• Right Place Photo Caption Contest Hall of Glory Top 25

    meister.jpeg About Me
    BlogmeisterUSA's Guidelines for Commenting
    My Blog at Newsbusters
    My Writings at Family Security Matters
    My Writings at The American Thinker
    I Also Blog at Lifelike Pundits
    National Summary Interviews Me
    Read "The Americans" by Gordon Sinclair
    PELOSI_DEMOCRAT_TREASON-1.jpg More About the Fighting 101st Keyboardists

February 28, 2006

Arab Nations: Ban Slandering of Religion

I'll take Double Standards for $400, Alex!

I posted about this earlier this month , and it seems the MSM is finally catching on to it.

Arab and Islamic governments should pressure the United Nations to ban the slandering of religions, said more than 200 Arab politicians who renewed their criticism today of the contentious Prophet Muhammad cartoons.

The call, which was made at the end of a two-day conference at a Dead Sea resort in Jordan, comes amid outrage felt throughout the Islamic world over the publication in a Danish newspaper of a series of cartoons of Islam’s prophet.

“We urge Arab and Muslim governments to spare no effort to pressure the UN to issue a resolution banning the slandering of religions,” the politicians from 16 Arab countries representing the Arab Inter-Parliamentary Union said in a statement.

Those who violate such a resolution should face legal action, added the statement.

The UN is not, I repeat, not, a governing world body, as much as it would like to be. Here is the purpose of the UN, from its own website:

The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends.

I don't see anything about passing international laws. The UN can put pressure on its member countries, I suppose, but those sovereign nations make their own laws, thank you very much.

However, for the sake of argument, let's say such a law was passed worldwide. Then any Arab or Muslim nation would face legal action for publishing cartoons such as these:



Some have argued that the cartoons are deriding the Jews as a people and not their religion. I say, hogwash. Deriding someone as a Jew is deriding the Jewish faith. Period. Freedom of speech for me but not for thee seems to be the order of the day...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

Check Out MilTracker

Officer Candidate Phil Van Treuren over at Camp Katrina has begun a new blog! Not a blog in the conventional sense, MilTracker is designed to be a clearinghouse for posts on the positive things our military is up to from scads of bloggers across the blogosphere.

Check in to see what MilTracker has to offer!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:33 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

February 27, 2006

Cindy Sheehan in Germany: A Counterprotest

Yesterday I posted about Cindy Sheehan's upcoming visit to Germany, where she will be the centerpiece of a protest designed to "support" those soldiers recuperating at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center.

Now comes news of a counterprotest:

RAMSTEIN, Germany — Efforts are under way to stage a counterprotest to Cindy Sheehan’s planned March 11 demonstration outside Landstuhl Regional Medical Center and Ramstein Air Base.

Sheehan, who is the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq and who protested the war last summer outside President Bush’s Texas ranch, is scheduled to participate in a daylong war protest.

Stefan Prystawik, a German writer in Bonn, is working to stage a counterprotest. On his Web site, at www.stefan-prystawik.de, Prystawik characterizes Sheehan as “the great-great grandmother of all Bush haters.”

Sheehan’s planned protest is highly inappropriate, and her complaints are “very much an internal U.S. matter,” Prystawik said.

“First of all, it’s completely inappropriate to instrumentalize the troops here particularly, and above all, those who have suffered severe injuries and are at the hospital,” he said. “They are coming here with an attitude to deliberately demoralize troops who just got back or are going to go back [to Iraq].”

Well done.

Hat tip: GD

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1) | Leftwing Lunacy

Blogs For Heather: The Money Trail

Chris over at Lucky Dawg News pointed out this breakdown of campaign donations to both Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) and her likely opponent in November, Democrat Patricia Madrid.

It's interesting to see which groups contribute to whom, isn't it?

Show Comments

Another Look at the Port Debate

I'm glad there is a postponement on the UAE-owned company takeover of managing six major US ports. I admit I was one of the ones who thought the administration must be off their rockers when I first heard of this. However, as time goes on, I wonder if we all weren't a bit hasty in our jump to criticize. After all, Dubai Ports World will not be handling security, and will be continuing to employ the same US unions who currently work at the ports now.

However, can anyone blame us? Considering the UAE's spotty record on terrorism, rational thinkers had every right to question the deal. Now, let's take a look at a similar hypothetical situation:

The US decides to sell control of our border posts on the US/Mexican border to a Mexican company. We will still provide security (you know, the guys with guns), but the actual day-to-day running of the border posts will be overseen by this Mexican company. That is to say, the Mexican company and its employees will be in charge of checking authorization of people wishing to cross over from Mexico to the US.

What's wrong with this picture? Would you have absolute trust in a Mexican company to make sure illegal Mexican immigrants don't come streaming over the border? I know I sure wouldn't.

And that's why many of us are skeptical of DP World managing our ports. Can we trust that they will have our best interests at heart? If it's a foolproof, ironclad plan, then I'm glad. But I want to hear about it. The biggest gaffe President Bush could have made in this situation was to simply say "trust me." It's not him I don't trust, it's a company owned by a country that recognized the Taliban as a legitimate government in Afghanistan before 9/11.

The UAE is considered to be one of our (few) allies in the Middle East. There is an argument being made that by allowing this port deal to go through, it will strengthen our ties. If a postponement of the deal allows proof of this to see the light of day, then I'm all for it.

Let's hope Congress doesn't squander this opportunity to make good.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Homeland Security

Clooney on Controversy: I'm Lovin' It

There are bloggers I know who can't be bothered with posting about celebrities, and frankly, they're better bloggers than I am. I just can't help how some of these people really get under my skin.

Take George Clooney, for instance. In a recent interview (overseas, of course), Clooney said he relished being branded as a traitor regarding his open disagreement in the Iraq war.

Clooney, who has weathered attacks since opposing the 2003 Iraq invasion, said at one point that it was "frustrating" to be listed as a "traitor" on a set of playing cards, but he also accepted people's right to free speech.

He later admitted he relished the attacks.

"I think it's important to be on the right side of history," Clooney said.

"I want to be on that deck of cards. And I want to be able to say that they boycotted my films... I want to be able to say I was on the cover of a magazine called a 'traitor,"' he said.

"I'm proud of those because those were badges of honour for me because that was when you did it when it was hard to do," the actor and director said.

The free publicity didn't hurt either. And really, how hard could it be trumpeting one's leftwing anti-war views to a leftwing anti-war press, while surrounded by one's leftwing anti-war friends? Does anyone feel that cold chill yet? How can you with all the hot air?

I have news for Clooney and others like him: While he may or may not be on the right side of history (who will know for another 50 years or so?), one thing is for certain: he will not be in the history books. Trivia books, perhaps, but not the history books. That honor (or dishonor) is saved for the real players. I guess it's hard to realize that you aren't going to be a part of history when popular culture lionizes you during your lifetime...or at least as long as your movies continue to make money.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Celebrity

Members of Congress to be Indicted?

That's according to Cindy Adams of the NY Post:

February 27, 2006 -- PAY attention. Pay large attention. Could be more, but for today the number is a dozen. At least a dozen members of Congress, primarily of the party currently in power, are about to be indicted. Influence peddling. One dozen.

Cindy usually discusses Hollywood celebrities and New York "high society" folks, but she occasionally will come out with a nugget like this. Is it true? We'll see.

Hat tip: Kitty

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Politics

February 26, 2006

An International Embarrassment

That's what Cindy Sheehan has become. Last month she traveled to Venezuela to cozy up to Dictator -- er, President Hugo Chavez. In March, shortly before the concert she's promoting to bring the troops home, she'll be traveling to Germany. My comments are in brackets.

RAMSTEIN, Germany — Cindy Sheehan, mother of a soldier killed in Iraq and the woman who protested the war last summer outside President Bush’s Texas ranch, is scheduled to bring her anti-war message to U.S. military installations in Germany next month.

“[We’ve already heard] that Cindy Sheehan is like Hanoi Jane [Fonda] coming here,” said Elsa Rassbach, an event organizer with American Voices Abroad, which is supporting Sheehan’s trip.

But, she said, “We’re here to just democratically talk about U.S. policy.” [Translation: talk about how U.S. policy sucks without listening to other viewpoints. Isn't democracy grand?]


On March 11, protesters plan to walk from Landstuhl Regional Medical Center to a parking lot just outside Ramstein Air Base, where Sheehan will be at a “camp,” paying tribute to those who have died in the Iraq war. [We support the dead soldiers, not the live ones.]

“Cindy will be with us at Camp Casey Landstuhl/Ramstein to call attention to the fact that Germany is Europe’s logistical hub for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and others threatening Iran and the Middle East,” according to an event flier. “Germany has the power to stop the further use of U.S. bases in Germany for illegal wars and criminal methods of warfare — the power and the right to just say no!” [Fine. I say pull them all out now and let the Germans fend for themselves. They've let us know in no uncertain terms what they think of us. Why waste our time and energy there?]

Organizers are hoping to erect the camp — known as Camp Casey for Sheehan’s son — in a parking lot outside Ramstein Air Base’s west gate. The parking lot is under German jurisdiction, said Erin Zagursky, an Air Force spokeswoman at the base. Protest organizers are meeting with city officials in Ramstein and Landstuhl to gain permission for their event.

Sheehan’s goals are to bring the troops home and have peace on earth, she said in an e-mail to Stars and Stripes. [Peace on earth? Tell that to the likes of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is hoping to fulfill his first campaign promise of wiping Israel off the face of the map. Oh wait, Israel doesn't count.]

Her son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, 24, was killed in Iraq on April 4, 2004. Sheehan said in an e-mail she was too busy for a phone interview with Stars and Stripes. [Too busy to talk to a publication that speaks to the very people she claims to represent?]

“I don’t know anything about the visit,” she wrote. “It is being arranged by some people in Germany.” [Talk about an overwhelming sense of self-importance. Has she hired a personal assistant yet, like other famous celebs?]

With the Kaiserslautern military community home to more than 50,000 Americans with military ties, Sheehan could face a rough welcome. When asked for comment Wednesday on Sheehan’s upcoming visit, several soldiers in Kaiserslautern asked if they could be quoted anonymously.

One soldier, who recently returned from Iraq, did give his name but didn’t have much to say about Sheehan.

“Anything I would have to say about her, you couldn’t print,” Army Staff Sgt. Mark Genthner said. [I'm sure Sheehan's supporters wouldn't argue with that kind of "self censorship."]

Beginning March 9, Sheehan’s European visit will take her to Frankfurt, Aachen, Landstuhl and Ramstein in Germany. On March 13, Sheehan is scheduled to have a news conference in Paris, and the following day will address the European Union parliament in Strasbourg, France. [Do you think when she was a child, Cindy dreamt of traveling on someone else's dime to bash America in front of a bunch of Amerca-loathing European politicians? Most girls dream of being princesses and riding unicorns.]

Read the rest of the Stars and Stripes article here. And how much do you want to bet the anti-American German press will just eat this up? An actual American going to Germany to publicly reaffirm what Germans already know: Compared to Germany and the rest of Europe, Americans are a bunch of colonial yahoos who are on the bottom of the moral and cultural totem pole of the world.

How tiresome.

Hat tip: Medienkritik

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:03 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Reid on Legacies

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) has a prediction:

"This is an administration that is going to be noted for its incompetence not its accomplishments," Reid, D-Nev., said after a forum on Medicare reforms at the University of Nevada's School of Medicine.

Yes, but what will Democrats be known for? Failure? Obstructionism? Finger pointing and grandstanding?

I'd take an incompetent administration over the inability to carry an election any day.

Reid also delivered this well-worn canard:

"The poor are getting poorer, the rich getting richer, the middle class is being squeezed. And this deals not only with health care, but with everything," Reid told The Associated Press.

That's great for scoring political points with those who don't bother to check facts. But how true is it? Jonah Goldberg addressed this topic in a column a few years ago:

Now, the first thing to keep fresh in your mind is that high income inequality is not the same thing as high poverty. As the Gatesbergia example illustrates, you can have outrageous gaps between the rich and poor and the "poor" will still be OK.

For example, according to Robert Rector, an economist with the Heritage Foundation who uses the government's numbers, the typical person in the poorest fifth of U.S. households today spends as much as the person of average wealth in the early 1970s (adjusted for inflation).

The typical "poor" American, according to census data, has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a VCR and a color TV. It should go without saying -but usually doesn't -that in, say, 1960, someone who had a color TV, a refrigerator, air conditioning and a car would not be considered poor.

More telling: Child hunger has largely been wiped out as a major social problem in America. While deplorable instances of hungry children still occur (usually attributable to bad parenting), the real nutritional problem we face today is fat kids.

Not only is poverty relative, it has less to do with money than most people think. Technological innovation makes life less expensive. Fifty years ago, a refrigerator was a big investment, even for the middle class. But it was worth it because it made it possible to buy food in bulk.

Today, refrigerators may not be supercheap, but they're affordable. And the cheapest fridge today is far more advanced than a fridge from two decades ago. Ten years ago, a cell phone was a luxury. Today, they're ubiquitous -even in the poorest neighborhoods.

Here's how relative our understanding of poverty is: The average poor person in America is richer than many entire villages in Africa or Asia, where they still have no phones, refrigerators, and very little food.

Rather than predict the lousy legacy of the Bush administration, perhaps Harry Reid would be better off studying economics.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:26 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Politics

February 25, 2006

Woo Hoo, I'm Going Airborne!

Not in the literal sense, however. Tonight I'll be on the radio with a few of my friends. Back in college I was a member of the college radio station, and today they're having an alumni day. Folks who are still local can go on the air for an hour or two and do whatever they'd like (within FCC regulations, of course!). We'll be playing all of the alternative stuff from the 1980s that was on the playlist when we were in school. It's going to be a blast! As a "life member" of the station, I could have a regular air slot if I wanted to. I did, too, for a while. In 1998, I started an '80s show, but had to give it up four years later when I started working again and going back to school to become certified as a teacher. Now, with my commute into the city, I still don't have time. Therefore, I plan to really enjoy myself tonight!!!

My big thing was going to be to have a radio career and eventually get into doing voiceovers for commercials, documentaries and the like. However, what really held me back was the fact that I married young (right out of college). Those who want to really make it in radio have to be able to move around a lot (at least in the early days), and I obviously tied myself down early. Regrets? A few, but nothing I lose sleep over. I've thought about trying to break into voiceovers but the competition is horrendous, and I don't have the time or energy to truly pursue it.

Don't you just love these walks down memory lane?

UPDATE: Click below to see me in the studio. Don't I look professional? (heh)

Read More "Woo Hoo, I'm Going Airborne!"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:48 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Personal

Seven Songs I'm Listening To Lately

Pat at Brainster tagged me for this meme: seven songs I'm really into lately. Like Pat, I'm no longer in my twenties, and music doesn't have the same meaning it used to. I enjoy it, but I don't feel like I have to own the latest CD. In fact, the last few CDs I bought (and I don't buy many) were '80s compilations and Pat Benatar's Greatest Hits. Yes, my age is showing. I don't even have an iPod, as it's not a priority item for me. However, if I did own an iPod, the following seven songs would definitely be on it. Most of them are older tunes, but there are a couple of recent ones mixed in.

Girls Just Want to Have Fun (Cyndi Lauper): The quintessential '80s song. Short and sweet, bubbly and poppy. I loved the video (and still enjoy it if I happen to catch it) from MTV's heyday...when they actually were Music Television.

Chariot (Gavin DeGraw): This guy has a great voice and sings songs that have nice melodies and soothing lyrics. It doesn't hurt that I think this guy is totally adorable...

Material Girl (Madonna): Before she became a "holier-than-thou perfect mom who embraced one of the weirdest religious fads ever," I was a Madonna fan. I loved her all through the '80s and '90s, and own everything she did before American Life. I still like to listen to the old stuff. Material Girl is another song that identified the '80s, and it was Madonna at her best: a shameless self-promoter who had a sense of humor, before she decided she was going to save the world (while still making piles of money).

These Words (Natasha Bedingfield): This song has a rappy feel to it, but it also has actual singing. It's a very playful tune. Bedingfield also has a Motown flavor to her singing which is very appealing.

Footloose (Kenny Loggins): Can you tell where my musical tastes lie? Not only can you dance to this tune from the movie, but the lyrics are fun (partial lyrics below):

I've been working so hard
Keep punchin' my card
Eight hours for what?
Oh tell me what I've got

I've get this feelin'
That time's just holdin' me down
I'll hit the ceiling
Or else I'll tear up this town
Tonight I gotta cut

Loose, footloose
Kick off your Sunday shoes
Please, Louise
Pull me off of my knees
Jack, get back
Come on before we crack
Lose your blues
Everybody cut footloose

In fact, I love the whole soundtrack. I used to have it on cassette, but I keep thinking I'll have to buy the CD.

Hopelessly Devoted to You (Olivia Newton John): I remember going to see Grease with my mom, sisters, and our two friends from next door and their mother. It was the first "late night" movie I had been allowed to go to (I was 10, and we didn't get home until well past 11 pm). Who didn't love Olivia? Who didn't want to be her (especially since she got to be close to then-very-hot John Travolta)? I recently bought the CD and listen to it at work. If I had to pick a favorite tune from it, this is the one. I love to sing along!

Mamma Mia (ABBA): ABBA brings me back to the carefree days of my childhood and Mamma Mia is absolutely one of my favorite songs by them. They've seen a huge resurgence in popularity in the past ten years or so, with movies featuring tunes and a Broadway musical based on their music (called Mamma Mia, what else?)

There are so many more, but I'm limited to seven! OK, my turn to tag:

Two Dogs

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:32 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | Blogging

February 24, 2006

Brainster Cited in National Review

Pat over at Brainster has had his post regarding Abramoff's campaign contributions cited at National Review by Donald Luskin.

Click here for details. Be sure to congratulate Pat...he's one of the best bloggers out there.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Blogs4Bauer: Carnival of Bauer

As a public service to my good friend The Man over at GOP and the City, I'm happy to announce the upcoming Carnival of Bauer! That's right, for you fans of 24, Blogs4Bauer will be hosting the Carnival of Bauer every Thursday, beginning March 2. The main stipulation for posting your link, of course, is that your post be about 24.

Click here for more details.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:23 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Student Activism for a Good Cause

Students in Danbury, Connecticut created a video that convinced the state to stop investing its pension money in companies that have ties to the Sudan, a country whose government has been accused of genocide in its Darfur region.

What makes it even nicer is that they did it on their own time for no school credit.

Read the article here. It's nice to see students take an interest in something that has real meaning.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Connecticut Issues

February 23, 2006


OK, I stole the name from Thirdwavedave, but it was simply better than anything I could come up with. Here's the scoop:

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan and REM frontman Michael Stipe will headline a New York concert to urge the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

The concert, dubbed "Bring 'Em Home Now!" will be held at the Hammerstein Ballroom on March 20, the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Rufus Wainwright and Bright Eyes will also perform, it was announced Wednesday.

Ugh, just when you thought it was safe to pay attention to national affairs again.

Perhaps instead of calling it "Bring 'Em Home Now!" they should call it "Crash and Burn," considering Cindy Sheehan's marketability of late...


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:13 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

What About Airport Security?

With all of the hoo ha about the ports this week, Peggy Noonan has a very timely article regarding the security at our airports. Her assessment? It still stinks.

I am almost always picked for extra screening. I must be on a list of middle aged Irish-American women terrorists. I know a message is being sent: We don't do ethnic profiling in America. But that is not, I suspect, the message anyone receives. The message people receive is: This is all nonsense. What they think is: This is all kabuki. We're being harassed and delayed so politicians can feel good. The security personnel themselves seem to know it's nonsense: they're always bored and distracted as they go through my clothing, my stockings, my computer, my earrings. They don't treat me like a terror possibility, they treat me like a sad hunk of meat.

I don't think most of us get extra screening because they think we are terrorists. I think we get it because they know we're not. They screen people who are not terrorists because it helps them pretend they are protecting us, in the same way doctors in the middle ages used to wear tall hats: because they couldn't cure you. It's all show.

I do not fly often. I flew for the first time since 9/11 back in November of 2004 to England. Last year I went on two business trips to the Midwest, flying for both of them. I can't say that I felt any safer with the new security measures either. It was a hassle, to be honest, having to take my laptop out of my bag, take my shoes off, etcetera.

Michelle Malkin wonders if we're now all ethnic profilers since the port story blew open.

For the past several years, I've been condemned as an "extremist" for advocating nationality profiling – unapologetically applying stricter scrutiny to terror-sponsoring and terror-sympathizing countries in our entrance, immigration and security policies.

Now, mirabile dictu, some of the same Democrats who have routinely lambasted such profiling are rushing to the floors of Congress and in front of TV cameras espousing these very same policies. The impetus: the White House's boneheaded insistence on ramming through a $7 billion deal giving United Arab Emirates-owned Dubai Ports World control over significant operations at six major American ports in New York, New Jersey, New Orleans, Baltimore, Philadelphia and Miami.

Why the discrepancy? Does this mean ethnic profiling might start taking place at airports? Not likely. However, the double standard is striking.

I agree that the port issue needs to be revisited. Put it on hold and examine it more closely before allowing Dubai Ports World to pass GO and collect $200. If this deal truly has merit, President Bush needs to sell it to the American people. Some people might be willing to take him at his word, but many are not. Tell us why this is a good idea, other than the "we can't discriminate" line.

And while we're at it, let's take another look at airport security.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Homeland Security

More Iffy News for Hillary

According to a recent poll, two thirds of respondents think Hillary Clinton will run for president in 2008, but only one third of those think she will win.

In the same poll, nearly 80 percent don't think Condoleezza Rice would win either. However, the article fails to say how many respondents would vote for her. (Condi keeps saying she won't run, while Hillary is "just concentrating" on her run for Senate, not actually saying "no.")

Of course, Hillary leads the pack when it comes to Democrats, but just look at who she's up against, with only Al Gore, John Edwards and John Kerry breaking double digits.

So it seems that the TV show Commander in Chief (currently on hiatus and a poor ratings victim) isn't exactly preparing the electorate for a woman president, as 27 percent said they wouldn't vote for a woman no matter what. Frankly, it annoys me that so many people factor in a candidate's sex rather than whether or not he or she is right for the job.

To me, it's the individual.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 21, 2006

Christopher Hitchens Stands Up for Denmark

Christopher Hitchens wrote a superb (as usual) article today in Slate regarding the freedom of the press crisis that now faces much of the free world. He asks why we are ignoring Denmark, a staunch ally. Why indeed?

Read the article, as you should. Then, if you live in the Washington DC area, consider contacting Hitchens, as he is hoping to have a peaceful event at the Danish embassy there in order to show our solidarity with Denmark at this important time.

As for me, I would love to help organize a sister event at the Danish embassy in NYC. I e-mailed Hitchens (don't know if he will actually reply), but if any of you are in or around New York and would like to participate in such a venture, please contact me (click on the EMAIL ME icon on the left sidebar or leave a comment).

For the record: I have said it before and will say it again. I don't think deliberately offending religious sensibilities of anyone is tasteful. However, free society doesn't mean freedom from being offended. We cannot allow radical Islam to dictate what we can and cannot print or broadcast. Peaceful protests? Fine. Boycotting? Again, while it is hurting Danish companies, it is also an acceptable way to protest. But burning, rioting and death threats cross the line, as does a religion that expects special treatment while doing plenty of offending itself.

If you're interested in the event I mentioned above, I hope to hear from you. I certainly can't do it alone!

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

Bill Clinton Tops 'em Again

If you have been outraged by comments from Al Gore and Jimmy Carter these last couple of weeks, you obviously haven't seen what Bill Clinton is up to:

ISLAMABAD: Former US president Bill Clinton on Friday condemned the publication of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) caricatures by European newspapers and urged countries concerned to convict the publishers.

Talking to reporters after meeting Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz in Islamabad, Clinton said he disagreed with the caricatures and that the publication was against religious and ethical norms. Clinton said he had no objection to peaceful demonstrations being held worldwide, but this was not the time for violence. He said it was the time to promote inter-faith harmony and stand together on the issue.

He said the people’s religious convictions should be respected at all costs and the media should be disallowed to play with the religious sentiments of other faiths. He said the media could criticise any issue including governments and people, but nobody had the right to play with the sentiments of other faiths.

I'm sure he also means that the newspapers in Iran and other Middle Eastern countries that regularly run anti-Semitic and anti-Christian cartoons and propaganda should be prosecuted. He must also mean that prominent papers like the New York Times, which have run pictures of Piss Christ and the Madonna covered in elephant dung should be prosecuted, as those images were offensive to Christians in America, right?


Clinton is obviously kissing up to folks in the Middle East. Why? Well, it's been rumored that he wants to become Secretary-General of the UN when Kofi Anaan steps down. This is called "having one's ducks in a row." He's probably not too concerned about what Americans think, because the Americans who support him also support the UN. The rest of us can just go suck eggs. As for the Danes, I guess he figures there are less of them than Muslims, so why worry about them?

Un****ing believable. This man thinks more of himself than the damage he is doing to the free world. And I'm not just talking about America. I'm talking about everywhere else too.


Cross posted at Lifelike Pundits.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:54 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | Leftwing Lunacy

February 20, 2006

What's A Little Humiliation Among Sex Offenders?

The ACLU is already on the warpath on this one:

The US state of Mississippi plans to put the names and faces of convicted sex offenders on roadside billboards.

About 100 posters showing offenders, particularly those who prey on minors, will be put up, a state official said.

Don Taylor, head of the state's Department of Human Services, told a local newspaper the aim was to make the public aware of their crimes.

But human rights campaigners say the measure is unnecessary as the public is already aware once convicts are jailed.


The American Civil Liberties Union in Mississippi said the billboards would be a waste of money.

"Why is it necessary to put them on billboards if they're already serving?" its head, Nsombi Lambright, asked.

"If they have criminal charges before them, the information is public, the victims are notified. The people already know in these communities who these folks are once they're arrested."

I don't know; this is an idea that might have some merit. Public humiliation can sometimes do wonders, and might serve as more of a deterrent than a few months in jail.

Question: Does the ACLU worry about the rights of the children that have been violated? Does it worry about the humiliation these children have to deal with for the rest of their lives?

Don't bet on it.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | ACLU

Why Do They Hate Us? Because They Do

Westerners are asking why radical Islamists hate us and have come up with a plethora of answers, ranging from "misunderstanding" to "haves vs. have-nots."

Brigitte Gabriel is an Arab Christian who suffered at the hands of Muslims in her childhood because she is an infidel in their eyes. She shared her story and her insights at the Intelligence Summit last Saturday, February 18. Excerpts from her speech are posted on Frontpage Magazine. Here is one of the most powerful passages:

America cannot effectively defend itself in this war unless and until the American people understand the nature of the enemy that we face. Even after 9/11 there are those who say that we must “engage” our terrorist enemies, that we must “address their grievances”. Their grievance is our freedom of religion. Their grievance is our freedom of speech. Their grievance is our democratic process where the rule of law comes from the voices of many not that of just one prophet. It is the respect we instill in our children towards all religions. It is the equality we grant each other as human beings sharing a planet and striving to make the world a better place for all humanity. Their grievance is the kindness and respect a man shows a woman, the justice we practice as equals under the law, and the mercy we grant our enemy. Their grievance cannot be answered by an apology for who or what we are.

Absolutely a must-read.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:12 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

February 19, 2006

New Caption Contest...

over at The Right Place. I have only placed in one of the contests I've entered so far...but I keep on trying. Go over, see the great captions, and add yours to the mix.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:01 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

About Me

I'm a native of Reno, Nevada, but have been living in Connecticut for well over 20 years. (I also spent a few years in Wisconsin. Cheese ahoy!) After all these years, I have finally accepted my fate as a Yankee. Speaking of acceptance, my acceptance of the fact that I'd been a conservative all along (and just playing at being a liberal) came at the same time it did for many, on 9/11. Since then, I've been tireless in my efforts to not only educate myself, but as many as will take the time to read what I've written here and elsewhere, about the path to insanity that is labeled "progressive," "liberal," "leftwing," and so on. Star Trek liberal no more!

"Professional" journalists would say that I have no qualifications whatsoever to write anything other than a grocery list. While I would agree that I have no accepted professional qualifications other than a B.A. in Communications (big waste of time, that!) and a minor in English, I would say that my status as a concerned, informed American citizen makes me more than qualified to give my opinion on the news of the day. And while the fact that I must work at a job quite unrelated to my interests in order to help support my family keeps me from original reporting 99.9% of the time, I have been able to attend several newsmaking rallies and report on them. I hope to do more of the same in the near future.

I love getting e-mail from readers...as long as it's not rude. I do my best to answer everyone who writes (my apologies if I do not get back to you). My address is blogmeisterusa@gmail.com. If you have any feedback on a particular post or any suggestions about things you'd like me to write about, I am all ears!

Finally, in case you are interested, I also contribute elsewhere: a weekly column for Family Security Matters, occasional pieces for American Thinker, and I am also a blogger for Newsbusters. Links to my archived works at these sites can be found in my upper left sidebar.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Personal

What the MSM Won't Show

As the MSM gleefully displays "previously unseen" photos from the Abu Ghraib scandal, there are photos of prisoners in Iraq that are not being shown. The Jawa Report has them, and asks, "Where is the UN? Where is Amnesty International? Where is al Jazeera?"

Good questions, but no answers in sight.

Hat tip: GD

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | MSM

Alec Baldwin is Insane

That's right. Send a star-studded straightjacket over to Baldwin's Hollywood pad...he is certifiably nuts. Here's his "blog entry" over at HuffPo:

So, I suppose the question is...what kind of civil trial will we see, or not see, between Cheney and Whittington? Whittington is certainly no stranger to a court room and to civil litigation. Will Cheney pay him off, preemptively? Will they go to court? I would imagine if a guy with a few beers in him shoots you in the face on a hunting trip, how could you turn down that opportunity?

What would Cheney do about the whole secrecy thing then? I mean, this is the guy that sicced Enron on Gray Davis and the state of California to embarrass Davis, trigger the recall and then watched Arnold Schwarzenegger become governor of California. (To this day, perhaps, still the low point in American political life.) Then Cheney covered it up.

Cheney's the guy who told Libby to out Valerie Plame. The rumor I heard is that someone yelled, "Look out! Shooter!" and Cheney thought he said Scooter and fired in that general direction.

Cheney is a terrorist. He terrorizes our enemies abroad and innocent citizens here at home indiscriminately. Who ever thought Harry Whittington would be the answer to America's prayers. Finally, someone who might get that lying, thieving Cheney into a courtroom to answer some direct questions.

Baldwin is fast becoming the left's poster boy for crazy conspiracy theories, even outpacing the once unbeatable Michael Moore. If you'll read the comments at the bottom of the post (I'm sure Baldwin himself will never read them), you'll note that many of the commenters say things like, "Cheney will pay him off privately" and "Cheney will use his power to stay out of court." There are more voices of reason than I thought, however:

How about this Alec:




Hey, Alec. Why don't you threaten to leave the country until Cheney is dragged into court? Oh, wait a minute. You already famously threatened to leave the country when Bush was elected. But you never keep your word.

For the record, I can't stand Cheney and I believe, along with most of the readers of this post, that he and the Bushies are destroying this country. However, our cause is not helped by Hollywood actors who run their mouths and then don't have the conviction to follow up on their public promises. It results in a loss of credibility, not only to you, but to the cause you are advocating. Please abstain from dabbling in politics, Mr. Baldwin. Leave it to stars like George Clooney who actually back up their words with actions.

Hmm. Not sure what George Clooney has actually done other than make conspiracy theory movies that put America in a bad light and make public comments about how patriotic he is, but I don't recall him threatening to leave the country. That ought to count for something, I guess.

My personal favorite:

Why haven't you left the country yet? Is this all you can bring to the table for discussion....this story is OVER! How about we chat about Al Gore's latest speech....or what's NOT being done by the UN around the world, or the corruption at the UN....there is so much to talk about, and yet you can't tear yourself away from the Cheney story - it's OVER you stupid liberal!!!

And, Alec, if there was a civil trial, it would pertain only to the events surrounding the shooting. Not Plamegate, Enron, or anything else you are demanding answers about.

I'd advise him to stick to acting, but plum roles have been pretty slim of late...


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:55 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

February 17, 2006

From the Over-Inflated Sense of Self-Worth Files: Richard Dreyfuss

Who else but an actor would stand up in front of the National Press Club and say that the impeachment of George W. Bush is a "cause worth fighting" for?

Richard Dreyfuss said this (and much more):

"There are causes worth fighting for even if you know that you will lose...Unless you are willing to accept torture as part of a normal American political lexicon, unless you are willing to accept that leaving the Geneva Convention is fine and dandy, if you accept the expansion of wiretapping as business as usual, the only way to express this now is to embrace the difficult and perhaps embarrassing process of impeachment."

He also said that impeachment "is a statement that we refuse to endorse bad behavior."

Bad George, bad! Go stand in the corner for a time out. (I wonder what he thought of the "embarrassing process of impeachment" when it was Bill Clinton being impeached for lying under oath and obstructing justice? Was that a statement of the refusal to endorse bad behavior, or were the Republicans just being mean ol' meanies? I'll bet no one asked him that.)

"Watch me lose my sense of humor if people accuse me of treason," Dreyfuss said before mocking two of the Fox News Channel's most popular hosts. "'That's not very O'Reilly of you, Mister Smarty-Pants,' or 'What would Sean Hannity have to say about that, Mister Too-Complex-for-Your-Own-Good?'"

Gosh, I'll just bet that Hannity and O'Reilly are at home crying because Richard Dreyfuss made fun of them.

Dreyfuss did have a few harsh words for the press, blaming the 24-hour news cycle and sound bites for the way we react to world events. "Instantaneous knowledge leads to instantaneous reaction, which creates a demand for an instantaneous, reflexive response."

So does that mean that Dreyfuss himself is a victim of demanding an instantaneous, reflexive response? Does he stop to think that perhaps he doesn't know enough about the electronic surveillance (it's not wiretapping), the torture he describes, the Geneva Convention? Is he familiar with Part I, Article IV of the Geneva Convention, which covers the treatment of POWs?

I kind of doubt it.

Despite his self-proclaimed "libo-conservo-middle-of-the-roado" stance on life and politics, Dreyfuss seems to be afflicted with the very same "reflexive response" that he blames the press for. Perhaps he should follow his own advice and be a little more skeptical of what he hears in the MSM.

Treasonous? No. Questionable? Yes.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:28 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Celebrity

February 16, 2006

Jimmuh Writes Aunt Sophie

You must read today's Dear Aunt Sophie column over at FrontPage Magazine.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

Arab Company To Manage US Ports

Okay, MSM: stop talking about Dick Cheney, as there is more serious news to be discussing.

The Bush administration on Thursday rebuffed criticism about potential security risks of a $6.8 billion sale that gives a company in the United Arab Emirates control over significant operations at six major American ports.

Lawmakers asked the White House to reconsider its earlier approval of the deal.

The sale to state-owned Dubai Ports World was "rigorously reviewed" by a U.S. committee that considers security threats when foreign companies seek to buy or invest in American industry, National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones said.

Why the concern?

U.S. lawmakers said the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. They also said the UAE was one of only three countries to recognize the now-toppled Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government.

I think that's a legitmate issue, as is the following:

Critics also have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"Outsourcing the operations of our largest ports to a country with a dubious record on terrorism is a homeland security and commerce accident waiting to happen," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "The administration needs to take another look at this deal."

Write this down for posterity: I agree with Chuck Schumer on something.

Having a UAE-based company run operations in ports located in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Philadelphia and Miami is akin to giving a burglar your keys and asking him to watch your home for you while you go away on vacation. Or, as the popular saying goes, having the fox guard the henhouse.

Absolutely insane.

What can George Bush be thinking? Forget the 30-day window for objections being closed. This is a vital issue that needs to be addressed, before something happens that we'll all be sorry about.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:47 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Homeland Security

Cheney's Gun: The Final Word

And the final word (in my mind) over the hoo ha regarding Dick Cheney's shooting accident goes to one of my favorites, Thomas Sowell:

The media are so full of themselves -- among other things that they are full of -- that they act as if the government exists to provide them with something to publicize. The time is long overdue to put these people in their place. Where is Margaret Tutwiler when we need her?

Be sure to read it in its entirety.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

Bryant Gumbel: Still Mumbling

I didn't even realize Bryant Gumbel had what one might call a career going, but he has a show called Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel on HBO. Here's what he had to say about the Winter Olympics (via Newsbusters):

"Finally, tonight, the Winter Games. Count me among those who don’t care about them and won’t watch them ... Because they’re so trying ... Like, try not to be incredulous when someone attempts to link these games to those of the ancient Greeks who never heard of skating or skiing. So try not to laugh when someone says these are the world’s greatest athletes, despite a paucity of blacks that makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention. Try not to point out that something’s not really a sport if a pseudo-athlete waits in what’s called a kiss-and-cry area, while some panel of subjective judges decides who won ... So if only to hasten the arrival of the day they’re done, when we can move on to March Madness — for God’s sake, let the games begin."

As David Pierre of Newsbusters comments, "You'd think these remarks would have received more attention than they have. (Well, maybe not.) It's just hard to imagine a Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity getting a pass on something like this. Don'tcha think?"

I agree. But perhaps there's another reason Gumbel seems to be given a pass: Unlike O'Reilly and Hannity, Gumbel is a has-been whom no one seems to give much notice to.

Be sure to read the comments at the bottom of the Newsbusters post linked above, as there are some real gems.

Hat tip: Drudge

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | MSM

February 15, 2006

Cartoon Fatwah Update

The religion of peace is showing its fangs. And it's going high tech.

Michelle Malkin and other blogs are being spammed and threatened regarding their posting of the cartoons of Muhammed.

Here's something to keep in mind:

"No people in history have ever survived who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies." - Dean Acheson

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1) | Dhimi Watch

Dems' Response to Cheney Gun Affair

Democrats are having a field day with Dick Cheney's hunting accident. Hillary is among those who are asking why it took so long for the information to become public, and implying that a coverup was in the works.

I have two things to say to the Democrats:

Vince Foster and Mary Jo Kopechne.

UPDATE: It seems Ted Kennedy has gotten into the spirit of things. The Man at GOP and the City has details.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:12 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

February 14, 2006

UN's International Code of Unacceptable Speech

This article by Joseph Klein on Canada Free Press is a must-read.

Last week, I reported on the move by China and its authoritarian-minded cohorts in the General Assembly to stop UN staffers from talking to the press without their approval about matters under investigation that might impact the "reputation" of the United Nations. While that is certainly bad enough if you believe in freedom of the press, it is nothing compared to what the Islamic fanatics are trying to ban--and using the United Nations to do it.

Don't believe me? Read it and judge for yourself. Our UN dollars at work.

h/t: GD

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | United Nations

Iran Says "Not Yet"

An Iranian official has been quoted as saying a crucial process to uranium enrichment has not yet begun. Which official? Who knows?

Iran has not yet started running centrifuges to produce enriched uranium, which the West suspects Tehran wants to make atomic weapons, a senior Iranian official told Reuters on Tuesday.

Iran, which says it wants to enrich uranium only to the low level needed for power stations, ordered the resumption uranium enrichment after being reported to the U.N. Security Council earlier this month.

"No work has been done on the centrifuges and no gas has been injected yet," the official said.

I don't know about you, but I feel a heck of a lot better after reading that. After all, the Iranians are so honorable. Why would they make anything up?

After all, they're only looking to create clean energy...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | World Affairs

And the Dems Wonder Why They Keep Losing

More playground antics from the Democrats:

THE DRUDGE REPORT has obtained an email sent Monday evening by Democratic National Committee (DNC) research director Devorah Adler that contains ten opposition research packets on potential 2008 GOP presidential contenders.

In one packet titled “Newt Gingrich: 08 Watch February 2006” a picture of the former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA) appears with --- him holding two full plates of food!

The quote underneath the Gingrich photo reads “In His Own Words: Gingrich’s Solution To Childhood Obesity: ‘Turn off the TV, cut the fatty diet and get exercise.’ [AP, 2/8/06]”

The ten Republicans picked by the Democrat Party include: Sen. George Allen (R-VA), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), Gingrich, Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R-NY), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Gov. George Pataki (R-NY) and Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA).

One Republican strategist who had seen the opposition research packets said: 'We should expect nothing less than name-calling and referring to one’s political opponents as ‘fat’ from Howard Dean’s Democrat Party.'

This goes right up there with "Yeeargh!" and "Bush is stupid/Bush is evil."

Real strategies? Real alternatives? Who needs 'em when you can say, "Nah nah nah nah nah!"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:34 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

New Caption Contest at The Right Place

Head on over to The Right Place for the latest caption contest...it's a good one, and the competition is fierce! I doubt my lowly entry will win, but you can't win if you don't play!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

February 13, 2006

Valley of the Wolves: A Hit in Turkey

What a surprise! The anti-American movie Valley of the Wolves, starring American has-beens Gary Busey and Billy Zane, is hot tamales in Turkey.

At one of Istanbul's biggest multiplex cinemas the blockbuster is showing on five separate screens and nearly all the seats are sold out. It's the same story across the country.

"I'm back to see it for the second time already," says one student, waiting impatiently outside Screen 10.

"It is anti-American, but we already know what they've done in Iraq. That's the reality. Now we can see it on screen."

Hooray! They can now see on screen what's really happening in Iraq. According to the movie, that's American soldiers having a shootout at a wedding party and bombing a mosque full of worshippers. And the doctor, played by Busey, sells organs harvested from Iraqis to Britain and America.

I can hardly wait until they release it stateside. Definitely a "full popcorn tub" feature.

This quote from a moviegoer kind of sums up the experience:

"If I see an American when I get out of here I feel like taking a hood and putting it over their head."

I'll bet when it premiers here, Air America will give away tickets. Hey, they need a gimmick to keep their paltry listenership, right?

billy zane.jpgbusey.jpg
Billy Zane and Gary Busey: Patriots dedicated to the bottom line.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:33 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Cheney's Hunting Accident: Much Ado About Nothing

You have no doubt heard, by now, that Dick Cheney went hunting over the weekend and accidentally shot his friend, Harry Whittington. Whittington is in stable condition.

Now the White House is being harshly criticized for not breaking the news instantly. The blogosphere is awhirl with conspiracy theories and tasteless comments and cheesy online games. One White House reporter even began shouting at spokesman Scott McClellan because he felt his questions weren't being taken seriously.


Hunting is a dangerous sport. Anything involving guns is dangerous. (No, I'm not a part of the gun control crowd.) When you take a gun and go out to shoot it, accidents are always a possibility. Cheney and any other hunter can tell you this. Heck, my brother-in-law can tell you this.

No one seems to care that Harry Whittington was injured. They only care that they can finally "get" Dick Cheney on something, and that they can "get" the White House on not releasing the news the moment they received it.

In the world of 24-hour news cycles and instant access, some cry conspiracy theory if they don't get the information when they believe they should have had it. Do people really think that this kind of thing could have been hushed up? So we found out a day later. Big deal.

I hate to tell you this, but I doubt criminal charges will be filed against Cheney or the White House. So get over yourselves, and wish Harry Whittington a speedy recovery.

Fun time: Who do you want Dick to take on a hunting trip with him? Rachel at Tinkerty Tonk is starting a list.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:19 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Politics

Al Gore's Most Recent Rant

It's hard to tell which former presidential figure is a bigger embarrassment to America: Jimmy Carter or Al Gore. Yes, I know Gore was never actually president, but he was vice president. And I know Jimmy Carter was only a cardboard cutout president...but I digress.

Yesterday, Al Gore saw fit to criticize our current government yet again on foreign shores. And not just any foreign shore, but Saudi Arabia.

Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed "terrible abuses" against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment.

Gore said Arabs had been "indiscriminately rounded up" and held in "unforgivable" conditions. The former vice president said the Bush administration was playing into al-Qaida's hands by routinely blocking Saudi visa applications.

"The thoughtless way in which visas are now handled, that is a mistake," Gore said during the Jiddah Economic Forum. "The worst thing we can possibly do is to cut off the channels of friendship and mutual understanding between Saudi Arabia and the United States."

Gore told the largely Saudi audience, many of them educated at U.S. universities, that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable."

"Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong," Gore said. "I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."

In other words, "Please like me and hate George W. Bush."

On paper, Saudi Arabia is a friend to the U.S. However, there have been noticable cracks in that facade. From WaPo in June of last year:

"We entered one of the companies' [offices], and found there an American infidel who looked like a director . . . When he turned to me, I shot him in the head, and his head exploded. We entered another office and found one infidel from South Africa, and our brother Hussein slit his throat. We asked Allah to accept [these acts of devotion] from us, and from him."

That's how Fawwaz bin Muhammad Nashami described one part of an attack last month in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, that killed 22 people. The terrorist commander, who escaped after the attack, was interviewed by Sawt al-Jihad, a journal sympathetic to al Qaeda. As translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute, the interview provides both a detailed account of the attack and a vivid glimpse into the minds of the jihadists who seek to overthrow the royal family of Saudi Arabia.


The Saudi government is in a "state of terminal denial and paralysis," according to Mai Yamani, a Saudi analyst based in London, interviewed by the Lebanon-based Daily Star.

"Termites of terrorism and violence are eating at the foundation of the state," said Yamani, an associate fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. Yamani says she has been barred from working in Saudi Arabia because of her writings.

Saudi leaders "have not shown a united front in dealing with security issues or the question of reform in the country," she said.

The government has few good options: "If they embark on reforms, they are accused of bowing to the Americans... If they don't do anything, even the moderates are going to throw themselves in the arms of the jihadists. If they try to curb the power of the religious police -- the Mutawa -- they will have a backlash."

Indeed, there are Saudi citizens who have answered the call to jihad against America and the West. So are we or aren't we wise to be a little more discriminatory as to who we let over our borders? What's wrong with being vigilant about expired visas and fishy green cards? And I'd like for Gore to be a little more specific when he describes conditions of people being detained as being "unforgivable." What's unforgivable, not having cable television?

Al Gore may seem like a child having a temper tantrum every time he opens his mouth in public these days. He's had a case of diaper rash ever since losing the 2000 election. But that's nothing compared to the damage he does to our current government's attempts at stopping another terrorist attack here at home. If, Heaven forbid, there is another attack perpetrated by a Saudi citizen, I can hear Al Gore now:

"Why wasn't the Bush administration more vigilant in taking precautions against expired visas and green cards that weren't in order?"

Let's hope he never has the occasion to say it. But if the opportunity arises, don't put it past him.

Brainster has more, as do Michelle Malkin and Captain Ed.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:35 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

February 11, 2006

Winter Olympics 2006

Who watched the opening ceremonies of the Olympics last night?

I watched most of the teams come in, but lost interest during the entertainment portion. What is it with so many countries who host the Olympics and their tendencies to use so much "artsy fartsy" stuff during the opening? I mean, floating sun and moon balloons with trapeze artists hanging below them really did nothing for me. I turned on a rerun of Invader Zim on Nickelodeon.

During the entrance of the teams, I was pleased that the U.S. athletes weren't booed (if they were, it wasn't very loud because I couldn't hear it). I was annoyed when I saw one chick (Beth somthing, a skiier or snowboarder, I think) on her CELL PHONE! It's the Olympics, for crying out loud! Put down your phone and enjoy the moment technology-free. How ridiculous was that?

Part of the reason I tuned out after the teams was the inane commentary by the good folks at NBC. It would be much more pleasant to simply watch what was going on without them talking for the sake of talking. I didn't mind the commentary when the teams were arriving, but after that, I wish they had just shut up and let us enjoy the show.

My favorite sport is ice skating, so I'll do my best to watch that. Other than that, I'll catch what I can.

Here's hoping America has a good showing this year!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:52 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Entertainment

February 10, 2006

Rowland a Freebird

Former Connecticut governor John Rowland has been released from jail after serving more than 10 months on corruption charges. His lieutenant governor, Jodi Rell, took over when he was ousted in 2004 and is running for re-election this year.

He now gets fitted with an electronic bracelet for four months (a la Martha Stewart), and has to perform 300 hours of community service.

How the mighty have fallen. I thought Rowland was a good governor and had a bright future. He spoiled it by getting greedy and having people do him favors. It's too bad.

I often wonder what people like him do after they are in prison for high-profile cases. It's not like Martha Stewart, who had a media and retail empire to return to. Politics were his life. What's next?

Still, he has served his time and I wish him the best.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:19 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Connecticut Issues

Border Issues

With all of the focus on Muslim rioting over cartoons and our thoughts of support for Denmark, it's sometimes easy to forget what's going on here at home.

At the 33rd annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Senator John Cronyn said that our border with Mexico needs to be treated as a national security issue. From the Washington Times:

"We are proud to be a nation of immigrants ... but we are also a nation of laws," said Mr. Cornyn, warning that other nations, including Mexico, must "have respect for this country's laws and our nation's sovereignty."

He said human traffickers, drug smugglers and criminal gangs from Brazil, China and other countries are "using Mexico as a point of entry into the United States."

Mr. Cornyn, whose appearance capped a morning of speeches and panel discussions devoted to border issues, drew applause when he said he would push for a Senate bill to provide "a comprehensive solution" to U.S. immigration problems "that does not include amnesty."

Absolutely. But just you wait for the accusations of bigotry and racism to come flying.

In a related article from the WTimes, Department of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff is assigning nearly $1 billion of next year's budget toward more Border Patrol agents, electronic surveillance and other security measures.

"There has been an over-100 percent increase in the last fiscal year in border violence aimed at our Border Patrol agents, and that ranges from gunshots fired across the border to rocks being thrown, sometimes flaming rocks, and let me tell you, rockings are serious," Mr. Chertoff said at a press conference in Washington.

"We are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior ... if they think they're going to back us down or chase us away, the answer to that is no. Our Border Patrol is properly trained. They have rules of engagement. They are entitled to defend themselves. They will defend themselves. We will support them in applying these rules of engagement," he said.

Border Patrol Chief David V. Aguilar noted there had already been 192 assaults on his agents since the start of the new fiscal year in October.

This nonsense needs to stop. Not only are these people violating our laws, but some are bringing drugs and other contraband into the country. Let's not forget too, that al Qaeda operatives have a golden opportunity to slip through our southern border if holes continue to be left unplugged.

Wake up and smell the coffee, people!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Homeland Security

February 09, 2006

Child Rape Idiocy at Huffpo

I guess teenage boys having sex with adult women shouldn't be considered taboo, especially if the woman is a former model, and giving the woman jail time is as bad as going to war. All in a day's work over at Huffpo. Go to Brainster for details.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Shocker: Hezbollah Encouraging Cartoon Protests

From AP via Yahoo:

In Beirut, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah urged Muslims worldwide to keep demonstrating until there is an apology over the drawings and Europe passes laws forbidding insults to the prophet.

The head of the guerrilla group, which is backed by Iran and Syria, spoke before a mass Ashoura procession. Whipping up the crowds on the most solemn day for Shiites worldwide, Nasrallah declared:

"Defending the prophet should continue all over the world. Let Condoleezza Rice and Bush and all the tyrants shut up. We are an Islamic nation that cannot tolerate, be silent or be lax when they insult our prophet and sanctities."

"We will uphold the messenger of God not only by our voices but also by our blood," he told the crowds, estimated by organizers at about 700,000. Police had no final estimates but said the figure was likely to be even higher.

What a load of hooey. First they want apologies, then they want laws passed that will forbid offending Islam. Perhaps if they are worried about offending the sanctity of religion, they won't mind if laws are passed worldwide against offending Christianity and Judaism. Oh, wait, never mind...it's the "free speech for me but not for thee" mantra.

Kind of like the American left. Who says the left has no influence?

And tyrants? Who are they to discuss tyrannical actions when they are demanding that we bend to their will?

The key phrase that we should be focusing on here is the phrase "Islamic nation." Not "Islamic religion," but "nation." Radical Islamists believe that the entire world should not only convert to Islam, but that Islam should rule every facet of our every day lives using Sharia law. And those who do not convert will be annhialated. (Kind of like the Borg of Star Trek: "You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.") They won't stop on their own...we need to stop them.

The idiocy continues; stay tuned.

h/t: GD

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

America "Leads" Europe

As a former presidential candidate who wanted America to make amends with Europe, John Kerry should be proud that we have regained our status as leader of Europe. At least, that's what some protesters in Afghanistan think:

Police killed four people Wednesday as Afghans enraged over drawings of the Prophet Muhammad marched on a U.S. military base in a volatile southern province, directing their anger not against Europe but America.

The U.S. base was targeted because the United States "is the leader of Europe and the leading infidel in the world," said Sher Mohammed, a 40-year-old farmer who suffered a gunshot wound while taking part in the demonstration in the city of Qalat.

"They are all the enemy of Islam. They are occupiers in our country and must be driven out," Mohammed said.

Poor Sher Mohammed must be yearning for the days of the Taliban, where men were king and women were cowed.

Still, I know I'm pretty excited, knowing we're the "leading infidel" in the world as we know it. What a great T-shirt or bumper sticker slogan. "America: Infidel Leader of the World"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

February 08, 2006

Dodd: This Has Not Been a Very Good Two Months

An excerpt from the NYTimes:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 — Democrats are heading into this year's elections in a position weaker than they had hoped for, party leaders say, stirring concern that they are letting pass an opportunity to exploit what they see as widespread Republican vulnerabilities.

In interviews, senior Democrats said they were optimistic about significant gains in Congressional elections this fall, calling this the best political environment they have faced since President Bush took office.

But Democrats described a growing sense that they had failed to take full advantage of the troubles that have plagued Mr. Bush and his party since the middle of last year, driving down the president's approval ratings, opening divisions among Republicans in Congress over policy and potentially putting control of the House and Senate into play in November.

Asked to describe the health of the Democratic Party, Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said: "A lot worse than it should be. This has not been a very good two months."

"We seem to be losing our voice when it comes to the basic things people worry about," Mr. Dodd

Like national security?

You know, the Dems are going about this all wrong. Rather than worry about how they are not exploiting perceived weaknesses in the Republican party, they should be coming up with their own plans for how to lead our country. Don't like how President Bush and the GOP are doing it? Then come up with real alternatives.

Instead of concrete answers, Americans get this from people like Howard Dean:

"If we get back in power, we are going to make a real effort to go get Osama Bin Laden. We are not going to let him lollygag around for four years after the September 11th attack. And also we are going to equip our troops with the body armor that they deserve in order to fight this war. We need to do a better job on defense than this President is doing."

How? He doesn't say how, and that's the problem. All rhetoric and no substance. That's todays' Democratic party in a nutshell.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

February 07, 2006

All Quiet on the Hollywood Front

With Muslims worldwide doing their best to stifle free speech with riots and death threats over a series of drawings of Muhammed, the question begs to be asked: Where are our beloved celebrities who are the first to complain if they think their free speech rights are being violated? The following are all celebrities who have talked about the importance of free speech (and some said they were "afraid" to speak their minds):

Martin Sheen
Susan Sarandon
Tim Robbins
Sheryl Crow
Michael Moore

As far as I know, some of these people may have been subject to a negative article and a boycott or two, but none had their homes burned down or received death threats.

Their silence is deafening. And telling. When the shoe is on the other foot, it doesn't seem to squeak as much. I guess this also means there isn't a movie about the riots and what sparked them in the works.

Oh, and a side note: no comment from the ACLU?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:28 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Celebrity

Cheap Shots: Politicizing the Funeral of Coretta Scott King

The memorial service of the wife of one of our great civil rights leaders, who was herself a pillar in the civil rights movement, was hijacked by those who have no shame when it comes to shilling for support of their various agendas. From Drudge:

Today's memorial service for civil rights activist Coretta Scott King -- billed as a "celebration" of her life -- turned suddenly political as one former president took a swipe at the current president, who was also lashed by an outspoken black pastor!

The outspoken Rev. Joseph Lowery, co-founder of Southern Christian Leadership Conference, ripped into President Bush during his short speech, ostensibly about the wife of Martin Luther King Jr.

"She extended Martin's message against poverty, racism and war. She deplored the terror inflicted by our smart bombs on missions way afar. We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction over there," Lowery said.

The mostly black crowd applauded, then rose to its feet and cheered in a two-minute-long standing ovation.

A closed-circuit television in the mega-church outside Atlanta showed the president smiling uncomfortably.

"But Coretta knew, and we know," Lowery continued, "That there are weapons of misdirection right down here," he said, nodding his head toward the row of presidents past and present. "For war, billions more, but no more for the poor!" The crowd again cheered wildly.

Former President Jimmy Carter later swung at Bush as well, not once but twice. As he talked about the Kings, he said: "It was difficult for them then personally with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretaps." The crowd cheered as Bush, under fire for a secret wiretapping program he ordered after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, again smiled weakly.

Later, Carter said Hurricane Katrina showed that all are not yet equal in America. Some black leaders have blamed Bush for the poor federal response, and rapper Kayne West said that Bush "hates" black people.

Have these people no shame? To use Coretta Scott King's memorial service as a soapbox? And to top it all off, to do it with President Bush sitting right there? He took the time out of his busy schedule to pay his respects to a woman who was respected and admired for her tireless efforts for civil rights. For him to be insulted when he had no chance to rebut their claims is both childish and outrageous. As president, he expects criticism, even harsh criticism. But this was neither the time nor the place.

Lowery and Carter should both be ashamed of themselves...but I doubt they are.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:30 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack (1) | Just Plain Stupid

Getting Ready for 2008

For someone who constantly denies plans to run for prez in 2008, Hillary seems to be doing a lot to shore up her image with the public. Her latest stunt? Trying to look like someone with a strong marriage and dedicated family.

The state of Bill and Hillary Clinton's union is apparently strong - at least judging by the mongo diamond that Hillary was sporting on her ring finger yesterday.

Sources say the former President quietly gave the iceberg-sized bling - thought to exceed 3 carats - to his wife months ago, in advance of their 30th wedding anniversary on Oct. 11 last year.

Like that ring is going to make us forget all that (publicly) transpired between Bill and his extramarital amours.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:10 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Moscow Museum Joins Cartoon Fatwah

Add Yury Samodurov in Moscow to the list of infidels who must be punished severly:

MOSCOW, Feb. 7 (UPI) -- A Moscow museum has announced it will exhibit the entire series of cartoons of Mohammed that have caused riots throughout the Islamic world.

Yury Samodurov, director of the Sakharov Museum and Public Center, said on Russian television that the center was ready to organize a public exhibition of the cartoons satirizing the founder of Islam that originally were published in a Danish newspaper, Pravda.ru reported Monday.

"We must show the whole world that Russia goes along with Europe, that the freedom of expression is much more important for us than the dogmas of religious fanatics," Samodurov said.

The exhibition reportedly will open in March. Lawyer Yury Shmidt has said he will invite French philosopher Andre Glucksmann and French novelist Michel Houellebecq to the opening ceremony to read lectures about the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.

In 2003 the Sakharov Museum outraged many Russian Orthodox believers with the art exhibit "Be Careful -- Religion," which many felt was insulting to their beliefs.

Again, I don't think we should go out of our way to insult anyone's religious beliefs. However, we should not allow bully boy tactics to stifle our freedom of speech and expression.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

February 06, 2006

Cartoon Fatwah vs. Piss Christ

From Frontpage Magazine, a must-read article:

Though some criticisms of Piss Christ, and the man who created it, were intemperate, Serrano's art was never forced underground, nor was his life seriously threatened, nor was he forced into hiding a la Salman Rushdie or placed in protective custody. Violence-prone packs of Christians did not roam the streets of Paris, or London, or Frankfurt, or Madrid, or New York calling for the head of Piss Christ's creator.

Read the whole thing here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1) | Dhimi Watch

George W. Bush is Not a Dolt

This from Davids Medienkritik, a great blog from Germany that I recently added to my blogroll. The post is entitled The Secrets of the American Success Story.

Of course, President Bush isn't a dolt - but other than that, I have to agree with much of what Anatole Kaletsky writes in this Times article. He addresses a number of reasons for America's greatness - almost all of which are a mystery for the German media:

The President is a dolt - so how can America be such a success story?

(...) For the past five years, America has been led by a president who is clearly not up to the job — a man who is not just inarticulate, but lacking in judgment, intelligence, integrity, charisma or staying power. Yet America as a nation seems to be stronger, more prosperous and self-confident than ever. (...)

Why does America’s prosperity and self-confidence seem to bear so little relationship to the competence of its government? The obvious answer is that America, founded on a libertarian theory of minimal government, has always had low expectations of politicians. In America, it is not just business that thrives independently of government, perhaps even in spite of government. The same is also true of other areas of excellence which in Britain are considered quintessentially in the public domain — higher education, leading-edge science, culture and academic research. Because Americans expect so little of their government, they are rarely disappointed. They do not slump into German-style angst when their governments fail to find solutions to the nation’s problems.

Read the whole post, and the accompanying comments.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | International

Quick Monday Links

Here are some posts by some great folks you may find worthy of your time today:

In Canada, clean needles and government reimbursements for Viagra are the norm. What's next on the "healthcare" agenda there? Moonbattery has the goods.

PCD at Iowa Voice tells us that Wikipedia is banning politicians and their staffers from editing posts to the online "encyclopedia."

Reverse_Vampyr highlights a post from a new blog regarding the crisis between the Islam and non-Islam world. The post makes some good points, but be sure to read the comment section as well for some much-needed clarification.

Finally, is it smart for Republicans to toss Lincoln Chaffee (RINO, RI) to the wolves? Pat at Brainster explores the issue.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Arlen Specter Not Sure of Bush Administration Motives

RINO Arlen Specter has a hard time understanding why the Bush Administration authorized wiretaps and other electronic monitoring of communications between known or suspected al Qaeda operatives and people here in the United States.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has not adequately justified why the Bush administration failed to seek court approval for domestic surveillance, said the senator in charge of a hearing Monday on the program.

Sen. Arlen Specter said Sunday he believes that President Bush violated a 1978 law specifically calling for a secret court to consider and approve such monitoring. The Pennsylvania Republican branded Gonzales' explanations to date as "strained and unrealistic."

The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, predicted that the committee would have to subpoena the administration to obtain internal documents that lay out the legal basis for the program. Justice Department officials have declined, citing in part the confidential nature of legal communications.

Specter said he would have his committee consider such a step if the attorney general does not go beyond his prior statements and prepared testimony that the spying is legal, necessary and narrowly defined to fight terrorists.

Hey Arlen...here's a hint:


Now take that $160,000 plus that we pay you and buy yourself a clue.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:37 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | RINO Watch

February 03, 2006

This Is Cartoon Fatwah

OK, the call has gone out and I am responding. Here, for your viewing pleasure, are the cartoons that Muslims in Europe and elsewhere are calling for blood over. This is part of the blogburst being sponsored by Michelle Malkin and others.

A disclaimer: I do not think that it's "fun" to offend the religious sensibilities of others. I do not go out of my way to do so. (Think "Piss Christ" and the lovely painting of the Madonna covered in elephant dung, both of which I find offensive myself.) Perhaps these cartoons are in bad taste. But, they're out there. Had Muslims not made such a stink, I doubt many outside of Denmark would have even heard of them, let alone seen them. But they've crossed the line in threatening death to the cartoonists and other kinds of violence. This is not the way civilized people behave. The so-called Religion of Peace is not exactly making a case for that moniker. Where are the moderate Muslims we keep hearing about? Why aren't they protesting this outrageous behavior? Because they are either afraid or they silently agree with them. The free world comes with a price, and part of that price is the right to offend someone else. It's not right, but it happens. And we have to act like adults and deal with it in an adult manner.

Issuing fatwahs is not the way.

Without further ado, the cartoons. Click on each one for a larger view.

islm_cartoon_1.jpg islm_cartoon_2.jpg islm_cartoon_3.jpg islm_cartoon_4.jpg islm_cartoon_5.gif islm_cartoon_6.jpg islm_cartoon_7.jpg islm_cartoon_8.jpg islm_cartoon_9.jpg islm_cartoon_10.jpg islm_cartoon_11.jpg islm_cartoon_12.jpg

I'm curious, too, as to why Michael Moore hasn't said anything about this. He compared the insurgents (read: Islamic terrorists) in Iraq to America's Minutemen. Does he have an opinion? Or is he too busy tooting his horn about his upcoming mockumentary on American healthcare (and promising bit parts to people who offer dirt on healthcare institutions).

Just wondering...


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:57 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (1) | Dhimi Watch

Looking for Accurate World News? It's Al-Jazeera!

According to this article in the Guardian UK, everyone's favorite leftwing newspaper overseas, the US does a terrible job in reporting international news, and al-Jazeera is poised to take over the void.

The US media reached an "all-time low" in failing to reflect public opinion and Americans' desire for trusted information, instead acting as a "cheerleader" for war, said Amy Goodman, the executive producer and host of US TV and radio news show Democracy Now!, at a news forum organised by al-Jazeera.

Well there's a surprise! And, if you're interested in Goodman's political leanings, check out the Democracy Now! website.

"The US media have done a shameful job of reporting on the Arab world. With the rise of al-Jazeera and independent media there is a chance for the Arab media to react back, but instead what we get is a clash," said Ethan Zuckerman, the co-founder of Global Voices Online and research fellow at the Berkman Centre for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School.

"I would urge everyone involved with new Arabic media not just to report on this [Arabic] world more fairly and accurately, but to report on the whole world more fairly and accurately. I challenge al-Jazeera and the new Arabic media players to do a better job that the US in covering the rest of the world," he said.

Here's a sampling of how Zuckerman really feels about al-Jazeera. Shall we give him a set of pom poms and a megaphone?

Ms Goodman said in the run-up to the Iraq war a study of NBC, CBS, ABC and PBS newscasts over a fortnight recorded 393 interviews on the conflict, of which only three reported the anti-war movement.

"This is a media cheerleading for war and does not represent mainstream opinion in the US," she added.

Ms Goodman said she believed the policy of embedding reporters with coalition forces was "a total failure for independent journalism ... western audiences need to see the other side of the story - from communities and hospitals".

"If people in the US had a true picture of war - dead babies, women with their legs blown off, dead and dying soldiers - they would say 'no'," she said.

"There is nothing more important than the media - it is more powerful than any bomb or missile and we have to take it back ... we need a media that is independent and honestly showing us the images, the hell, ugliness and brutality of war, not selling us war."

That's really rich. The MSM rarely talks about any of the advances in the war, none of the good things the troops are accomplishing. Their favorite topic is the death toll (but not of the terrorists). And, since when don't they report on the anti-war stance? Maybe they don't have to because they espouse it in their reporting about the war.

Not all journalists are embedded. If I were a journalist, I would rather be embedded with troops who would be there to protect me if need be, rather than run the risk of kidnapping and beheading by terrorists.

The whole concept of an unbiased al-Jazeera is the biggest joke since the MSM worldwide called itself unbiased. Let's face it, folks, all media has a slant whether it's admitted or not. As humans, it is very difficult for journalists to keep feelings and beliefs out of their reports.

Now if the media were to hire reporters of different ideologies, then the public might get a more balanced view of world events. But with a high percentage of journalists describing their own views as liberal, that's not reassuring.

For more on al-Jazeera, click here .

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | International

February 02, 2006

New Poll in Sidebar

Okay, the poll in my sidebar has been there waaay too long. I kept meaning to post results and change it, but never seemed to have the time to get around to it. Until now...

Here are the results (there were many ties) to: Which celebrity would you like to see move out of the U.S.?

Michael Moore - 31
Barbra Streisand/Jane Fonda - 24
Alec Baldwin - 20 votes
Al Franken/Katie Couric - 19
George Clooney - 17
Tim Robbins - 16
Susan Sarandon/Martin Sheen - 15
Paris Hilton - 14
Tom Cruise/Bruce Springsteen - 13
Britney Spears/John Cusack/Leonardo DiCaprio - 11
Donald Sutherland/Ben Affleck/Julia Roberts/Kate Hudson - 10

Michael Moore ought to be pleased; he loves to be noticed. I guess Barbra and Jane aren't as relevant as they think they are.

Thanks to all who participated. My new question (which I will try to leave up for only a couple of weeks) is: What is the most pressing issue facing the nation today?

Have fun!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:18 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Will & Grace VS Christianity?

A conservative group is upset about an upcoming Will & Grace episode in which Britney Spears guest stars as a Christian television co-host.

AFA pointed to wire reports saying that Britney Spears will make a guest appearance on the April 13 "Will and Grace," playing a conservative Christian sidekick to Sean Hayes' homosexual character, Jack.

When Jack's fictional TV network, Out TV, is bought by a Christian TV network, Spears hosts a cooking segment called "Cruci-fixin's."

How to combat this outrage? Flag burnings? Fatwahs? Armed gunmen storming the NBC headquarters? Er, no.

"Call your local NBC affiliate and ask them not to air the April 13 episode of "Will and Grace," AFA said in a message to supporters.

The group also wants concerned Christians to send a letter of complaint to NBC Chairman Bob Wright, and to spread the word about NBC's latest insult in church bulletins and newsletters.

Many progressive thinkers will pooh-pooh those who are upset about this and other television shows that openly mock Christianity. They will say (correctly) that such shows are protected under the First Amendment. Please take note, however, that in a democratic society we have the right to boycott and protest using peaceful means. Protesting the offensiveness of something is not the same thing as proposing an official ban.

Perhaps the Muslims who are upset about cartoons depicting Muhammed would do well to keep the above protest tactics in mind.

Oh, and do you think that Bill Clinton will be coming to the aid of offended Christians the way he came to the aid of offended Muslims?

"None of us are totally free of stereotypes about people of different races, different ethnic groups, and different religions ... there was this appalling example in northern Europe, in Denmark ... these totally outrageous cartoons against Islam," [Clinton] said.

I wouldn't bet the ranch.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:48 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Culture

UPDATE to Tale of Two Cartoons

Michelle Malkin reports that the NYSun printed the cartoons in today's print edition. I'm glad to see I was wrong. Will the NYTimes be far behind? Hmmm...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | MSM

A Tale of Two Cartoons

Welcome Michelle Malkin readers!

By now, anyone who doesn't live under the proverbial rock knows that all of Europe is in an uproar regarding cartoons published in a Danish newspaper last fall depicting unflattering portraits of Mohammed. Even if they were respectful it would be considered blasphemy by Muslims, because any depiction of Mohammed is forbidden according to Muslim tradition. Muslims are in an uproar, protesting, lighting Danish flags on fire, and calling for a boycott of Denmark.

Now, European papers are printing the cartoons in a show of solidarity, namely, democratic societies and freedom of the press. (All American ideals, I might add.) Some are asking when American papers will print the cartoons.

I don't think they will. The mainstream American media has been kowtowing to Muslims and other special interest groups for years. If it's anti-Western civilization or anti-America, then the MSM is very respectful of it. They wouldn't dream of offending anyone, as that's how progressive-type folks behave.

Unless, of course, it's the U.S. military and/or the Bush administration. The Washington Post published an editorial cartoon by Tom Toles that was so offensive in its depiction of a wounded soldier being "attended to" by "Dr." Rumsfeld, the Joint Chiefs of Staff actually wrote a letter to the editor expressing their disappointment. So far, there has been no official comment from the Post, although they printed the letter.

Some on the left will probably cry that the Joint Chiefs are trying to subvert the First Amendment rights of Toles and the Washington Post. That, of course, is ridiculous. They wrote a letter to tell the Post how they felt about the cartoon. They didn't have the newspaper offices stormed by soldiers or special agents and its staff taken away in chains while the building was set on fire.

So there you have it. American papers aren't afraid to print controversial cartoons that feature our military in unflattering circumstances. They aren't afraid to offend our troops and their families. Will they take up the cause of Denmark and show solidarity with their European counterparts in the name of free speech? Will they risk upsetting Muslims?

I doubt it. But I could be wrong.

Michelle Malkin and Tammy Bruce have more.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:52 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack (2) | MSM

February 01, 2006

Celebrating Black History Month with Mean Ol' Meany

My friend Two Dogs over at Mean Ol' Meany celebrates his one year blogiversary today (congratulations!), and has an interesting post on Black History Month that is sure to get someone's knickers in a twist. Here's just a sampling:

Let's think about this a bit. Doesn't it make sense to study Dr. King's work alongside the study of the Vietnam War? Doesn't it make sense to handle the studies about slavery alongside the founding of this country, the Revolutionary War, the writing of the Constitution, and the Civil War? Doesn't it make sense to study the first black Supreme Court Justice at the same time as you study exactly how stupid the welfare programs of Lyndon Johnson were? And doesn't it make sense to look into the Tuskegee Airmen at the same time that you are studying D-Day?

If you remove these events from history's time line and push them into one month of study, you disrupt the flow of history in its context. Kids will never know that the Montgomery Bus Boycott happened when we were at war with Korea. They will never understand that it took thirteen long years from the point of the Emancipation Proclamation until a Black man could vote. They will not understand that even though Black men were given the right to vote by the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870, Black women were still not given that right until the same time that White women were allowed to vote. (it was called Women's Suffrage and ended with the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, in case you were wondering).

He makes a lot of sense. However, I am sure that some readers out there will be quick to say he's a racist and should be burned at the stake (especially after reading his opening). I understand that black history, such as it is, was either ignored or glossed over for a long time -- too long. However, in rectifying it, have we gone too far in the other direction? Aren't we all Americans, no matter what our color?

As a special treat, Two Dogs has reworked all 12 months of the year to reflect the history of special interest minority groups.

So head on over. If you are easily offended, fair warning. However, under much of the sarcasm and humor is common sense...which is what I love about Two Dogs.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:10 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Culture

SOTU: Arianna Not Impressed

Some of Arianna Huffington's reactions to last night's SOTU:

17 mentions of "freedom" from the guy obsessed with assaulting it here at home.

Er, yeah, right. The fact that your blog has not been shut down because you disagree with the current administration notwithstanding, of course.

Did you notice the president had on a purple tie tonight? Very subtle. He could have come up with a purple finger or maybe covered head-to-toe in purple paint.

Very grown-up of you Arianna. Perhaps if it had been John Kerry up there he might have worn a pink tie to show his support of folks like Code Pink? I'll be honest, I didn't even notice the color of his tie.

One of the most heart-warming moments came when Joe Lieberman kissed W. even longer than he did at last year's speech. A salute to "Brokeback Mountain," I guess.

The representatives of the party of tolerance, who claim Republicans are homophobes, ride again. And of course, as Lieberman is now persona non grata in his own party, he is smeared right along with Bush.

I love that the biggest applause line of the night was an unintentional one, the spontaneous clapping that followed his mention of the fact that Congress hadn't acted on his Social Security plan. Bush looked flustered, unsure how to respond. Sitting next to me was actor (and HuffPost blogger) Paul Hipp who said: "Next time I want a president who can improv!"

It figures that her favorite part is where the Dems, who have no ideas of their own, pat themselves on the back for blocking SS egislation that, during the Clinton era, was supposedly important and needed to be looked into. And Bush wasn't exactly flustered. Respond? He didn't have to respond. He was the one giving a prepared speech. This was not a debate, and the Dems just acted like a bunch of spoiled brats.

I can't stomach anymore. Click here to read the rest if you care to. When it comes to snarky, nothing beats a disgruntled Dem supporter.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:28 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Pundits

Soldiers Ask: What's the Big Deal?

From UPI:

The American media stood up and took notice when an improvised explosive device grievously injured an ABC News crew Sunday.

In Iraq, and throughout the military, there is sympathy and concern for anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt, but there is also this question:

"Why do you think this is such a huge story?" wrote an officer stationed in Baqubah, Iraq, Monday via e-mail. "It's a bit stunning to us over here how absolutely dominant the story is on every network and front page. I mean, you'd think we lost the entire 1st Marine Division or something.

"There's a lot of grumbling from guys at all ranks about it. That's a really impolite and impolitic thing to say ... but it's what you would hear over here."

To be honest, I was wondering the same thing...but, not being in the line of fire myself, my saying it didn't exactly have the same kind of impact.

"The point that is currently being made (is that) that press folks are more important than mere military folks," a senior military officer told UPI Tuesday.

The unavoidable consequence of war is this: People are savagely wounded and killed. Soldiers in Iraq watching the coverage on satellite television and reading the news on the Internet are getting the impression that the press has only just discovered this fact.

It's not quite as simple as that, of course. Military personnel often express frustration that the media harps on military casualty reports at the expense of what they consider their successes in Iraq.

Exactly. But I hope the military isn't looking for that to change anytime soon.

"It's just a bit frustrating to see something so dramatized that happens every day to some 20-year-old American -- or worse to 10, 30-year-old Iraqi soldiers or cops alongside us. Some of the stories don't even mention the Iraqi casualties in this attack, as if they're meaningless," wrote the officer in Baqubah.

Kathryn Montgomery, a professor at American University's School of Communication, has been thinking the same thing.

"When you see the kind of coverage this story is getting it draws attention to the lack of coverage that hundreds of cases don't get," said Montgomery.

Having a personal connection to someone injured or killed on the battlefield is a relatively rare experience for journalists. Fewer than 1 percent of the U.S. population is part of the military; very few reporters have served. The war is comfortably distant, until a fellow journalist is affected. It could have been me, we think. The full weight of war is hard to comprehend until it happens to you, or someone you know, or someone like you.

Yep. And how many elite journalists hang around with ordinary soldiers back home? I don't think there's much in the way of empathy between the media and the military. Just ask Joel Stein.

Woodruff and his crew knew the risks. I do wish them a full recovery. But it would be nice if the media took a step back to think about how skewed their coverage has been and continues to be.

I won't hold my breath, though.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:01 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Your 15 Minutes are Up...Go Home Already!

Of course I'm talking about Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested last night as she sat in the gallery waiting for the State of the Union address.

Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a fallen soldier in Iraq who reinvigorated the anti-war movement, was arrested and removed from the House gallery Tuesday night just before President Bush's State of the Union address, a police spokeswoman said.

Sheehan, who was invited to attend the speech by Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D- Calif., was charged with demonstrating in the Capitol building, said Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider. The charge was later changed to unlawful conduct, Schneider said. Both charges are misdemeanors.

Sheehan was taken in handcuffs from the Capitol to police headquarters a few blocks away. Her case was processed as Bush spoke.

And she didn't get a chance to model the anti-war T-shirt that she had donned especially for the occasion. She must be crushed.

Actually, what really must have gotten her goat was what happened -- or rather what didn't happen -- during the demonstration that got her arrested.

Sheehan, wrapped in a bright pink scarf against the cold, protested outside the White House with a handful of others before heading to the Capitol Tuesday evening. There were no cameras around, but the small band faced the executive mansion and repeatedly shouted, "You're evicted! Get out of our house!"

Only a few folks showed up to protest and no one took pictures. After being feted by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela last week, it must have been heartbreaking to come home and find out you're staler than yesterday's bread.

Ah, the ups and downs of celebrity.

Correction: The way the above article was written confused me. She WAS arrested for the t-shirt, not for the earlier demonstration. My apologies.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:23 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

    ENDORSEMENTS "Your stupid requirements for commenting, whatever they are, mean I'll not read you again." ~ "Duke Martin", Oraculations
    "One of the worst sites I've read." ~ Frank A. Niedospial