Hopefully, since the ruling by the Federal Appeals Court Panel that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional, more people will finally get it that judicial appointments are important. If people are concerned about the ruling and feel that the courts might be eyeing the Declaration of Independence and some favorite patriotic hymns for censorship, then now is the time to contact the Senators who are sitting on judicial nominations and tell them to do their job . . .or find another one.

But what is very interesting about the finger pointing in this 2 to 1 vote is that the democrats are quick to point out that the wackiest explanation for the ruling, came from a Nixon appointee. That means this guy has been there for over a quarter of century and was appointed when the Senate understood the mandate of Advise and Consent. He was there before religious profiling was common place with judicial appointees and a president’s choice was considered the prerogative of the victor. Neither party was trying to ’’stack’’ the court by providing a litmus confirmation process. He was obviously considered, by President Nixon, a fellow Californian, to be a good, honest, competent judge.

So what happened in 25 years to make an otherwise sane man, think that a pledge that millions of Americans have been reciting for over a hundred years, is suddenly unconstitutional? What has happened in America that a second grader complaining about being taught about the legitimacy of alternative lifestyles is silenced and ridiculed, but another who complains that just hearing the word ’’God’’ is offensive can have her day in court?

Where is the American Civil Liberties Union to express outrage at this court sponsored censorship? Remember, they are the ones that feel that libraries should not have any filters on their computers in case perverts want to come in and download porn next to your little girl. She has no right to be offended by that. Her rights are silenced. But if that someone says the pledge of Allegiance in that same library, uttering those very offense words, ’’under God,’’ then somehow she should be protected from this horrible act.

Where are the Hollywood elite who still write their movies about the McCarthy blacklisting era where people’s views were inspected, dissected and silenced if they did not conform to the views of a small group of bullies. They are incensed that not only were views silenced, but that freedoms were denied of people who, by association, were considered to be enemies of the state. Is God not worthy of their righteous indignation? Are words that have been uttered by millions of American citizens for almost 50 years not worthy of their usual rhetoric of First Amendment protection? No one is ever forced to say the pledge . . . so to determine that it is unconstitutional calls into question every utterance in this land of the word God or the use of a reference to His deity. God Bless America could become outlawed in public buildings.

We have been there, done that, and have dozens of tee-shirts from communist countries who went down this same, dead end road, only to find that the gods they erected for themselves were gods that determined who was more valuable, and considered by the state, to be worthy of life. We have seen people imprisoned for their beliefs, their faith, the color of their skin, the political party they belong to, what books they have in their homes, whether they wear glasses and can read . . . etc. And it all begins with the government deciding that it knows best, above any and all, imagined or real, Supreme Being, and that all reference to said Being must be outlawed so that the perfectible man might have final and complete control over his own destiny. Except that, to insure this happens properly, it is only a handful determining what that destiny should be for the rest of us. It is one father determining that his 2nd grade daughter is somehow offended, because HE says she is, therefore the rest of the class, and the country should be summarily silenced. If I am offended by him, can I have him silenced? Where does it end?

This decision is a wakeup call to Senators who have been playing fast and lose with the constitution themselves, and taking on as their constitutional duties, the selection of judges. But it should serve as a much bigger wakeup call to the rest of America that has slipped into a state of complacency on issues that seem on the surface, benign inconveniences, while the foundation of their very liberties, freedoms and . . . country are being eroded and reconfigured in the image of a handful of people who arrogantly believe they know what is best for everyone. That is demagoguery which leads to tyranny, which leads to people on their knees praying to God for liberation from this man-made hell.

Now, EVERYONE Knows What The Terrorists Are Planning to Do . . .

Arafat warned that if Israel does not withdraw from Palestinian held territory immediately, “enabling our people to practice their legitimate rights of establishing the independent Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capital, the whole region will witness a disastrous explosion that will impact not only the region but the stability of the whole world.” [The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition, June 8, 2002]

Now, if it was Osama Bin Ladin saying this, everyone would be outraged and insist upon turning up the heat to bring him to justice. But suddenly, when his fellow terrorist in arms, hiding behind a self-proclaimed position of “world leader” says this, everyone quickly dons their appeasement posture and says, “We better listen to him, he will do it you know.”

What happened to the words of almost every American president, forced to answer to terrorists demands; “We do not deal with terrorists”? Why then do we continue to negotiate with the most infamous exporter of terrorism in the world? A man who encourages innocent young people to do his dirty work for him, while taking money from his partner-in-murder, Saddam Hussein . . . who has recently upped the anti for families whose kids strap on dynamite for his sake.

The big question is . . . if this man has such little value for human life, if the parents of these kids who encourage them to kill themselves, have such little regard for their own children, why should the world worry that they are being killed? Their own parents don’t even care. They are getting paid to have their children kill themselves. They are getting rewards in heaven for getting killed . . . oh, only if they take some more innocent people out with them though. How hypocritical. And we deal with this man as though he is a legitimate leader, a trustworthy broker of peace? The only type of peace that Yassar Arafat will be satisfied with is spelled . . . P-I-E-C-E. A piece of each Palestinian child for a larger piece of land that never belonged to him in the first place.

How do you deal with thugs, murderers, terrorists? You deal with them consistently. You don’t encourage this behaviour by elevating one that happens to be recognized by other world nuts as a leader . . . just because he says he is. Why not take someone like a Timothy McVeigh then, and instead of executing him as the terrorist and thug that he was, elevate him to position of leader of a “just cause,” give him a platform from which to speak, and pressure those with integrity and courage to accept that this man’s cause far outweighs whatever means he employs to make that cause a reality.

That is the concept of situational ethics at its best and is the byproduct of an educational system that has sapped common sense and decency from our elected leaders. If the situation warrants a terrorist act, then that is acceptable. If we don’t agree with the cause, then the terrorist is executed. How can you rule and lead with such inconsistent standards of justice?

When Arafat promises there will be a large explosion that will impact the entire world, the media elite get this warm tingle all over that justice for the poor Palestinians will be served. They don’t recoil in horror and insist that this madman be taken out . . . like they clamour for the removal of Osama Bin Laden . . . or Timothy McVeigh. What is the difference? Are we supposed to wait now and see what that big explosion is and where? Will we only act if it affects America?

When you prop up a petty dictator like Yassar, then you reap what you sow . . . and we have allowed a master-terrorist to walk amongst us, unmolested, as a legitimate voice of freedom and peace. If there is such an explosion, and we don’t treat this man as the enemy of civility that he is, then we have no one to blame but ourselves for the deaths such a promised explosion will cause. Can America live with that? Can we live wi th a known terrorist amongst us, holding all our lives as hostage to his demented demands? The choice is ours . . . while we still have the freedom to make it.

Now, EVERYONE Knows What The Terrorists Are Planning to Do . . . so the Dems can stop pointing fingers at Republicans (especially when they gave Clinton a free pass for 8 years)

We recently had the opportunity to conduct a detailed review of a captured Al Qaeda training tape. The tape was apparently produced for Al Qaeda internal use and did not appear to be an external propaganda production. The tape showed Al Qaeda operatives engaging in a number of training exercises including small arms firing ranges, live-fire room entry, and numerous mixed live-fire/role-player type of scenarios.

Scenarios included: Assassinations, Kidnappings, Bombings, and Small unit raids on various types of targets. The training depicted in these scenarios was clearly for export according to an intelligence expert that commented on the tape.

“None of these training scenarios depicts the type of fighting that Al Qaeda engages in within Afghanistan.” Detailed planning, diagramming and walk-through’s followed by live-fire exercises were the norm. There were a lot of role playing, scenario type of interactions. The role players made aggressive moves simulating resistance at various points throughout the scenarios. All such resistance was met with immediate and brutal
countermeasures by the terrorists. There was no presumed compliance on the part of the terrorists.

The effort to produce detail and realism in training was impressive. These people are using extremely effective training methods!

The following points were seen REPEATEDLY and ROUTINELY throughout the training exercises:

1. Use of standard military small unit tactics with multiple elements. (Assault, Security and Support elements)
2. Coordination with sub-elements via hand-held FM radios.
3. Use of pick-up trucks by the assault element to conduct raids/assassinations (shooters concealed in bed of truck).
4. Use of Motorcycles by the security element (as well as in the historical role as a shooting platform for drive by shootings/assassinations.)
5. Use of explosives upon withdrawal from the objective.
6. Use of vehicle horn to signal withdrawal (and initiation of explosives.)
7. Detailed planning and rehearsal of all actions.
8. Exercise of prisoner handling procedures. From initial contact, to search and control, to execution of prisoners. Role players could be heard begging not to be killed (IN ENGLISH). Terrorists practiced commands in English also.
9. Multiple man room entries. Typically one or two, 2-man teams that assumed a back to back position near the center of the room.
10. Distraction devices used prior to room entry. Fuse lit devices (improvised?)
11. Multiple breach points into structures and into individual rooms.All scenarios were practiced live-fire. Including those that involved role players. Paper targets and role players were interspersed in the same scenarios. (The terrorists showed good muzzle awareness and control.) The weapons handling was NOT haphazard. All terrorist operatives carried and fired their weapons using the same techniques.

Some specific weapons handling idiosyncrasies are:

1. Handguns were carried in high ready.
2. Long guns (AK variants) were carried and fired rotated 90 degrees (ejection port up)

Specific scenarios included:

1. Targeting of law enforcement officers in ambush / assassinations.
   • Faked disabled vehicle with shooters concealed in trunk of car or bed of truck. When officer stops his vehicle behind “disabled vehicle” assault is initiated by driver blowing horn. Target was first engaged with rifle fire from the vehicle, terrorists then debussed to administer “coup de grace” at close range.
   • An explosive device was thrown into the LE vehicle on exfiltration. This was one of a number of scenarios that were shown first as a diagram and explanation, then progressing to dry fire walk through and finally to a live-fire exercise. Target location was shown as a 6 lane divided highway with the terrorist vehicle located just prior to the exit/cloverleaf (to allow multiple exfiltration routes and security overview.
   • There aren’t any such highways in Afghanistan and damn few in the Middle East. In one iteration of this scenario the security/overwatch element was exercised firing on possible responding LEOs.
2. Residential assassination. Innocuous looking person (weapon concealed) knocks on door of residence. Stands in view of peephole and answers question from resident through closed door. When resident opens door terrorist draws and fires, emptying weapon into victim.
3. Assassination on golf course. Target was on the green (at the pin/flag.) A Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) was fired at a vehicle adjacent to the green (VIP security element?) to initiate the hit. Target was then engaged with rifle fire.
4. Two and four-man live-fire room entry (2-man back to back technique) with target discrimination (shoot/no shoot targets).
5. Raid on compound (Kidnapping). One person taken. Initiated with RPG. Initiation was when Guard Shack was taken out with grenades. Primary target building was engaged with RPG. Primary target building was entered through multiple breach points (through explosive breach of wall and through windows.) Exfiltration was by truck with motorcycle security element in overwatch positions.
6. Drive up kidnapping of target walking down the street.
7. Use of tunnels/storm drains/sewers for infiltration and exfiltration during raids.
8. Rappelling from roof of building to make entry on upper floors was shown on more than one occasion.
9. Motorcycle drive-by target practice. Shooter stands up on rear pegs and extends arms over driver. Excellent muzzle awareness and control.
10. Grenades thrown into second story windows by motorcycle drive-bys.

MULTIPLE SCENARIOS/EXERCISES involved raids on buildings with a large number of occupants (school or office building?)

These raids followed a standard pattern:

1. Covert/surreptitious entry into building and movement to initial points.(Rifles hidden on persons and in bags/cases carried into building.)
2. Initiation with extreme violence of action. Any resisters are shot.
3. Immediate positive control and search of prisoners. Any resisters, or anyone they don’t like the look of, are shot.
4. Segregation of prisoners into manageable groups. (Explosives were displayed to gain psychological dominance over prisoners.)
5. Movement of selected prisoners in small groups to the roof where terrorists posture and make statements for the press/cameras.
6. Prisoners executed one-by-one in front of the press/cameras.
7. All scenarios involving prisoners ended in execution of the prisoners and none included a plan for exfiltration of the terrorists. They plan to kill the prisoners and to die in place.

The major take home lesson here is that although the enemy is known to be seeking the ability and opportunity to use weapons of mass destruction and of an unconventional nature, such as hijacked airliners, they are also spending a lot of time training to carry out attacks the old-fashioned way. Attacks executed by small groups of dedicated personnel equipped with little more than small arms.

There is information to the effect that the “perfect day” as seen by Al Qaeda would combine attacks designed to produce the maximum number of casualties with attacks that would give them the opportunity to get “face time” on the news channels to deliver their rhetoric.

For maximum effect these attacks would take place nearly simultaneously at multiple geographically separate locations.

We need to address, in training and in personal preparation, the differences between a typical criminal victimization and a terrorist incident in terms of early recognition and appropriate response. I.E. The typical bank robbery vs. finding yourself in the middle of a terrorist attack on a “financial institution” (as per the recent FBI warning.)

If you find yourself in the middle of one of these attacks, there will not be time for the SWAT team to intervene on your behalf. Compliance will buy you only a very little time. If you are identified as a potential problem to the terrorists you will be shot!

(They are training to spot Law Enforcement, Security and Corrections Officers as well as armed citizens.) If, by feigned compliance, you make it through the first cut you can expect to be physically restrained and then controlled with threats to the rest of your group and to the other groups.

“We will blow up the women and children in the next room if any of you do not do exactly as we say!”

Your ultimate fate, if you d not resist, is to be ritually executed in front of the television cameras.

In my opinion the best time to act is most likely to be at the initiation of the attack.

Once the terrorists are consolidating on the objective it will be very difficult to take effective action. You must plan on providing effective resistance at the first opportunity! Shoot, move and communicate. Seek cover, use your weapon as required. Attempt to acquire a better weapon system at the first opportunity (do you know how to place an AK into operation?) Keep in mind that before any terrorist action there are many opportunities to interrupt their cycle by detecting their pre-mission activities.

This is where we all can be of assistance. Pay attention to what is going on around you as you go about your daily business. Investigate and report any unusual or suspicious activity that you observe (note vehicle make and model, license plates, personnel descriptions etc.)

A suicide bomber blew himself up at an ice cream parlor in an outdoor mall near Tel Aviv yesterday, also killing two others including a 2-year-old girl whose bloodstained carriage lay on its side after the blast amid a tangle of white plastic chairs. About 20 were wounded.

Now, tell me again, why we are supposed to have compassion for this cause? These people are clones of Timothy McVeigh.

If we condone this type of action, no matter how “worthy” their cause, then we owe McVeigh an apology and invite that same type of terrorist activity here in the United States.

If they are all destined to kill themselves, and that is the highest goal they can attain spiritually, then why does the world go nuts when the Israelis beat them to the punch?

So, they only get a dozen virgins if killed by someone else in their “holy war”? To justify this type of activity is to condone cowardice, murder and nihilism, and it changes the paradigm of their commitment to the cause, and the actions of those trying to stop the carnage.

This is not rocket science.

If you have a group of people, bent on self-destruction, willing to blow themselves up in order to take out innocent babies, then perhaps the time has come to help them achieve that goal.

They can’t have it both ways . . . they can’t call the Israelis murderers, while the PLO, et al, embrace the concept of suicide. They have already determined that their life is cheap, and only has value in death, so what is the point of calling the Israelis murderers when they are just trying to prevent this madness from infecting innocent people.

There are many distinctions between the antiwar activists of the Vietnam era and those today. In spite of the fact that many today are holdovers from that conflict, and have perennially, since that time, hated all things American, most are the new breed of protester.

The antiwar rally on the Mall in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, March 15, was like a big anti-American infomercial with each speaker giving their web site address, advertising what group they represented, and inviting all within hearing range to come to yet, another rally, for yet another anti-American cause.

It wasn’t surprising that in their rush to condemn America and President Bush, they forgot to mention it was the anniversary of the gassing of thousands of fellow Iraqis by Saddam. The few who lived through the horrors were not invited to speak or give an eyewitness account of the brutality that the tyrant visits upon his “loyal” subjects.

But you can be sure, if one Iraqi is even scratched by the US military, they will be immediately flown in, invested as the anti-war poster child, and paraded through every rally and talk show decrying the evil of President Bush and the United States.

The speeches, or commercials, would hardly convince the casual listener that they could possibly have anything in common with this rag tag group of socialists that never saw a dictator they didn’t love, and a patriotic American they didn’t malign as being a right-wing terrorist. They had apologists for Cuba, Columbia, Nicaragua and several other countries ravaged by communism, drug lords and tyranny. Their icon of irrelevant thought, Ramsey Clark, praised the French people and said even Lafayette and the Statue of Liberty don’t compare to the greatness of the French people today and their courage to stand up against the infidel, George W. Bush.

But, I would like to think that Ramsey Clark loves conservative Republicans, including President Bush, at least as much as he claims he loves the people of Iraq, which he did at the rally on Saturday. Remember Ramsey . . . charity begins at home.

It was cute how they all kept referring to each other as “brother and sister” like they were all going to go home and share a steak together or something. Oh, sorry . . . I mean a slab of tofu. So, the word “Comrade,” the ancient communist term for unity and “solidarity,” (another key word that kept popping up), has been replaced. Since the rest of the world is under the impression that communism is dead, forgetting Cuba, North Korea and China, it is cliché to call a fellow tyrant loving, useful idiot, a “comrade.” How retro can you get?

Years ago, during the Vietnam protests, we were privy only to the carefully gleaned semi-intellectual comments that were woven skillfully into the evening news of the three major TV networks that held the country hostage to their editorial slant and persuasion. There were no opposing views expressed, except at the voting booth that overwhelmingly put Nixon back in office, inspite of the impression that McGovern was the clear choice of “the people.”

Today, there are so many voices, opinions, camcorders and websites that not only report and film every single word, but provide dissection from every possible angle imagined. With CSPAN loyally providing an unvarnished version of the truth, the rest of America is free to shake there collective heads and wonder what rock these protesters crawled out from under.

Then we remember Seattle and DC and the anti-World Bank and IMF marches where violence and mayhem ensued in the name of peace and justice. A whole generation of anarchists chomping at the bit to release their venom against anything that stands for liberty, personal responsibility and civil rights, is delighted to finally have a purpose, a cause celeb. This was their teething ring, preparing them for the hopes of protesting against a President who has the courage to stand firm against attacks that killed 3,000 fellow American citizens.

It is still a mystery as to why they stood by silently as their icon of ego, Bill Clinton, dropped bombs on Afghanistan, Sudan, and then Serbia and Albania without checking the pulse of the International community. They were silent when the “oops” bomb dropped on the Chinese embassy, and on the personal residence of Slovodon, deep in the heart of Serbia. What, no human shields? No opposition to the president using our tax dollars, our military and our government to bomb sovereign nations, as many of the speakers Saturday were complaining that Bush was doing?

Ok, we know that liberals, even left wing anarchist liberals, believe no democrat can commit a crime, while all Republicans (except the Republican Guard) should be lined up against a wall and shot . . . in the name of peace of course. But it was amazing to see such hate issuing from these young, impressionable kids who probably couldn’t point to Vietnam on a map if their MP3 player depended on it.

So let’s look at the numbers. The most recent polls show that 70% of the American people support the president. That number keeps climbing every time a Hollywood starlet says how awful he is, and how ashamed they are of America.

The Dixie Chicks just caused Bush’s numbers to go up a few points in the polls as they trashed him to London audiences, hoping their base . . . red, white and blue-blooded Americans . . . wouldn’t get wind of their disloyal statements. Heh girls, I dare you to go on a local Nashville station and make those same comments.

Here comes the distinction between then and now. Although the vast majority of the agitators against the Vietnam War were paid operatives with the purpose of demoralizing our troops and destabilizing our presence in that part of the world, the naive followers really did believe we should be out of Vietnam. And that was it.

They weren’t tree-hugging atheists who spewed venom at people of faith who ate hamburgers. They understood the threat of the Soviet Union and wouldn’t be caught dead siding with Castro. They were thoughtful people who had a serious problem with the US sending troops, for years, to a land we knew nothing about for a purpose that was never clearly explained. And when the war ended, they went on with their lives, their businesses, their professions . . . and didn’t look back.

The protesters today are far slicker with a much more complicated agenda that really has nothing to do with peace. If it did, they would have spoken out at some point about the atrocities committed by Saddam, or Castro, or Kim Jong Il, or a myriad of other petty dictators who have zero respect for human life. They would be on the front line against abortion that kills more innocent babies in one year, than they even predict will die in the worse case scenario in an Iraq conflict.

They are giddy with delight that finally they have an opportunity to showcase to the world what an imperialist, aggressive, and arrogant nation they think America is. Because for them, the greater good lies in the hope of a world body that supersedes all that America stands for . . . which they think is greed, oil, money, domination, strength, individualism, religion, faith in God, belief in the core family unit, freedom to choose to eat meat or home school, pay less taxes, have less government control in our lives, etc.

So in spite of the intended result, the rally on Saturday, and subsequent rallies which are sure to follow, serve mainly to entertain, to galvanize an already committed nation to the cause of freedom and justice. They remind us that free speech is a right we all fight to preserve . . . just as much as the right to disagree and think for ourselves, without fear of being called right wing terrorists.

If you listen to conservative radio talk shows, you might not be aware that Senator Daschle thinks you are capable of violence.

What is so interesting is that even moderate to liberal talk show hosts have been outraged by the statement by Daschle that says, “What happens when Rush Limbaugh attacks those of us in public life is that people aren’t satisfied just to listen.

They want to act because they get emotionally invested. And so, you know, the threats to those of us in public life go up dramatically, and on our families and on us, in a way that’s very disconcerting.”

But, if you read between the lines, you will really hear Daschle say, “Rush Limbaugh holds politicians accountable by pointing out our hypocrisies and inconsistencies and as a result, people are motivated to go to the polls and let their voices be heard.

They want to vote because they realize that we want to take their freedoms away and they are emotionally motivated to secure their freedoms and liberties, but we think this is a threat to our power base.

And so, because they are responding intelligently, and voting with their feet, our livelihoods as a liberal power base, that tries to control the hearts and minds of the American people, is threatened.”

Interestingly, we have searched everywhere and can’t find Daschle making this type of accusatorial statement, chastising a real-life threat made by Alec Baldwin on national T.V. to take Henry Hyde out and stone, and kill him and his family.

All who agree with Daschle’s statement, totally disregarded Bill Clinton’s loathing of the military, thus placing hundreds of thousands of our members of the military in a position of being the recipients of their liberal brand of discrimination and intimidation that they exhibited in the 60’s and 70’s toward the military.

He has not expressed outrage at the hateful, anti-American rhetoric uttered by Hollywood’s useful idiots, Jessica Lange, Robert Altman, and all the others who promised to leave the country should Americans be so stupid as to elect Republicans to the White House.

These same open-minded, compassionate liberals applauded when Julia Roberts remarked at an elitist event that the word “Republican” was found in the dictionary between Reptile and Repugnant. That of course was not seen as inciting violence, or even hatred against people who freely choose to be a aligned with a legally organized political party.

But what is so interesting about this unvarnished attack on everyone who exercises their constitutional rights by drawing an erroneous conclusion that these lemmings are inspired to violence, is that we are not allowed to apply that same conclusion to a group of people who really DO commit violence when inspired to.

We are not allowed to point out that Muslim fundamentalists have as their specific goal in life to destroy us and our way of life, even if it means giving their own life for the cause.

This is considered hateful, bigoted, mean spirited and just in bad taste. Even though all dots connected show a distinct picture of terror, murder, loss of life and property and nations held hostage by the inevitability of life given to their emotional responses.

And ironically enough, if someone does make the international faux pas of drawing this deadly conclusion, they are castigated for their insensitivity, while they are being proven right by the very people they are identifying.

For example when Jerry Falwell made a statement, very similar to Senator Daschle’s, about the violent nature of Muslims, they responded by starting a riot and . . . killing innocent people. Conservatives on the other hand, responded to Daschle’s specious claims that they were violent, by either inviting him to host their show, or posting tongue in cheek articles on the internet making him look like the lightweight he is.

No one, except Hillary, really believed him anyway, or even understood what he was saying. She however is still convinced that all the rational thinking people (aka vast-right-wing conservatives) in America, en masse, tempted her husband to cheat on her and embarrass her in front of the world, and then conspired to get him to lie under oath and do that finger waggy thing saying he “did not have sex with that woman.”

Now that you mention it . . . I do recall seeing Newt Gingrich standing behind his chair during that televised victim-thon, whispering words into his ear and moving his arm up and down as he pointed to all America, like WE were the cause of his major and hugely stupid indiscretions.

So, Senator Daschle, who wants to lead the country, thinks that the majority of the country, who voted for conservatives, are so dangerous, that they should be silenced and the leaders of their ilk, broadcasting their evil and destruction on the air, should be silenced.

Isn’t it odd that he has never once complained about the liberal TV anchors who for years have been spoon-feeding the populace their liberal pabulum with the hopes of keeping us in a state of disinformation and complacency? Even though over 90% of people in the media are self-identified as liberals and members of the Democrat party, Daschle, et al, will not be satisfied until it is 100%. Sieg Heil Her Daschle!!

Liberals, and especially Tom Daschle, really need to take a deep breath, get out more in the real world and realize that Republicans, and conservatives in particular, are not that dangerous. And that the vast majority of the American public, as proven in the last election, are not prone to violence just because they believe in individuality, less government control of their lives, and politicians being held accountable to their word.

Think about it, if they were that violent, they would have revolted after the elections in 1992, and had a virtual overthrow of the country in 1996. They would not have waited until 2002 for a silent and gentle reorganization of power achieved by going to the polls and peacefully, pulling the lever for people who aren’t hungry for power, and don’t lie to to get it.

In order to get into some gangs, you have to do something called, “making your bones,” which basically means throwing yourself on the sword of their twisted fraternity by killing someone. This is a desperate, lonely move, usually made by people who have lost a sense of direction and are hoping their new found “friends” can fill that empty void in their lives.

In civilized society, those trying desperately to prove themselves, to people that the rest of us would choose to avoid, have more sophisticated techniques to prove they are in with the “In” crowd, even if it means they totally alienate themselves from anyone outside this little clique.

Arianna Huffington has just made her bones for the “anti-anything-American-we-hate-conservatives-hypocrite-elitist” gang, by promoting one of the most ridiculous, insulting and deceptively conceived ads since the little girl in the field of daises with the mushroom cloud in the background. She, and her fellow multimillionaire, let-them-eat-cake friends think that anyone who drives an SUV is contributing to terrorism, therefore, is a terrorist.

Let’s define terrorism: Any situation where one group or individual can exert such pressure, force or control over another as to cause them great fear. Like, if I drive an SUV, I could be the target of great derision and abuse, and this should cause me, and other average Americans, to fear driving or buying one. Thus . . . I am terrorized.

Let’s define average American. Well, it is someone who doesn’t own a 9,000 sq. ft. house, like Arianna, or a 13,000 square ft. house with a 21 car garage, like Normal Lear, a supporter of the commercial. It is someone who might have kids, or be in a working profession where a heavier vehicle is needed. It might be someone in sales or delivery who needs an SUV for their livelihood. It is the family on the farm and in the rural areas where four wheel drives and sturdy cars are necessary. It is the electrician, plumber, and carpenter who are all called at the most inconvenient times to come make life for Arianna, and the rest of us, a little easier when expected systems fail.

Grasshopper, would Arianna turn back a plumber driving an SUV if her living room was flooding with water? Or would she turn down a neighbor’s offer to drive a sick child through a snow storm when the emergency vehicles can’t get through?

Everyone who chooses to own a pickup truck needs to realize that they too are the target of these ads because most SUVs are built on truck chassis. “Choice” is a key word here because that is the word these liberals, and neo-liberals, have all carved in their alter of political correctness and restrict all discussion, surrounding the sanctity of that word, to the issue of abortion. They don’t really mean that we should all have a free choice in everything. Oh, heavens, don’t be silly. It is only if our choice is exactly what they think it should be, or if it is the choice to kill an unborn baby.

So a woman can choose to go to an abortion clinic, she just can’t choose to get there in an SUV. And if she does, she is a terrorist, but not a baby killer. Are you following this logic?

Another interesting point that seems to be lost on the gang that can’t shoot their rhetoric straight, is that they claim terrorism is horrible and bad and must be stopped, but the minute President Bush tries to address the issue, they dismiss him as a warmonger, or aggressive imperialist. They have declared they want no part of a conflict that protects their rich heenies from annihilation, to be in “their” name, and have even started a group called . . . Not In Our Name.

The Not in Our Name Project encourages everyone to build resistance in the spirit of Philip Berrigan who said, “The American people are, more and more, making their voices heard against Bush and his warrior clones. Bush and his minions slip out of control, determined to go to war, determined to go it alone, determined to endanger the Palestinians further, determined to control Iraqi oil, determined to ravage further a suffering people and their shattered society. The American people can stop Bush . . . can banish the war makers from Washington.” Oh . . .by not driving SUVs? News flash . . . the vast majority of the oil we import into America is NOT from terrorist countries. And if they are so concerned about us being dependent on foreign countries for oil, why do they continually stop exploration in Alaska and off shore, so we are not?

So what is it? Are terrorists bad or not? Are soccer moms and working men and women who rely on their SUVs and pickup trucks to make a living as evil as Saddam, and are we all really terrorists if we use gas and oil products, even Arianna and Norman?

Or, is this a way for Bill Maher, Al Franken and Norman Lear to force Arianna to repent for her past dalliances with conservatism, sleeping with the Republican enemy, and to prove that yes, she really is a bona fide liberal. That is fine, if she wants to switch parties, ideologies and even soap powder. . . but it is not acceptable for her to take her desperate desire to swing with the liberal elite as an excuse to paint all drivers of SUVs as terrorists, or supporters of terrorism. And if she does insist upon connecting dots that don’t exist, she and her gang have to be honest about the fact that they are far guiltier of the same charge because of the cost of heating and cooling their huge homes, and the cost to put gas in ALL those cars.

It seems a little suspicious that the group, that pretends to abhor terrorism by creating an ad campaign that basically terrorizes SUV drivers, is trying to stop the production of the only vehicle that will be useful should another disaster hit this country. They should be encouraging people to buy SUVs so they can be of assistance if necessary, like they were in DC and New York during the snow storm of Feb. 17 and 18.

A little consistency is all the rest of us “little” people ask from the beautiful people . . . no bones about it.

*Update: We just bought our first SUV in honor of Arianna and her gang that tried very hard to terrorize me and others into thinking we were supporting terrorism. Sorry, it didn’t work. And as a reminder of what freedom, choice and liberty mean, and that intimidation in the name of political correctness should be rejected and denounced . . . we named our SUV . . . Arianna . . . and Jesus is driving with me everytime I drive it, to answer the question, “What would Jesus drive?”

The Democrat party has announced that it will begin equating Christians in America to the Taliban, claiming they are intolerant and bigoted.

This is another very enlightened step by a party that constantly shows it is OUT of step with the rest of the country.

The sad thing is that they don’t even know the demographics of their own party that show there are 80 million born-again Christians, registered to vote in the country, and 40% of them are registered democrats.

This can actually serve as a much needed wake-up call to these Christians who have been living in denial as to the agenda of the democrat party.

Those who for years have turned a blind eye to the party’s whole-hearted support, for example, of un-restricted abortion.

Their adamant opposition to parental notification before their child undergoes a life-threatening procedure, school vouchers, choice in education, and protection of children on-line are just a few indications that the democrats are out of step with Christian principles.

Ironically, this same party will bend over backwards to ensure we do nothing to slight Muslims or their faith.  A religion with elements who have declared war on America, with commands in their Koran to kill all unbelievers, and have nothing to do with people of other faiths.

While the very dangerous dictates of the Christian faith are . . . “Love your neighbor, turn the other cheek, pray for those who persecute you, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

So if the democrats in America are that out of touch with reality, with history, and with their own supporters, I would invite thinking democrats, no matter what their faith, to reject this fascist agenda to attack and destroy a class of people because of their belief system.

Where have all these peace marchers, who are protesting the US retaliation against acts of war on our country, been in the past 8 years?

These are not teenagers who have suddenly come of age, clueless about the seriousness of the devastating attacks on US soil on September 11. These are seasoned educators and professional agitators who take every opportunity to trash America while pretending to take a moral high ground.

So again, I ask, where were they when President Clinton was dropping bombs on Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998 to distract the world from his infidelities?

Where were they a year later when we decided to send troops into a sovereign nation and target their leader, Milosovich, for destruction?

Again, suspiciously timed to move Clinton’s personal problems off the front page.

This was a country that posed no threat to the US, had been fighting for centuries, and had never attacked the US. Why weren’t these peace-idiots marching and using their worn out slogans like, “The US is an imperialist country?”

Why weren’t the enlightened and concerned college professors rallying their gullible students to protest President Clinton’s acts? Why were they somehow justifying it based on flimsy human rights arguments that could also be applied against the Kosovo Liberation Association?

And if they were so concerned about human rights violations, why are they so obviously silent on human rights violations in dozens of other countries in the world?

I suggest that we give these peace activists one-way tickets to Afghanistan, and encourage them to march over there. And of course, because Afghanistan is just like the US, they will obviously let them march, and of course pay for them to come back. Or . . . maybe not.

There is a funny, yet shockingly true vignette circulating on the Internet speculating how the Clinton’s, with a combined income of about $200,000 can afford to buy a two million dollar home.

No matter how the average family, making the same, tries to stretch their dollar, it is never going to fit over a purchase like that.

If this is a gift, have they paid taxes on it like everyone else would be required to . .. or are there some loopholes the average American doesn’t know about.

Will someone let us know so we can all enjoy this same bounty of generosity?

But this elitist diversion from economic reality by the Clintons actually helps explain a lot. He promises to veto the bill repealing the marriage tax penalty and the death tax penalty.

And it is easy to understand why. He is not held accountable to the same rules of taxation that the rest of are. He has become so isolated behind instant gifts for cattle futures and New York mansions, that he just thinks the rest of the country is as fortunate.

So, please visit our website at and read the story I am referring to called “The Free Ride” and please let me know if I am missing something.

And then . . . call Bill and Hillary and let them know as an average tax payers who is not fortunate enough to live in the same wealthy class they do, that you could really use the extra $1400 a year if you are married.

Or you would appreciate not having to bury your father and mortgage the family farm or business in the same week because Al Gore keeps referring to you as rich and greedy.

I think what Bill and Al need a little lesson in perspective and I am counting on you . . . to give it to them.