Monday, April 30, 2007

Would You Buy, Well, ANYTHING From This Man?


Me, neither.

If there is a bigger weasel, a more gutless coward, a more shameless ingrate in public life than failed CIA Director George Tenet, I don't know who it is. This guy is the Barney Fife of the fight against terrorism. He missed everything.

Don't take my word for it. Here's Michael Sheuer, famous neo-con hater, in the right-wing Washington Post:


"What troubles me most is Tenet's handling of the opportunities that CIA officers gave the Clinton administration to capture or kill bin Laden between May 1998 and May 1999. Each time we had intelligence about bin Laden'swhereabouts, Tenet was briefed by senior CIA officers at Langley and by operatives in the field. He would nod and assure his anxious subordinates that he would stress to Clinton and his national security team that the chances of capturing bin Laden were solid and that the intelligence was not going to get better. Later, he would insist that he had kept up his end of the bargain, but that the NSC had decided not to strike."


Since 2001, however, several key Clinton counterterrorism insiders (including NSC staffers Richard A. Clarke, Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon) have reported that Tenet consistently denigrated the targeting data on bin Laden, causing the president and his team to lose confidence in the hard-won intelligence. 'We could never get over the critical hurdle of being able to corroborate Bin Ladin's whereabouts,' Tenet now writes. That of course is untrue, but it spared him from ever having to explain the awkward fallout if an attempt to get bin Laden failed. "

Now the same guy who never went after Osama, who never fought to topple the Taliban when it mattered, and who didn't have the decency to resign after the worst intelligence failure in American history is re-writing history to make himself the guy who tried to tell us....uh, well, something.

He tells us today that he was astonished when Bush officials linked Al Qaeda and Iraq. It was bogus and he told, er. somebody (but not the president, who he personally briefed every morning). That's what Tenet said on "60 Minutes." But here's what he said in a letter to fellow Democrat Bob Graham in 2002:


“We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qa’ida going back a decade”; “Credible information indicates that Iraq and al-Qa’ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression”; “We have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qa’ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad”; “We have credible reporting that al-Qa’ida leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities”


Gee, maybe all these reports from the CIA are the reason that Hillary Rodham Clinton said "Saddam Hussein has given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members" in 2002? Maybe?

What would be hilarious if it weren't so pathetic is that George Tenet--so desperate to do the kind of sucking up that built his political career--is now getting it wrong again in his desperation to bash Bush and win media friends. Today he mocks the notion of fighting Iraq as part of the fight against Al Qaeda, but listen to these words from Tenet in the months leading up to the war:


Tenet described Abu Musab Zarqawi, the main character in the administration’s case that Iraq is working with al Qaeda now, as it had not done in the past, as a “senior al Qaeda associate.” Zarqawi sought medical care in Baghdad, has met with Osama bin Laden, has been financially supported by al Qaeda and has taken “sustenance” from Iraq. But Zarqawi, he pointed out, is not under the control of Hussein.”
Hey, didn't that Zarqawi guy turn out to be some kind of Al Qaeda operative? Didn't he kill Coalition soldiers in Iraq, and behead journalists and commit numerous terrorist attacks? But wait--you just told me he was in Iraq when we got there, George. I thought there wasn't any Iraq/Al Qaeda action until we showed up? I thought George W. Bush created Al Qaeda in Iraq, right?

When a miserable failure of a political hack like George Tenet starts throwing sand to cover his own escape, things are going to get ugly, we know that. What I want to know is, if giving the guy the Medal of Freedom won't buy his loyalty, what will? There used to be honor among hacks. The boss gets your back, doesn't fire you, sends you out with a big retirement and a commendation, and you get some cushy job in the private sector and keep your mouth shut.

But this cretin takes the bribe and still stabs the boss in the back. Even Whitey Bulger wouldn't do that.

Finally, there is the fundamental question of character. Why would I believe anything this weasel has to say? When Clinton refused to go after Osama, Tenet could have resigned, or complained publicly--done something that was risky, but mattered. He chose to keep his job.

When Bush was supposedly "ignoring" Tenet's warnings about Al Qaeda (his book says yes, his testimony to the 9/11 Commission says no), he could have resigned, held a press conference, etc. When the Bushies were doing whatever magic mind-control on him to keep him saying things defending the decision to invade Iraq, Tenet could have quit. If he had, it could well have stopped the war, or moved the date back at least.

But at every turn, Tenet the Hack won out over Tenet the Hero. Now he's going to make a million dollars playing a guy in bookstores and on TV that he never had the courage to play in real life.

Tenet Lied, The Media Never Tried

George Tenet has said so many things that are demonstrably untrue that it's almost embarrasing to point them out. But being the shameless kind of guy that I am, I'll do it.

Start here with his "I ran into a guy in Washington who was actually in France at the time."

Then go to "I don't know nuthin' about no Al Qaeda in Iraq."

Then try "Bush was trying to start a secret war against Iran!...except he wasn't."

And finish up with Michael Sheuer's "slam dunk" (pardon the pun) take down of the World's Most Shameless Hack.

If you're still taking this idiot seriously, just remember what he did on September 12th, 2001. He DIDN'T resign.

'Nuff said.

Friday, April 27, 2007

Sen. Obama: Just One Clue Away


Of the many, many dopey things said at the Democratic presidential debate in Orangeburg, SC, Sen. Obama's answer to the Iraq question stands out for its utter cluelessness:


But look, we are one vote away -- we were one signature away or 16 votes away from ending this war. One signature away. Now, if the president is not going to sign the bill that has been sent to him, then what we have to do is gather up 16 votes in order to override his veto.


Uh, no, Senator. You're not just "one signature away" from ending the war because you know--and have known for months--that President Bush is going to veto the Democrats' "surrender first" Iraq war bill. Saying you're just "one signature away" is like John Kerry saying he's just "one state's electoral votes" away from being president. In other words, you're NOT.


The same with the talk of "gathering up 16 votes" to override Bush's veto and push through the Obama plan. Senator, there AREN'T 16 GOP US senators who are going to vote with you. The vote was 51-46--a bare majority. Your brave, bold Iraq war plan is to round up 16 Senators to switch their votes? Why don't you round up 16 elves, fairies and sane Mike Gravel supporters while you're at it?


Sen. Obama's answer to the Iraq question, in other words, is sheer nonsense. Then again, so was Gov. Richardson's, Sen. Dodd's and just about everyone else's on the Democratic platform--with the glaring exception of Dennis Kucinich (D--His Mom's Basement).


While it is impossible for Senate Democrats to hypnotize President Bush and force him to sign their doomed legislation, it is completely possible for them to vote to end all funding for the war. Sure, the president will veto that, too, but he can't force them to pass a bill with war funds in it. They can win this fight through attrition. If, that is, they have the guts to fight.


They don't. Instead, they blather on about magic signatures, invisible votes and Democratic strategies for winning the war on terror. All things that don't exist.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

My Take On Sheryl's "One Square, One Squat" System

From today's Boston Herald.

Everything I Need To Know About The Bush Presidency...

I rarely quote David Broder, the icon of "Beltway High School Student Government" establishment journalism, but a single sentence captured what I believe is the fundamental truth about the Bush presidency:

"President Bush's highly developed tolerance for egregious incompetence in his administration may have met its supreme test in Attorney General Gonzales..."

Broder's column is actually about how dumb Harry Reid is (Broder's right about that, too), but I think it's fair to say that, whatever happens between now and 2009, the story of the Bushies has been written: Incompetent.

Just as Clinton was defined long before his presidency ended by his sleaze and laughable rejection of the obvious truth, Bush has forever earned the reputation as a leader who never met an incompetent he couldn't like.

I don't think this is the same thing as being stupid. Stupid is doing dumb things. Bush's ideas, including regime change in Iraq, are all reasonable (it's possible for an action to be reasonable and wrong at the same time). What's been lousy is the execution.

Here's the Bush management style:

A--"Hey, I've got an idea! Let's buy an ad on the Super Bowl. It's going to cost a ton of dough and risk our ability to make a profit for an entire year, but if it's a great ad, it could revolutionize our business and make us money for a long time."

B--Hire a buddy from college to produce the ad. He comes in way over budget and the ad bombs.

C--Deny the ad sucked, give your buddy a promotion and blame business reporters for the lousy reviews.

Plastic Bags? No! Body Bags? No Biggie.


Boston city councilor and notorious Nanny-State kook Rob Consalvo is at it again. He wants to criminalize plastic shopping bags in Beantown. He got the idea from San Francisco--'nuff said--and (surprise!) he's already got nine votes on the 12-member city council for the ban.

This has to come as a great relief to Consalvo's constituents in Mattapan. When your community's nickname is "Murder-pan," the number one issue on your mind has to be plastic shopping bags.

Consalvo says the bags are a blight. They're annoying. They litter the sidewalks of Mattapan, obscuring the view of the chalk drawings and blood stains. Something must be done! And, with a 9-vote majority, probably will be.

Meanwhile, State Sen. Brian Joyce is trying to get rid of the plastic bags statewide. His plan is to charge shoppers up to 15 cents per bag if they choose plastic over paper. Doesn't this insensitive earth-hater know that paper bags come from TREES! Why, every paper bag I choose is equal to at least a dozen "one-square" visits to the potty by Sheryl Crow.

Save Shery's Potty! Choose Plastic!

UPDATE: For other examples of Consalvo's kookery, look
here, here, and here.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

If You Call Me "Violent" Again, I'll Kill You, Part XVI


The Reuters caption under each of these photos?

"Palestinians attend a demonstration against violence in Gaza April 23, 2007. "

(hat tip: Opinionjournal.com)

"The War Is Lost! We're Doomed! Run Away!"

But enough from Sen. Harry Reid. "Fightin' Harry Reid," the W. T. Sherman of the US Senate, has already announced that he knows more about what's going on in Iraq than Gen. Petraeus does.

So let's do what Harry Reid won't, and get listen to/learn from
some actual reporting:

"Last week, Connecticut Republican congressman Christopher Shays briefed his Republican colleagues on the progress he observed in Iraq earlier this month. No member of Congress has visited Iraq more often than Shays, and since he’s an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s war strategies, members of Congress were attentive as he gave his impressions from his 16th trip. For the first time in over a year, Shays saw promising signs, and he is anxious to confirm them when he returns to Iraq next month. He is encouraged by the improved security in Baghdad, the cooperation of Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province, and the dramatically improved oil production in the north."

What? A member of Congress reporting "progress?" Yeah, but what else would you expect from a right-winger like Chris Shays, representing the rednecks of red-state Connecticut. There aren't any impartial observers who haven't given up, are there?

Uh, well actually...

Clinton pal and frequent Bush critic Gen. Barry McCaffrey wrote a scathing review of screwups in Iraq,
but concluded: "We can still achieve out objective of a stable Iraq, at peace with its neighbors, not producing weapons of mass destruction and fully committed to a law-based government."

British military historian Sir Max Hastings, a big-time critic of the war, says that losing in Iraq would be a disaster for both the Iraqis and the West, and that Gen. Petraeus--despite ignoring the military advice of Harry "Rambo" Reid--is winning "real if partial victories."

What does this prove? Only that rational, reasonable people believe the war is still winnable. It can also still be lost, too. Given the stakes of this war for the entire world, why wouldn't this inspire to fight smarter and harder for a much-needed victory, instead of embracing the option of defeat?

You're Fat? You're Fired!

And why not? Since I'm already free to discriminate against employees who smoke--forcing them to quit, firing them for smoking, making them pay more for health insurance premiums--why can't I do the same to people who choose to eat too much?

This study makes it clear that hiring overweight people is a fiscal loser for business owners. What's the difference between nicotine addicts and those hooked on Nutty Buddies?

It's against the law to "discriminate" against overweight people. In other words, I can fire a smoker who does a good job, but if I refuse to hire Hillary Hippo to work as a receptionist at my health club, I can (and will be) sued--even though she is going to cost me more money and take more days off?

Ain't that America...

Ham Sandwich...Or HATE CRIME?!

That's the question they're asking today in Lewiston, ME, after a middle school kid threw a bag with a slice of ham in it on a lunchroom table where some Muslim kids were sitting.

One student has been suspended for, er, "assault with a pork product," maybe? Anyway, one kid is suspended and "more disciplinary action could follow [the] possible hate crime."

Hate? Maybe. CRIME? No way.

What's the crime? Was anyone in any danger of any harm whatsoever from the ham in question? Now, if it were tainted ham or poisoned ham, or the life-threatening ham salad my culinary-impaired sister made for us one Easter--then you'd have a crime scene.

This was one kid or group of kids teasing another. It happens. It's called "middle school."

So if the ham-slamming 12-year-old broke some rule, fine. Detention, suspension, whatever. But does everyone involved after overreact?

Apparently, yes. "Incidents like this...are often said as a joke," says Stephen Wessler of the Center fro Prevention of Have Violence. "I know that conduct is never static. More degrading acts will follow, until at some point we'll end up having violence."

First it's the ham steak, then it's...THE AK-47!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!

Apparently everyone in this Maine middle school is a moron. But, unlike the bonehead bureaucrats, the kids have the excuse of being 12-year-olds.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Kerry And The Kooks


If I were a US Senator and some 9/11 kook started spouting his "Halliburton did it for the Zionists" conspiracy crap, I'd shut the idiot down. In fact, if someone suggested that we don't know what happened on 9/11, or that it involved some group other than Al Qaeda, I'd give them the eye roll and announce "next question, please."

But I'm not Senator John "Nuance" Kerry, who never met an idea so stupid he couldn't take it seriously.

Watch him feed the fantasies of the BushHitler conspiracy kooks here.

Forget Teaching Sex, How About Learning Math?

Gov. Deval Patrick has declared abstinence-only sex education a failure. He wants to turn down $700,000 in federal tax dollars that Massachusetts could be using for this education.

But why does the Cadillac of Governors say that abstinence-only education doesn't work? Because,
according to a study cited by Patrick, the kids who study it are just as sexually active as the kids who take the sex-ed classes Patrick supports.

Huh? Exactly.

The study doesn't say that abstinence-only kids are having more sex, nor does it say they're getting pregnant more often or catching more diseases. Instead, the study Patrick cites says that programs he supports work just as well (or badly, as the case may be) as abstinence-only. But the governor isn't proposing we dump the federal money we get for those failing classes.

Gee, I wonder why?

Monday, April 23, 2007

He Should Have Stuck To Blaming 9/11 On Halliburton

A New England college professor gets canned for a (in my opinion) crude and stupidly-timed, out of context conversation about Virginia Tech and gun ownership.

Meanwhile, the taxpayers of New Hampshire keep a professor on the public payroll so he can continue to "teach" that 9/11 was a (Zionist?) conspiracy.

Making the case of the Emmanuel College professor even more confusing is the school's statement that they don't allow "the use of discriminatory or obscene language."

OK, who is discriminated against by the word "pow?" Native Americans?

Wow.

The Brit Wimps: I Told You So


All of you who defended the gutless, testicle-free performance of the British sailors and "marines" kidnapped by Iran can read the latest example of their character and send your apologies to michaelgraham@969fmtalk.com .

Barak And His "Posse"


I have a simple rule when it comes to voting for President of the United States: Vote "no" to anyone who takes Al Sharpton seriously.

This weekend, Sen. Obama locked up my "no" vote by endorsing Sharpton as a great leader (!), and mocking the fact that Sen. Rodham is also begging for Sharpton's support.

If you're unsure as to why every rational person is nauseated by the sight of potential POTUS's lined up to kiss Sharpton's, er, ring, here's a reminder.

And a question: Will America's Jewish voters continue to support presidential candidates who pander to a pathetic anti-Semite like Al-Sharpton-A-Qawi?

Friday, April 20, 2007

The DUMBEST Reaction Yet To The VTech Shooting

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't read the story myself.

WEAPONS TO GO OFF STAGE

"In the wake of Monday’s massacre at Virginia Tech in which a student killed 32 people, Yale University Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg has limited the use of stage weapons in theatrical productions. Students involved in this weekend’s production of 'Red Noses' said they first learned of the new rules on Thursday morning, the same day the show was slated to open. They were subsequently forced to alter many of the scenes by swapping more realistic-looking stage swords for wooden ones..."

In Defense Of Courage

The loonies at Media Matters--the ones who have announced their McCarthyite list of talk show hosts to take down ala Imus--have got me in their sights yet again. They're apparently upset (I say "apparently" because their confused, incoherent blog post about me is so difficult to decipher) because of the conversation we've been having on the air about the behavior of the hundreds of Virginia Tech students who encountered the shooter during his rampage.

Is it significant that not a single student, or group of students, confronted the shooter? Is it significant that, when he was outnumbered 25 to one in a closed classroom, he was able to walk out and kill still more students elsewhere--leaving 21 dead or injured students behind?

These don't strike me as odd or noteworthy questions to ask. Indeed, many of you have emailed to say you've asked the same thing.

Now, let us enter the world of the Angry Lefty, straight from this morning's email:

"You're VILE SCUM. HELL AWAITS YOU, PIG"

and

"You filthy worthless sonofabitch. God----you. Piece of s---, you should have your brains beat out you p----...what a god---- moron you are....take THAT you worthless a--hole."

I'm such a meanie. At least we have these fine folks to take me to task on behalf of a more civilized discourse.

Well, I'm not going to back down. I have to ask these questions because there are brave students who deserve to have them asked. Unfortunately, none of the brave students I'm speaking of were on campus at Virginia Tech on Monday.

No, I'm talking about the students Appalachian Law School just a couple of hours down the road from Blacksburg, VA.

Here's how Time Magazine describes what happened in 2002:

A distraught law student on verge of flunking out went on a shooting spree in Grundy, Virginia Wednesday, killing three people and wounding three others before he was subdued by students, witnesses and officials said.

The victims included the dean of the Appalachian School of Law, L. Anthony Sutin, who was a former acting assistant attorney general, and an unidentified professor, both of whom were "executed" at point-blank range,according to Dr. Jack Briggs, a Buchanon County coroner who raced to the scene from his family practice a half-mile away. Briggs said a female student was also shot dead after the gunman opened fire on students outside the dean's office.

"There were four bodies on the floor and bodily fluids seeping out on the floor," said Briggs, who arrived on the scene within minutes of the shootings. Briggs said the student shot the dean and the professor, then "executed" them as they lay on the floor. "He put the gun barrel to their backs and shot," said Briggs, who observed "powder burns" on the victims' shirts indicating they had been shot at close range. "Then he went down to a common area and started shooting at random," Briggs said. One female student was killed and three others were critically wounded before the gunman apparently ran out of bullets.

Briggs said four students wrestled the gunman to the ground as he ran from the building and held him until the police could arrive.


That's right: One guy with a gun. Four unarmed students. That's how Time magazine reported it. Not surprisingly, they got it wrong.

What really happened is that at least two students went out to the parking lot. But instead of getting into their cars and fleeing for their lives, they grabbed their own guns...and went back into the building.

Think of all the things that could have happened to these two men. They could have been shot and killed themselves. They could have accidentally shot an innocent bystander and, thus, ruined their own lives.

If they had done the "smart" thing and played dead, who knows how high the body count from this random shooter's rampage could have been. But by confronting the killer, they could have been killed themselves. What if they had been? Would that mean they made the wrong decision?

You and I are now confronted by these two different sets of decisions. One group of Virginia students chose not to act. Another group chose to risk their own lives. Who did the right thing? It cannot be both.

I owe it to the young men at Appalachian Law School to ask these questions and, thereby, honor their heroism. If that means that the students who stood around taking pictures on their cell phones during the shooting are going to feel uncomfortable...

Good.

If You Think NBC's VTech Coverage Is Bad...

...check out the headline on this story (warning--GAG alert!):

"Va. Tech Shooter Was Picked on in School"

Oh, so THAT'S why he plotted for months to murder 32 people. Now it all makes sense.

After all, nobody expects the dirtbag murderer to be held responsible for his own actions, no, no, no. And since his decisions to buy two guns, pre-plan the murder, chain up the doors in the engineering building, send a videotape to NBC, etc, etc.--since none of this can be his fault, it's got to be someone else's.

Now we've got the answer:

"There were just some people who were really mean to him and they would push him down and laugh at him," said a former highschool classmate. "He didn't speak English really well and they [other kids in his high school] would really make fun of him."


That's right: He had to murder 32 people at VTech because he was picked on in high school.

If you need more people to blame for the killer's actions, you can add: "violent movies," "the media," the war in Iraq, racism (hey, he's a minority--it's GOT to be racism), and, of course, talk radio.

Alas, I'm not intelligent or nuanced enough to apply this sociological schema to the events in Blacksburg. So I'll stick with my simplistic decision to blame the murderous bastard who pulled the trigger.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Is The News Fit To Print?

That is the question many people are asking about the video and images the Virginia Tech shooter sent to NBC News, and which NBC has chosen to release portions of.

To me, the first question that needs to be asked is "Is it news?" Once the answer is "yes," the only remaining one is whether there is some direct and immediate harm that overrules question one. Publishing the location of a Special Forces group in Waziristan would be an example of news overruled by harm. Publishing the loony ravings of the VTech shooting isn't even close.

I buy newspapers and watch news shows for (duh!) the news. If NBC News has it and doesn't give it to me, I'll go elsewhere. If they have news I don't care about or find too depressing to watch, I'll go elsewhere. But the fact is, disturbing and depressing events are, by definition, more likely to be newsworthy than "all is well."

Not
everyone agrees with me, obviously.

UPDATE: A
terrific article by Mark Steyn on the questions we asked yesterday regarding the passive behavior of the VTech shooting victims. A must-read!

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

VTech Shooting: Gun-Control Kooks Are Way Off Target

And they're off!

The families haven't even started buried the dead in Blacksburg, VA, and already the Al Sharpton's of the anti-gun movement are demanding an immediate end to the Second Amendment.

When they're not blaming George W. Bush, they anti-freedom forces are screaming about the "assualt gun ban" and Virginia's "lax" gun laws. John Edwards wants to "restrict gun sales," according to the New York Times. And on every point, they anti-gun kooks are wrong. Not a single one of their demands would have had any impact on the crime or the criminal who committed it.

Let's do something the lefty anti-gun loonies never do: Think.

The assault weapons ban did expire in 2004, that's true. And the number of "assualt weapons" sicko Cho used to murder 32 people? That would be....zero.

Yes, Cho was able to legally buy a .22 caliber pistol in Virginia without a waiting period. But he took more than 30 days to buy the two guns he wanted anyway. Making him wait five more days would have made how much of a difference? That would be...none.

The pistols he had did not hold an inordinate number of bullets. They weren't automatic. He could have committed the exact same crime with a traditional revolver.

Cho had to have a background check, federal and local. He passed. He had to have a legal ID. He did. He could only buy one gun in Virginia every 30 days. He waited.

And then he took his guns and made the choice to commit a heinous, evil act. Not a single law proposed by any of the gun kooks trying to exploit this crime would have had any effect whatsoever on Cho or his crime.

For those of you who disagree, here's my simple question: What did Cho do BEFORE his decision to become a murderer that you and I should not be allowed to do?

Are you saying you and I shouldn't be able to buy a .22 pistol? How about a .22 rifle, just as deadly? Folks, if John Edwards is serious about criminalizing the purchase of these basic firearms, then there is NO right to bear arms at all.

We're not talking about AK-47s here, or even .44 magnums, Dirty-Harry style. The only way to stop the next Cho from buying a .22 is to ban all legal sales of handguns.

This, of course, will have no impact whatsoever on criminals since they already buy their guns illegally. But it will mean stripping the Second Amendment from the US Constitution.

Today, 32 people are dead. Do we really want to add to that tragedy by killing the Constitution?

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

The Worst Mass Shooting In US History


The horrific crime at Virginia Tech is, obviously, our topic today on the Natural Truth. If you're like me and are still unclear about the basic facts of the story, we'll be covering the events from beginning to end on this morning's show.

A good place to start is the Virginia Tech campus paper. However, be forewarned that you'll encounter the kinds of goofy, poorly-informed opinions one associates with college "journalism."


The Roanoke Times is also on top of this story as well, with a timeline and updated blogs. And Virginia Tech has a website dedicated to this crime.

Locally, one of the 32 victims (the cowardly dirtbag shooter is not included in the victim count) was Ross Alameddin of Saugus, MA. And Michelle McPhee at the Boston Herald reports that this heinous crime has inspired local cops and universities to take a fresh look at campus safety.

We will have live updates from Blacksburg, VA on the show today. Please make plans to be part of the conversation.

UPDATE: Many listeners think that this action by the Virginia legislature is relevant to the VTech story. I'm not sure anyone should be drawing any conclusions at this point. Right now, this is a terrible, wildly unusual crime committed by a monster among us. That's all.

Monday, April 16, 2007

Deval "Will Rogers" Patrick: I Never Met A Criminal I Didn't Like


Massachusetts' criminal class will be pleased to know that Deval Patrick doesn't just care about convicted rapists like Ben Leguer. Just over 100 days in office, he's already trying to get rid of mandatory minimum sentences for all of the Commonwealth's most dangerous felons.

As the Boston Globe-Democrat points out, this isn't Gov. Patrick's only pro-criminal initiative. "The administration is also looking at restricting which information is released to employers under the Criminal Offender Record Information, or CORI, law, which has made it difficult for released prisoners to find work."

As for mandatory minimum sentences, they're bad ideas because the murderers and rapists who get out afterwards are likely to kill and rape again as soon as they're released. Patrick's plan: Release them sooner.

Oh, that'll help...

The Patrick p.r. machine insists that this isn't eliminating mandatory minimums, merely "reforming" them. As Patrick ally AG Martha Coakley says "legislation filed by Senator Cynthia Stone Creem would create a sort of hybrid mandatory minimum: prisoners could apply to the Parole Board for release after serving two-thirds of their mandatory minimum sentence."

So Massachusetts would still mandate that dangerous felons serve their entire sentences, except for when they get out after serving two-thirds of it. It's mandatory, except when it's not.

Brilliant.

Barack Obama, Speakin' Truth To Power


You've got to admire Sen. Barack Obama for tellin' it like it is, takin' it to the man, keepin' it real, and other principled activities that involve dropping one's "g's."


When Don Imus first got into trouble, Sen. Obama said nothing. Once it was clear Imus was toast, Sen. Obama suddenly discovered that he was outraged and Imus must be fired!


After all, Sen. Obama said, we can't allow young women like his two daughters to be referred to as "ho's."

Then Sen. Obama ran off to another high-level campaign meeting with Ludacris.

I'm kidding, I'm kidding. Barack didn't have ANOTHER meeting with Ludacris. Just the one.

Sen. Obama and the rap star (see photo above), talked about "empowering the youth." I have no idea what they said in their personal, private meeting, but I do have a few public comments of Ludacris going out to all you empowered young folks out there:

"Get out my business, my biznass Stay the f*** up out my biznass, ah Cause these niggaz all up in my s*** and it's my business, my biznass cause it's mine, all mine."


Ludacris then promptly joined Sen. Obama in calling for Don Imus to be drawn and quartered.


If, unlike Sen. Obama, you're unimpressed by Ludacris and his way with words, you might be interested to know that the song quoted above was produced by legendary hip-hop maestro, Timbaland. Timbaland--an (ahem) artist in his own right--has brought the world such outstanding lyrics as:

"I'm A Ride Or Die Nigga, I Be Tearin S*** Up We Aint Like Them Other Fools, Who Dont Compare To Us All The Hoes Love A Nigga, They be Backing It Up"

It's like Shakespeare, only faster...

Why do I bring up the subject of Mr. Timbaland? Because when he's not being loved by his "Hoes," he's a max contributor to the presidential campaign of...Hillary Rodham Clinton. In fact, just weeks ago he hosted an $80,000 fundraiser for the former First Lady, or (in deference to Mr. Timbaland) "Number One White House Ho."

Oh, and did I mention that Sen. Rodham has called for Don Imus to be tortured, maimed and fed to alligators?

Not that there's a double-standard here, no, no, no. As Chrysler Motors spokesman (spokes brutha?) and rap superstar Snoop Dogg pointed out:

"It's a completely different scenario. [Rappers] are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing sh--, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC [the cable network home to Imus] going hard on black girls. We are rappers that have these songs coming from our minds and our souls that are relevant to what we feel. I will not let them mutha-----as say we in the same league as him."


Snoop Dogg would like to run down Don Imus with his Escalade and then "pop a cap in the M-----F-----'s ass."


Thank the good Lord we have gotten rid of that foul-mouthed bigot Don Imus, and made the airwaves safe for Snoop, Timbaland and Ludacris. The Republic is, at last, secure.

Sunday, April 15, 2007

"...And Don Imus Killed Him!"


Here's one celebrity death no talk radio host will dare talk about.
Not if Al Sharpton's listening, anyway.

No, Liberals Are NOT Smarter Than A 5th Grader

You've got to read this Boston Globe-Democrat op-ed from Robert Kuttner just for the sheer, unmoderated, joyous, gut-busting hilarious ignorance of it.

Kuttner is allegedly one of the leading thinkers of the New Left, and he's actually unashamed to make these statements...in public!

Jimmy Carter was a "conservative Democrat?"

The Reagan economy was a "failure?"

Nixon--who imposed wage and price controls, supported massive government spending and high taxes, and who signed into law the most draconian government programs in history--was a "conservative?"

It's not Kuttner's left-wing politics that makes him stupid. It's his stupidity. This is just plain embarrassing. Why not write that LBJ was a Nazi, or that Katrina wasn't an actual hurricane, or that Ted Kennedy won the Cold War? Why not?

The facts about Carter's liberalism, or the '80's economic boom (it set a new record for the longest period of economic growth since WWII) or Nixon's center-left politics are not in dispute--at least, not by rational people. You can still love Carter and hate Reagan and Nixon, but hating Nixon for being a "conservative" is like hating George W. Bush for being an intellectual.

How the editors of the Boston Globe-Democrat even published this idiocy with a straight face is beyond me.

UPDATE: For the Cambridge loonies who will be emailing me about the "horrible economy" of the 1980s, here are the facts.

It's Not Just Imus


Every right-of-center talk host is now in the crosshairs. Don't believe me? Ask the loony-lefty organization that led the charge against Imus.


Their own headline: "It's Not Just Imus."


Here's the story of how an irrelevant group of angry lib activists ended a guy's career over a joke.

Friday, April 13, 2007

Does Jesse Jackson Know About This Movie?

Halle Berry starring in Nappily Ever After.

As the I-Man might say, you can't make this stuff up.

Want To Support Don Imus?

The best way to show your support, in my opinion, is to support the charities benefiting from the Radio-Thon. It shows that he has supporters, and that they're people who are willing to take action for causes they care about.

On behalf of the I-man and all the charities he's supported, thank you.

The "Pimps And Hos" That Sharpton WON'T Protest

Michelle Malkin has all the details. This is a (profanity laced) must-read.

Al Sharpton, Speech Nazi

What would you do if you were at a rally and your fellow activists were shouting "Jew bastards" and "blood-sucking Jews!" I assume you'd do what I'd do, and leave promptly.

Not
Al Sharpton. The angry mob terrorizing a Jewish landlord was in fact organized by Sharpton. One of the members, listening to Sharpton's "get whitey!" rhetoric, ran into the building, shot several people, set it on fire and killed himself. Eight people would die that day, "fighting the power" with Al Sharpton.

And this is the man who got Don Imus fired, and would like to get me fired, too. Why is anyone taking this idiotic, anti-Semitic, barely literate, hate-spewing thug seriously? Why do the Democrats continue to invite the David Duke of their party to speak at their national conventions? Why would any self-respecting businessman, like Les Moonves, do him the honor of meeting with him?

Why? Fear. Al Sharpton can turn out crowds of white people and rows of TV cameras. He can make the accusation of racism--no matter how ridiculous--and get the media to repeat it. If you're the average American, you can't win that fight. The accusation alone is enough to hurt you.

Al Sharpton is now the biggest swinging in the American media industry. He has destroyed the career of a successful broadcaster (albeit with that broadcaster's unintended help) and he's already announced he's looking for more.

Jesse Jackson is getting in the action, too, joining
Keith Olbermann for an on-air discussion of who's next. Olbermann--the Joe McCarthy of our time--literally has a hit list of the hosts who must go. Coincidentally (?), none of them share his left-of-center politics.

This is the state of public discourse today. We have let the most ignorant and irrational among us--Sharpton, Jackson, Olbermann--operate as Speech Nazis, silencing anyone who does not follow the party line.

Getting fired for being stupid is one thing. But getting fired by a hate-spewing, corrupt, self-promoting clown like Al Sharpton? You gotta be kidding me.

What You're Saying About The Imus Disaster

I am a 45 year old woman who was an academic athlete at Providence College I played on the women Ice hockey and Lax team on an athletic scholarship. I was the first test to Title 9 when I played for the Watertown Public school system from 1976-79. I had to change in the public bathroom and had my parents hold my hockey bag so no one would steal it. I had to put with rants about my skills [ which by the way were darn good!] and worse my wonderful parents heard things in the stands . They always taught me stand up for what I believed in. They lead by example, they ignored the words and actions of others with pride and honor.

Those awful hurtful things said about me and to me.made me and my parents stronger because they were only words.

I write you today and say what Mr. Imus said was wrong and awful. But let me also say let he throw the first stone who is pure of fault.

For the University to allow Jesse Jackson , Al Sharpton and others to use those athletes is the largest crime. Where is the Black community to say these are only words let they Ladies play on the court and work in the class room speak for itself.

I have watched/ listened to Imus for ten years. Many things he talks about I find wrong and difficult but this man is just that, a man ,who should have known better. But he is human and has shown he is classy and a man who is truly upset by his words.

These ladies say they are scarred. These athletes are not scared. The Duke Lax team is scared. Where is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for that outrage.

It seems the world has forgiven Jackson, Sharpton and many others for the awful hurtful words they said. Why can not we forgive a man who gives so much to the few [ soldiers and kids.]

As a female athlete [ an old retired one]. I forgive hm and admire him for his actions which are more power than his one sentence. – Jane



I think your time is coming up, almost there... I will keep listening until you two put your foot in your mouth or up your a**…hey check this out, I am going to **** a big fat white check tonight, me like them hos.—Anonymous


Enjoy your show.. Having been a frequent viewer of Imus on MSNBC I could not believe a quickly the rats scurried off the sinking ship, punching holes in the sides as they jumped. David Gregory ..how many times did he appear on that show...and then presiding over the likes of Al Sharpton and others criticizing him..such a coward.. I think Don is still looking for Harold Ford..My wife and I shocked and frightened by this turn of events and share your concern over the potential for future repression of the airways. This very brief stupid uttering was likely initialy missed by the Rutgers team. But it was doggedly repeated by the media for several days to include Al Sharpton repeating it last night on MSNBC. Sad and most disturbing.--George


I totally agree with you about the injustice Imus is facing. While I do not listen to him regularly, I wanted to do something positive before I knew about the event on Friday. I stopped and bought Imus Ranch items at the grocery store, stuff I normally wouldn't buy just to do something. If everyone bought one thing, it would show him and his opponents in a very positive way that he has plenty of support. Please put the idea out to the listeners. It made me feel less overrun by the thought police. --Sally


CBS fires Imus and the British surrender to a bunch of whack-jobs just out of the stone age. Well, at least the Iranians had machine guns and not a loud mouthed race pimp on their side. --Steve


A definite overkill on the Don Imus situation. He sincerely apologized, and of all people, a Reverend would not forgive him. For all he has done for charitable causes, he did not deserve this. Another score for the secular progressive whack jobs. Keep doing what you do, your great.--Paul from New Hampshire




I am having a great time with this, it is great entertainment to listen to all of the defenders of Imus. Its like watching a tidal wave roll up on a handful of people that ignore and continues to ignore warnings to either get out of the way or to stop doing the wrong that you do on a daily basis.

What I mean when I say this is that the majority of people out there find his (Imus) remarks deplorable and that he should pay the consequences. Imus is first, using the public airways to spew his trash, he is in a position of great influence, over many people that can’t think well for themselves, his remark was disrespectful to black people, all American women not to mention all women.

Whatever he gets, he deserves. I personally hope that he gets fired. It will most definitely get the attention of the rest of all you guys, white, black, Hispanic or whomever spews extremist rhetoric over the airways. Believe it or not, the majority of the public is sick of the extremist points of views that most of you talk radio host present.

Oh, by the way, if you haven’t heard, Imus is done! Remember now, you get what you deserve. Watch what you spew over the airways. --Dale

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Join The Conversation At MSNBC

That's what our listener, Paul (a.k.a. "Naps"), has been doing. You can see some of his comments here, or here. Or you can jump in with your own.

Happy To Be Nappy?




It's a phrase that could get a talk show host fired. It's also the title of a book by black, feminist activist bell hooks [sic], in the top picture above.


She's not alone. There's also Nappy Hair and Going Natural: Fall In Love With Nappy Hair, both written by the authors pictured (in order).
Nappy or not? Offensive or not? I don't know. Why don't you ask these guys?


No Justice, No Speech

The fact that I have to make the following statement is an indicator of just how irrational, overwrought and childish our discourse in America has become: What Imus said about the Rutgers basketball team was stupid, offensive and he deserves to be punished for it. He was bad.

Bad Imus! Bad Imus!

What we're talking about now isn't Imus's 10 seconds of stupidity, but rather the tidal wave of overreaction and hypocrisy that has followed. We are living through a moment of media insanity.

When a guy who tells a racist joke is a bigger story than a prosecutor who sends
three guys to jail because of their race, you know that you're living in Bizarro Land.

In addition, when MSNBC pulls Don Imus over concerns about racial division and replaces him (as they did this morning) with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (!), the loonies are truly running the asylum.

The media's coverage, conversation and conclusions from this story have been humiliatingly juvenile and ill informed. To borrow a phrase from a prominent and successful African American, this has been a "high-tech lynching" driven entirely by special interests groups--not by news judgment.

Seriously, how big a story should this be? Front of the entertainment section maybe? Once Imus apologized and the players agreed to meet with him, what's left of significance to say?

But Sharpton, Jackson and Co. know how to keep a political ball in play long after rational people have lost interest in the game. They pushed, and MSNBC caved.

MSNBC could easily have put Imus back on after two weeks, his lesson learned. Imus would have almost certainly added more black voices to his show, and we know from past experience he would have continued to deal with issues important to black Americans.

Yes, it's also likely that Imus would have eventually said something Jesse Jackson didn't like. So what? If Jackson doesn't like it, he can get his own cable TV show.

Oh, wait--he did. It tanked. Nobody watched, because it was so lousy.

Meanwhile, Don Imus--whose TV ratings were beating CNN's morning show--is off TV.

Was this a victory for free speech and open discourse? Obviously not. Was it a victory for racial progress? Nope, unless you think making Jackson and Sharpton more powerful is "progress."

The only winners are the people who believe they should have the power to tell you what you can and cannot say.

That's why the real loser is all of talk radio.

Monday, April 09, 2007

Why British Cowardice Matters in Boston

I've gotten a fair number of emails from people angry that I've spent any time at all on the shameful, humiliating and cowardly behavior of the British "Marines" kidnapped by the Iranians. "Talk about something important," one emailer complained.

My question: What matters more right now? Today the Iranians announced yet another forward step in their "Nuke the Jews" program. And according to the London Telegraph, more kidnappings are likely in the future, thanks to the boot-licking Brits.

Mark Steyn, as usual, nails the issue perfectly. But if you don't agree, I urge you to spend 10 minutes reading the latest public comments from Iran's Ahmed-Whack-I-Job, while reminding yourself he's about to go NUCLEAR.

Then tell me this story doesn't matter.

More Natural Truth about Global Warming


From Dr. Richard Lindzen at MIT: "The current alarm reests on the false assumption not only that we live in a perfect world, temperaturewise, but also that our warming forecasts for the year 2040 are somehow more reliable than the weatherman's forecast for next week."


Oh, and how warm is the world getting anyway? As the chart (from notoriously right-wing USA Today) shows, the temperature has increased just 1.2 degrees since 1860--no much of a "fever" is it, Dr. Gore?

As Holman Jenkins observes at the Wall Street Journal, "...it's perhaps sufficient to say that many people believe in manmade global warming because many people believe in manmade global warming; Al Gore believes in it because many people believe in it; many people believe in it because Al Gore believes in it; and so on, right up to the highest court in the land."
Then there's this story that none of the global panic kooks want you to read, because it includes the one thing they never want to discuss: the pricetag. The headline reads "EU climate goals could cost 1.1 trillion euros: study"


That's about $1.6 TRILLION in real (U.S.) dollars, just for Europe. America would surely be more--say $2-3 TRILLION dollars. 300 million Americans, $3 trillion dollars--how does $10,000 per PERSON sound? That's $60,000 for my family. How about yours?


And don't forget that every one of those dollars going to carbon taxes is a dollar not going to local restaurants, clothing stores, computer services, lawyers, doctors, hookers, etc., etc. That's why the minimum cost to the US economy is 1 million jobs.


One million unemployed people. $3 trillion in new taxes. And--here's the punchline--the warming kooks themselves say all this effort will theoretically reduce future warming by less than 0.1 degrees. If they're right.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

The ONLY Article You Need To Read On The British Hostage Debacle.

Our friend Ralph Peters nails it. 'Nuff said.

Jobs--Or I'll Shoot!

There's an interesting pathology here in Boston that goes something like this: If teenagers are shooting each other, it's because they're not picking up trash for the city Parks Department. If we create more make-work government jobs, shootings will go down.

There are some interesting assumptions behind this argument, not least of which is that random street violence is a rational reaction to being unemployed. Which explains why there was much street violence and so many murders during the Great Depression and its 25% unemployment.

Wait--there weren't? Never mind.

The other assumption is that the reason there aren't enough jobs is because the government isn't putting enough low-skill, young workers on the public's dime. This will certainly come as news to Boston-area employers desperately looking for American workers to fill entry-level jobs during this period of full employment.

Not that these jobs aren't getting done. They are. Illegal immigrants are doing them.

Want more young people working, and earning higher wages for that work? Then enforce immigration laws. Want low-skill workers sitting at home watching Judge Judy because they either can't find jobs or the wages are so low they discourage work? Then do what Gov. Patrick and Mayor Menino do: Welcome illegals into your community.

And because low-skill immigrants cost society more than they generate in taxes (assuming they're PAYING any taxes), you will also be raising the cost of doing business here in Boston, which means higher taxes on employers, which means lower profits available for hiring new workers, which means fewer jobs, which means....more knuckleheads shooting up the streets of Dorchester.

How dumb do you have to be to simultaneously demand more low-skill jobs AND encourage illegal immigration?

Dumb enough to be governor of Massachusetts.

The American Left: Whiny, Unhappy People

A friend of mine called yesterday and said "You've got to see this video from the John Edwards town hall meeting in New Hampshire. It's amazing!" I don't get many excited phone calls about C-SPAN programming, so I took his advice.

All I can say is, "Wow."

The key portions, featured on my radio show today, is the incoherent, narcissistic ramblings of one Jenny Ballantine, a student at UNH. Her position is that the President of the United States' job is to make her feel good about herself:


"I need to be able to look to my leader and see words of encouragement, words of hope. I need to be able to trust that person. I need to be able to know that I'm going to be grow in a world that's not going to be full of hate and prejudice and racism and to know that I matter, that I wasn't just dumped in this world for no particular reason whatsoever.... I don't know what I want to be when I'm an adult. But I'm 22 right now, so people are like, "Honey, you are an adult." You know what? It's about me. It's about me voting for you or supporting somebody who's going to be the next president. So it's all about me right now. Just give me something."


That's right: "Give me something."

What this woman needs is a life. A clue. A cinder block of reason and reality crashing in on her head. Who wakes up in the morning going "Hey, my life has no meaning, I don't know why I was put on this earth, I'm not sure what to do with my life...I better call the White House!"

This is the Angry Left's world view in a nutshell, which explains why they're so angry. If you're counting on Washington politicians to answer the fundamental questions of human existence and legislate a happy outcome for your life, you will be forever disappointed.

This juvenile world view of John Edwards as Jesus Christ, bringing peace and love to all, is perhaps the fundamental failure of American liberalism. Liberalism's guiding principles are so nonsensical that, when someone as clueless as Ms. Ballentine actually puts it into words, we all cringe.

Give my life meaning? Give me a purpose? Give me something?

Please, my Lefty friends, give me a break.

UPDATE: If you're having trouble viewing the CSPAN video, it's in Real Media format. Here's the latest link I can find:
rtsp://video.c-span.org/archive/c08/c08_040307_edwards2.rm

If you still have trouble, you can go to www.cspan.org and search for John Edwards, but it's still going to be a Real Media file.