Another Pledge Fiasco

Fresh from Bouler, Colorado

About 50 Boulder High School students walked out of class Thursday to protest the daily reading of the Pledge of Allegiance and recited their own version, omitting “one nation, under God.”

The students say the phrase violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

They also say the daily reading of the pledge over the school public address system at the start of the second class takes away from education time and is ignored or mocked by some students.

Good grief.  Here we go again.  Considering that the group who sponsored the move, The Student Worker Club, has only a dozen members, I would be willing to bet that several of the students were apathetic idiots who walked out to avoid class.  Of course that is pure conjecture on my part.  I suppose that it is entirely possible that all 50 students were actually highly unprincipled cynics who actually believe the garbage spewed by the group’s president.

“Boulder High has a highly diverse population, not all of whom believe in God, or one God,” said Emma Martens, a senior and president of the club, which has about a dozen members.

“We didn’t think it was fair for the whole school to have to listen to it. It’s almost religious oppression,” she said.

Of course, I’m more bewildered by the statement that came from the high school’s principal –

Principal Bud Jenkins told the Camera newspaper on its Web site Thursday the pledge will not be moved, but added he was proud of the students for standing up for their beliefs.

I guess it’s all just hopeless.  People consistently amaze me.  And the whack jobs just keep getting younger and younger. 


Michael Moore Wanna-Be

More filth is spewing out of Hollywood, this time in the form of Brian De Palma whose anti-American film “Redacted” debuted at a Venice film festival.  The poor f***er couldn’t even wait for Cannes to come around again.

De Palma’s film centers around a fictionalized account (based on actual events) of the rape and murder of a young Iraqi girl by US soldiers.  I have not and will not see this film.  I know full well that this sensationalized piece of garbage (in the Michael Moore tradition) is aimed at bringing down the war effort and demoralizing our troops even more.  De Palma doesn’t even try to hide that fact.

De Palma, 66, whose “Casualties of War” in 1989 told a similar tale of abuse by American soldiers in Vietnam, makes no secret of the goal he is hoping to achieve with the film’s images, all based on real material he found on the Internet.

“The movie is an attempt to bring the reality of what is happening in Iraq to the American people,” he told reporters after a press screening.

“The pictures are what will stop the war. One only hopes that these images will get the public incensed enough to motivate their Congressmen to vote against this war,” he said.

Obviously De Palma has a history of being a first-class, Grade A asshole.  Rather than focusing on the good things that American troops have done in Iraq, he chooses to focus on isolated events in order to characterize the US military in a negative light.

I don’t have enough bad things to say about bastards like De Palma.  I also am trying as hard as I can to keep this post from being a total profanity-laced diatribe.  The fact is that people like De Palma and Moore do not deserve to live in this nation.  They should not be entitled to the rights that were guaranteed to them by our men and women who have fought valiantly to secure freedom in the past.  They are pathetic losers with an evil agenda.

Sorry to sound angry like a leftist, but I sincerely hope and pray that people like this will rot in the lower rungs of Hell.  Only an eternity of perpetual pain and torture will be sufficient for these imbeciles.

The Left’s Funny Money

One of the things that many conservatives hold against Arizona Senator John McCain is his support and sponsorship of the campaign finance legislation that bears his name.  To his credit, McCain, apparently has worked within the confines of his own legislation and kept his nose clean.  This is especially important to him since he was a member of the notorious “Keating Five” involved in the Savings and Loan Scandal back in the late ’80s.  Maybe McCain-Feingold was a personal crusade that McCain sought in order to vindicate himself and make reparations – regardless of how misguided this act has been.

And while some GOP-leaning groups and Republican candidates/politicians have run afoul of campaign finance laws over the past few election cycles, it seems that the Democrats and their patron support groups on the Left have been the ones to make a true mockery of the legislation in recent years.  And what do we call that kids?  Hypocrisy – say it with me now.

There are two great examples recently to illustrate this point.  The first involves Hillary.  And while this is a doozy, the MSM and the relentless Clinton machine will make sure that none of this comes back on her.  The story involves a guy named Norman Hsu.  Nobody knows the extent of this fraud yet, but it all starts with a middle class California family who suddenly became some of Clinton’s biggest donors.  The Wall Street Journal details the events.

Six members of the Paw family, each listing the house at 41 Shelbourne Ave. as their residence, have donated a combined $45,000 to the Democratic senator from New York since 2005, for her presidential campaign, her Senate re-election last year and her political action committee. In all, the six Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic candidates since 2005, election records show.

Ok, no problem so far, right?  Well….not exactly.

It isn’t obvious how the Paw family is able to afford such political largess. Records show they own a gift shop and live in a 1,280-square-foot house that they recently refinanced for $270,000. William Paw, the 64-year-old head of the household, is a mail carrier with the U.S. Postal Service who earns about $49,000 a year, according to a union representative. Alice Paw, also 64, is a homemaker. The couple’s grown children have jobs ranging from account manager at a software company to “attendance liaison” at a local public high school. One is listed on campaign records as an executive at a mutual fund.

Ouch!  Anyone smell a rat?  While Hsu’s ties to the family are not extremely clear yet, he once listed his address at the family’s residence.  A mega-Dem fundraiser living in this tiny home.  Doesn’t pass the smell test.

Obviously, the Hillary folks have denied this one was linked to the candidate, but it certainly raises some eyebrows when you consider the Chinese Lobbying Group that scandalously funneled money to Bill’s presidential campaign back in the 90s. Or maybe the Al Gore trip to the Buddhist temple which was connected to the same shady players.

But, this scandal aside, also consider that George Soros’ former leftist 527 group, America Coming Together (ACT) was just hit with a $775,000 fine by the FEC for campaign finance violations in the 2004 election.  Naturally the group settled with the FEC without admitting to many of the charges, but you don’t get fined $775,000 for simple mistakes.

The Federal Election Commission has fined one of the last cycle’s biggest liberal political action committees $775,000 for using unregulated soft money to boost John Kerry and other Democratic candidates during the 2004 elections.

America Coming Together (ACT) raised $137 million for its get-out-the-vote effort in 2004, but the FEC found most of that cash came through contributions that violated federal limits.

MOST of $137 million is a whole lot of green.  Think about the impact of that amount of money.  That could easily tilt a campaign.  Fortunately for the GOP, ACT’s main benefactor was John Kerry.  Even that amount of money wasn’t going to help him with his issues.

I’m not saying that GOP groups and candidates are clean here.  When it all comes down to it, money is a corrupting force in politics for many.  But the hypocrisy here is that McCain-Feingold was made possible primarily by the hordes of Democrat senators and representatives who were tired of being out of power since 1994.  They sought to level the playing field at a time when Republican groups were outraising them by massive amounts.

Now that the field is more level due to increases in Dem donors and the left’s mastery of the shady 527 groups, they seem to have little regard for the legislation that they piously advance only a few years ago.  If that’s the case, then I would urge them to consider the repeal of McCain-Feingold.  Let’s see how many Dem takers we have on that one.

What is Ann Coulter Thinking?


As a guy who has always been one of the first in the gay community to defend Ann Coulter over “comments” she makes, I have to finally say there are a few things about her speech lately that have been making my blood-pressure move up. 

In February when she referred to John Edwards as a “faggot” and everyone was screaming, I was one of the few who actually concurred with her point from the start.  Never once did it enter my mind that she was making a homophobic remark.  I understood the meaning of the word in which she intended and also understood how referring to Isiah Washington going to rehab over using the same word (even though he used it incorrectly) made for a pretty good punch line.

I’ve been sitting back waiting for folks to respond to some of the more serious problematic remarks she has been making lately — and if anyone is out there reading thinking that I am purposely trying to attack her for no reason, I refer them to ask anyone I have talked to in the last five years about her or any other conservative speaker or blogger out there.  I buy her books, I laugh at her jokes, and appreciate her small government, lower taxes, and pro-life stance that I think everyone must hold near and dear to earn their Republican title and wear it proudly.

In the interview posted above via YouTube, Coulter refers to Bush coming out for Civil Unions right before the year 2004 as one of the top three major disaters of his tenure.  The other two of course were Harriet Miers (agreed) and his amnesty plan (agreed).

I’ve always referred to the subject of Civil Unions as a middle-ground for the issue of gay couples who are living as all others that are in love and making a home and life for themselves.  I hardly bring my personal views into this because my overall stance on the whole issue of gay rights stems from my love of Democracy and letting the people decide on these issues. 

I respect the fact that the majority of Americans are against gay marriage.  If the majority of Americans are against Civil Unions, I would respect that accordingly.  But obviously, George Bush coming out for Civil Unions before 2004 did not prevent him from getting re-elected.

As Democrats in Congress and the ones running for President are promising to do more for our community, I watch as Democratic voters in very blue states like California and Oregon betray us when it’s time to take these issues to the polls.  I also watch how red states like Arizona reject these restrictions.  These are what we like to call cold-hard facts when objective folks are trying to sift out bullshit being fed to us by Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich about how Republicans hate gays or anyone who is not white, straight, and rich.

Moving forward, Coulter’s current column takes another stupid turn in which she decided that the “gay lifestyle” was comparable to abortion by saying:

“Liberals know they’re losing the demographic war. Christians have lots of children and adopt lots of children; liberals abort children and encourage the gay lifestyle in anyone with a flair for color.”

If she were just making the point about the “demographic war” I could be objective enough to understand that she was solely comparing the two things to illustrate practices that do not result in reproduction.  Obviously, abortion and gay-sex qualify as a “no-baby” ending.

But where she went wrong is when she proclaimed that “liberals encourage” the gay lifestyle just as they do abortion.  If her definiton of the “gay lifestyle” is radicals that denounce God and have dozens of sex partners determined by what night of the week it is, then yes it is a fact that liberals and Democrats support this kind of behavior.  Irresponsible sex; gay or straight, is not helpful to the reproductive process.  If you’re gay, you aren’t risking pregnancy and if you’re straight and sleeping around like that of course you’re more likely to have an abortion than responsible folks are.  If this is her example of the “gay lifestyle” that liberals support, then she should have clarified that.

Ann Coulter has brilliantly pointed out in the past how gays are more protected overall by Republican policies and tax cuts.  She has also illustrated the often misquoted line of Falwell’s post-9/11 comment where most folks deemed him the biggest homophobe of all.

But to say that Bush made a mistake coming out for Civil Unions and then to say that liberals are the ones encouraging the gay lifestyle will only serve as ammunition for liberal politicians who have already succeeded at getting the bulk of our community to believe that it is indeed Democrats who like us more than the Republicans.

In a time where the next Presidential election’s results are so vital to the safety of this country and to mankind everywhere, she needs to focus more on facts when it comes to how much the Democrats encourage my true “lifestyle” with such an idiotic broad-brushing quote as the one posted above.

This pisses me off as a gay man but mostly as a Republican.  Not only will Democrats not do anything more for gay rights than Republicans will, but her confirming the misguided gay-liberals’ belief that Republicans are their enemies is dangerous for elections next year.  This isn’t just about “rights,” this is also about our safety.

Coulter needs to return to letting Democrats say the stupid things and do a little more thinking before she uses her voice and podium to give liberals a leg-up when it comes to gay rights.

So to all those out there who thought they would never hear me say this in regard to Ann Coulter, listen up:

She is dead wrong!

I Is So Dumb Ya’ll

In another case of liberal elitism, former Colorado Rep. Pat Schroeder, has determined that I (and all my ilk) are backwards and uneducated.  Her source?  An AP-Ipsos poll showing that self-identified liberals and Dems read more books than their Republican-Conservative counterparts.

“The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple slogans: ‘No, don’t raise my taxes, no new taxes,'” Pat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers, said in a recent interview. “It’s pretty hard to write a book saying, ‘No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes’ on every page.”

Schroeder, who as a Colorado Democrat was once one of Congress’ most liberal House members, was responding to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that found people who consider themselves liberals are more prodigious book readers than conservatives.

She said liberals tend to be policy wonks who “can’t say anything in less than paragraphs. We really want the whole picture, want to peel the onion.”

Evidently, that means we are dumb.  I will tell you now that I read maybe 5-6 books a year.  Most of those are for enjoyment.  I read relatively few educational books because I get most of my reading done online.  I would, however,  point you to the book by former Senator Zell Miller (D-GA) called “National Party No More:  The Conscience of a Conservative Democrat.”  That was one I read with enthusiasm.  I’m sure that was on Pat’s reading list.  If not, it should be (yours too).

One interesting finding of the poll was –

Among those who had read at least one book, liberals typically read nine books in the year, with half reading more than that and half less. Conservatives typically read eight, moderates five.

So I guess Schroeder’s reasoning would be as follows:  She would conclude that I, Philip, am a moderate since I didn’t read 8 books.  And moderates are dumber than both conservatives and libs because they didn’t read as many books as the other two groups.  What specious reasoning. And the independents in this nation should be a little perturbed.

I’m not going to go nuts over this.  The fallacies and Schroeder’s condescension speak for themselves.  Just suffice it to say that the GOP and conservatives, in particular, will always be subject to the scorn of self-obsessed libs who are out to convince the American people that our ideology is intellectually inferior.  Nice try, Pat.

Kos: Fox News vs. “Hundreds of Thousands of Voices”


In a usual display of liberal-whining and Fox News-bashing, Kos uttered the following line when his site’s insanity factor was questioned by Harold Ford: 

“It’s called Democracy, if you don’t like regular people…”

On Meet The Press, Kos showed his true-blue colors by complaining to Harold Ford about his appearances on Fox News.  He then labeled Ford’s recent comments on Harry Reid as an “attack.”

Ford then directed some of the attention to the insane things put out on Kos’s website and Kos then decided to start throwing in the old Democracy (the kind that they love when they denounce their country and root for U.S. troop failure in Iraq, but the kind they hate on Fox News) canard.

Since Kos has so much respect for the voices of “hundreds of thousands,” then how about the “millions” that did the following:

— “millions” watch Fox News and continue to keep Hannity & Colmes and O’Reilly Factor number one among top-rated cable TV shows. 

— “millions” voted in the last two national elections for George W. Bush.

— “millions” of Iraqis showed up in three elections to show their true desire for the same “Democracy” that Kos allegedly celebrates.

— “millions” of Americans want Roe v Wade overturned.

— “millions” of Americans buy books by Ann Coulter.

“millions” of Americans buy books by Michelle Malkin and read her blog weekly.

I think you get the point and I could go on and on.  If Democracy is such an important issue to Democrats (as it is not) then Kos wouldn’t have to keep complaining about Fox News and liberals would have a new-found respect for Rush Limbaugh!

“Democracy” for the Kos apparently means a club of hand-picked, finely-selected collections of nuts that want to hold hands and sing “Give Peace a Chance” with Muslim fanatics while they have bombs strapped to their chests. 

Apparently, Meet The Press is no longer the serious forum for discussion anymore, and perhaps this explains why the real Democracy of America continues to float toward Malkin, Coulter, Fox News, and conservative talk-radio.

Does he really think Hillary is going to show up to his “convention” again after she wins the Democratic nomination?  Won’t she be too busy appealing to the moderate Christians, then?

Good luck with next year’s convention, Kos.

Moonbats Vs. Loons

I guess since we’re on the topic of radical leftist idiots, I might as well bring this one into the picture.  It appears that some left-wing nuts are unhappy with  I never thought I would see the day.  You want to believe that the left can’t get any nuttier – then you hear about this.

MoveOn’s sin is supporting the Dems in Congress in their attempts to find a more “moderate” way out of Iraq.  The article from The Hill notes –

Some activist groups say MoveOn is giving a pass to Democratic leaders, whom they say are not taking a hard enough line to stop funding U.S. involvement in the war.

But MoveOn argues that burning bridges with Democrats is not an effective strategy. Much better, the influential organization says, is to work with them to peel away Republican support for the war and thus force President Bush’s hand.

Well, it never hurts to dream.  I’m not sure that this has any implication about the demise of MoveOn, but it certainly underscores one point – the Democrats in Congress understand that extremist measures to undermine our troops don’t play well in the public arena.  And MoveOn has indeed become more pragmatic if it feels that it must follow the Democrats in this understanding.  But what is amazing is the reaction from other extremist groups.

Leslie Angeline, an activist with Code Pink who staged a 24-day hunger strike in the office of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) to protest his position on Iran, said she dropped her membership from MoveOn after it supported that measure.

“MoveOn is very conservative,” Angeline said. “When they said, ‘We should support the supplemental,’ they betrayed us.”

Oh wow.  But MoveOn must protect its own.  I always chide the Democrats for taking marching orders from MoveOn, but maybe the Dems in Congress have finally co-opted that particular group of nuts.  Still, MoveOn regards the Dems in Congress very maternally –

Matzzie [ Washington Director for] said Democrats should be rewarded for the increasingly hard line they have taken against Republicans and the White House.

“When children do something bad, you can’t always be angry,” Matzzie said. “You want them to build confidence and feel bold, and feel like they have people behind them. And we want Democratic leaders to feel like they have people behind them that if they push, they’re going to be rewarded.”

Oh God.  How much more patronizing can you get?  This whole thing is sick and twisted, but it’s fun watching extremists battling it out.  I can guarantee you that there are so many confused Democrats on Capitol Hill right now (oh sorry, they ran home for recess after they gave Bush wiretap authority).

It’s just amusing.  A guilty pleasure I guess.

What They’re All About

I found this post by kos.  He was taking on the DLC (the supposed moderate Democrats).  But what he was really saying was that left-wing extremists like himself have made moderates in the Dem Party obsolete.  He ends –

We helped build this majority. Not the DLC’s 350 or so members. This is no longer their party. And as such, we can look forward to finally being truly competitive for years to come.

Another suggestion here that the Dem Party is beholden to the extremists.  This, folks, is why the Dems will eventually become irrelevant.  They have even taken, based on this post, to deriding the Democrats’ patron saint, Bill Clinton.

All I can say is that – if Clinton isn’t good enough for these folks – beware.  They won’t be satisfied til the extremist element of their party is firmly in control.  Based on what I’ve seen so far in Congress, Pelosi, Reid et al are on their way.  And I’m happy….

It’s means that the GOP minority will be very short-lived.

Pro-Choice = Pro-Abortion (Just say it, liberals!)

danpatrick.jpg (Dan Patrick, (R) Texas) 

I just don’t understand liberals and “reproductive rights” activists in times like this.  This furthers the evidence of the left’s love for abortion.

I remember this news story from a few months ago.  This broke in late March actually where a Texas lawmaker Sen. Dan Patrick (R) who is also a conservative talk show host is introducing legislation that would offer women $500 to sign away their rights to the child and agree to place the baby for adoption.

Today; August 1, I was driving home from the train station where this was the hot topic of the day.  The talk show host was a pro-choice man who was very angry about this.  I tried to call in, but was put on hold and never got through. 

I have been researching this tonight and basically; when the story broke earlier this year, all the expected groups and “pro-choice” folks were furious as well.

Some called it oppresive.  Some alleged “baby-selling.”  Some said that it was unconstitutional and this was another form of government intrusion.

First, how is it oppressive?  A child gets to live and the woman has another choice. 

How does this qualify as a “baby-selling” procedure?  Baby-selling in the U.S. is illegal and nothing is different here than if the woman put the child up for LEGAL adoption on her own.  But a Texas lawmaker wants to offer up an incentive for it, and people are enraged over it.  Why?  Hmmmm.

As far as governmental intrusion, I’d say the government already intruded when Roe V. Wade was legislated in the 70’s.  Somehow, liberals didn’t mind that intrusion.

Finally, why do liberals call themselves “pro-choice”?  This is precisely what I wanted to ask this blathering talk-show host today.  Is Dan Patrick forcing them to take him up on it?  It doesn’t look to me like he’s taking away a choice, but rather offering them another one.

It seems to me all evidence suggests that liberals and organizations like Planned Parenthood are interested in only one choice — abortion.

Everytime you hear a ranting liberal try to re-characterize the conservative position of “pro-life” to “anti-choice” (as they have done many times in the past), remember this moment and give them a subtle reminder.

If they’re going to be pro-choice, they need to shut up about this and allow women to have this choice as well.

Mondale: Still Sore From ’84?


Former Vice-President, Walter Mondale wrote a column in today’s Washington Post in which he exudes fond memories of Carter’s move to “make the most of” the “underused asset” known as the office of Vice-President.

In a book-report that focuses on our current Vice-President; Dick Cheney, Mondale remembers the days of the Carter administration with fondness.

“I remain enormously proud of what we did in those four years, especially that we told the truth, obeyed the law and kept the peace.”

That’s a pretty strong statement for the Vice-President of an administration that allowed Islamic fanatics to overthrow the Shah of Iran.  Did the Carter administration fight back like Reagan or Bush or Cheney would have?  I seem to remember an embrace of the new Iranian government by the United States (led by Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale).  After that diplomatic and peace-loving decision was executed, Carter couldn’t even retain the backbone to cut off all ties to the Shah when he let him back into our country to get treatment for the Carter/Mondale- knife he had in his back cancer at the Mayo Clinic in 1979, which of course led to the hostage crisis in Tehran that lasted 444 days.

Apparently, Carter and Mondale were such “peace” activists, they still couldn’t figure out which team they were batting for. 

Carter then decided it was time to toughen things up a bit by executing Operation Eagle Claw on April 24, 1980.  In this attempt to end the crisis that Carter was initially responsible for, five USAF Airmen and three U.S. Marines were tragically killed.

This was the first major Jihadist-association-happening in U.S. history that demonstrated the left’s “be nice to our enemies” plan by exercising the kind of “diplomacy” that Barack Obama is campaigning on now.

Mondale continues his fond recollections of his special relationship with Carter.

“Every Monday the two of us met privately for lunch; we could, and did, talk candidly about virtually anything.”

Apparently, devising clever military strategies was not part of their happy-meal repartee.  Come to think of it, clever economic and unemployment strategies were not part of it either. 

To their credit, they did manage to drum up a nomination and confirmation of Judge Anna Diggs Taylor (a left-winger), who last year struck down Bush’s NSA Spying program (with the help of the ACLU).  Thankfully, just a few short weeks ago, her enemy-helping ruling was overturned.

It is apparent to me that whenever any liberal talks about “peace” or “law”, it’s just a shifty way of advocating the far stretches of both desired elements.  Every decision made during their administration along with current decisions made by their judicial appointees boil down to one ideal: help the enemies escape, be nice to them, and hope they don’t hit us while our necks are buried in the sand.

Mondale might want to think back to 1984 when he decided to run against Reagan and lost in 49 out of the 50 states in this country.  The only state he managed to pick up was his own of Minnesota; where even there, he only won by 3,200 votes.  America remembered the backlash of thoughtless and irresponsible “be nice” policies of Democratic politicians.  Either Mondale (along with left-wing blogs, front-running Democratic-Presidential candidates, and all of the mainstream media) is suffering from major political amnesia or he really does wish for the destruction of America.

What more proof do we need than the facts of Democratic policies along with Mondale’s charge of criminality against the current Vice-President?

“It was Cheney who persuaded President Bush to sign an order that denied access to any court by foreign terrorism suspects and Cheney who determined that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to enemy combatants captured in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

To begin with, it is not only Dick Cheney that understands the fact that terrorists are not uniformed combatants represented by a formal military.  Moreover; if Carter and Mondale would have decided to take our enemies seriously back when they were showing the warning signs, it would have never progressed to the level that is has to today.

Forgive Bush and Cheney; sir, for attempting the clean up the mess that you and Carter made 28 years ago.