liberals deviate from their favorite communist. Liberals have nothing to fear but honest political debate. Nothing would be more detrimental to Democratic power (come to think of it, do Democrats have any power left?) than if voters stopped and considered facts and listened to arguments instead of giving in to liberal demagoguery. Liberals tell the American people that George Bush is shipping jobs overseas and Conservatives want to take away your right to choose, when it is liberals' high taxes and harsh business regulations that send most jobs overseas, and liberals who refuse to let people decide what energy to use or which school to send their children to.

Liberals attack and attack conservatives because they are afraid to defend their beliefs. Try and find any diehard conservative who doesn't honestly believe that if someone just sat down and reviewed the facts, they would side with them on almost any issue. Now try and find a diehard liberal who will actually engage in open debate rather than throwing pies or calling their opponents "racists." You couldn't, because conservatives actually believe what they say, and liberals are either in it for power or out of sheer ignorance.

Life would be so easy if we were all liberals (that is, until the world ended and we all went to hell). It must be a complete shock to liberals that they have lost power in America. They have the easy job of defending political ideas such as let's feed the hungry and let's make the world a cleaner place. Meanwhile, conservatives are busy keeping the economy alive and keeping everyone in America from being blown up by Islamic terrorists.

When a liberal says something like, "Let's ban SUVs and stop global warming!" Conservatives respond with "Why? There is no proof that human emitted 'Green House Gasses' have any effect on the environment." To which liberals respond, "You must be beholden to the oil companies!" The fact that America doesn't fall for tactics like these is a complete mystery to liberals, who believe that Americans are a bunch of morons.

As long as liberals are liberals, and therefore "believe" in indefensible ideas, we will never get honest debate out of them. We will have to get used to their vicious personal attacks, their shameless demagoguery, and their ignorance to criticism. And frankly, we should be glad that the other end of the political spectrum underestimates Americans as morons, because as any conservative knows, Americans are not morons, and they won't fall for liberals' dirty tricks.

Shane is a writer for the conservative news blog His other articles can be found here.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Putin Shows His Genius

Vice President Dick Cheney recently criticised Russian President Vladimir Putin for Russia's recent crackdowns on human rights. Well, look out Mr. Vice President! President Putin is showing his amazing debating skills by: making a joke about Cheney's hunting accident.

I don't know what is more sad about this, that it makes Putin look like an angry second grader or that it proves the stereotype that Russia is way behind on the times. Shooting accident jokes? Come on!

New Israel Leadership: Looking Good!

I have to say that Israel is looking pretty good under its new leadership. I should admit that I don't pay as much attention to the Israel-Palestine conflict as I should, but I do know that the new Israel appears to finally be telling Palestine to back off.

Sadly, one of the last things that Ariel Sharon did before he was debilitated was give in to Palestine's terroristic demands for land breaking the golden rule when dealing with terrorists: if you give them an inch, they'll blow up your country. Israel has taken back part of the Gaza Strip to make a "buffer zone" to stop the dozens of rockets that are being fired from there. And now they've used warplanes to launch a major strike on terrorists.

Let's hope that Israel finally decides to stop being the Middle East's whipping boy and puts Palestine in its place (which happens to be off the face of the Earth, since they have no right to exist.)

Name Change

Not that it should matter - I don't think the site has had any hits yet - but we've already had to change the name. I failed to check, and so did not know that "Capitalist Blogger" already existed. Our new name is "Confederate Blogger" - although, it should be noted that I am not a Southerner, I only wish I were one.

Right-Wing Summer Reading, Part I

I've decide to start posting all of the good Right Wing reading I do this summer as suggested reading, starting with what will no doubt be the summer's (possibly the year's) best Right Wing book; Godless: The Church of Liberalism, By: Ann Coulter.

Ann Coulter stands alone as the Right's best, smartest, and funniest pundit (matched in talent only by the brilliant Rush Limbaugh). Godless is perhaps Ann's best book yet, tackling topics from education to evolution to the state of American political debate to abortion. (Plus, you can finally read that "Harpies" comment everyone's been talking about!)

Ann makes excellent points with her trademark politically incorrect, in-your-face, unapologetic wit. But why should I bother writing a review, when you could read one from the "Right's diva" herself? If you would like to know more, just read Ann's review of her own book.

EU Court Rules Forced Reguritation Of Cocaine Was Illegal

I'm sure every American patriot will be glad to hear that the European Court of Human Rights is doing a great job at hindering law enforcement and getting drug dealers out of jail. Reuters reports:

Germany must pay damages and costs to a Sierra Leone citizen living in Cologne who was forced by police to regurgitate a bag of cocaine, according to a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights Tuesday.

The court, based in Strasbourg, said that Abu Bakah Jalloh, who was born in 1965, had suffered inhuman and degrading treatment and had not been given a fair trial. Germany must pay around 16,000 euros ($20,380), it said.

Jalloh was arrested in October 1993 after he was spotted selling drugs. No illegal substances were found on him and he was taken to a nearby hospital after the prosecutor ordered he be given an emetic.

Four police officers held him down while a doctor inserted a tube through his nose and administered a salt solution and syrup which yielded a bag containing 0.2182 grams of cocaine.

Putting aside the fact that the man had been seen selling drugs and many criminals have used the "swallow the stash" method to escape prosecution before, it should also be noted that it is very dangerous to swallow a baggy of cocaine. The rapper ODB died when a bag of drugs he had swallowed burst in his stomach. One wonders how big a settlement this lowlife drug dealer's family would have gotten had they sued the police department had the man been injured by the swallowed drugs?

However, the court succeeded in setting the drug dealer free:

The court also ruled that the drugs had been the decisive evidence in Jalloh's trial, and allowing their use had "infringed his right not to incriminate himself and therefore rendered his trial as a whole unfair."

This story serves as yet another morale boosters for us conservative who feel America is becoming dangerously liberal. At least we can still say to ourselves at least we don't live in Europe!

New Leathal Injection Procedure

Although it is nice to hear that the government is doing at least one of the few things they should be doing - protecting Americans by executing a murderer - I have to say that I was a little bewildered by a headline in The Cincinnati Post that read " New lethal injection protocol."

The story reports that:

Ohio today executed the first person using new injection guidelines adopted after the last execution was plagued with problems.

The veins of Rocky Barton, who shot his wife to death because she wanted to leave him, were closely examined several times before he died at 10:27 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. The state's lethal injection protocol was changed after Joseph Clark's execution in May, which was held up 90 minutes when prison staff struggled to find a viable vein and one they used collapsed.

It's nice to know that government bureaucrats have made a new "nicer" protocol for killing murderers, Heaven forbid any other brutal killers have a 90 minute delay in their painless deaths. I want to know what happened to the electric chair and the gallows? Is death by hanging really too gruesome for someone who shot his wife twice with a shot gun while his 17-year-old step-daughter watched?

The news story provides a description of the crime committed by the recipient of this new, painless protocol:

Barton was convicted of aggravated murder for shooting Kimbirli Jo Barton, 44, up close with a shotgun in 2003 outside their farmhouse while his 17-year-old stepdaughter watched. She had returned to get some belongings from the home in Waynesville in Warren County...

When she arrived, Barton ran toward her and first shot her in shoulder. She tried to crawl toward her daughter, but he shot her again in the back.

Personally, I find that no death would be too horrendous for this, and many other murderers. The most selfish thing a human being can do is to take another person's life. Instead of making sure that no criminal ever has to feel stress or pain during their executions, maybe the government should be preventing crime with more police, better technology, and, most importantly, tougher laws with harsher punishments.

Coming Soon

We will be opening shortly, I believe. First, I need to get the site in order and what-not.

This is my fourth political blog, and hopefully my last (meaning I hope it will last, not I hope to cease blogging). Check in soon for regular posts featuring my first-class insight (and wit).