• 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

March 31, 2006

This is America, Not Mexico

From yesterday's Washington Times editorial page:

In 1907, during one of the great immigration waves, President Teddy Roosevelt said that the immigrant who comes here "in good faith ... shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin." However, he added, "We have room but for one flag, the American flag."

Words well worth recalling as we noticed what student protesters decided to hoist up their high school flagpole while ostensibly demonstrating against immigration reform. In Spanish this is called reconquista, the reconquering of Mexican land lost during the Mexican-American war (1846-48), and its appearance in Los Angeles this week adds a dark dimension to the entire immigration debate.

In contrast to Mexican immigrants, those who emigrated to America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries came mostly from countries -- Ireland, Poland, Italy, Bohemia, Germany and Greece -- that had little if any significant historical dealings with the United States. Nearly all had never had colonial possessions in America, nor had lost territory on the continent in war. Their citizens emigrated because they were inspired by hopes for a new and better life, not redress for past indignities. In time they became Americans.

Something entirely different motivates the Hispanic radicals. Their inspiration is anti-Americanism, which they cheerfully articulate in banners proclaiming "This is our continent, not yours!" They claim citizenship, or at least the benefits of citizenship, to be theirs by right, rather than something to be earned. And their ultimate fantasy is no different than the radical Muslim immigrants living in the slums outside Paris: To retake what they think was formerly their ancestors' land, if not in name then in numbers. Tragically, they are able to dupe idealistic students into advancing their cause by masking their true intentions behind the facade of ethnic pride or civil rights. Nothing is more un-American, especially for those requesting American citizenship.

We acknowledge that a majority of protesters gathering in Los Angeles and San Diego this week do not believe in the reconquista agenda. Their disagreement is with Congress, not America. But by accepting radicals into their ranks, by allowing students to desecrate the American flag, they have given tacit approval of the reconquista message. If the leaders of the Latino community wish to bring public opinion to their side, they must condemn these verbal and symbolic calls for reconquest.

Nothing else needs to be said.

Hat tip: GD

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:37 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

The New French Revolution


From Bokbluster

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

Mistakes Made, News At 11

Why is this news?

BLACKBURN (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accepted on Friday the United States had probably made thousands of errors in Iraq but defended the overall strategy of removing Saddam Hussein.

Surprised? You shouldn't be. Of course mistakes were made. Mistakes are made in every war. Our government and our military do not have the luxury of 20/20 hindsight when making daily decisions.

Just more grist for the anti-war gristmill.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 30, 2006

Hillary's Makeover: Beauty Queen or Clown?

Lowell Ponte writes about Hillary's political metamorphosis on Front Page Magazine today.

“This bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself,” said Senator Hillary Clinton last week. She was criticizing legislation that would make felons of those who illegally cross America’s borders and their accomplices. “It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scripture.”

A year earlier, however, the junior Senator from New York preached a different sermon.

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants,” Ms. Clinton told an interviewer on New York City’s WABC Radio. “Clearly, we have to make some tough decisions as a country, and one of them ought to be coming up with a much better entry-and-exit system so that if we’re going to let people in for the work that otherwise would not be done, let’s have a system that keeps track of them….at least a visa ID, some kind of entry-and-exit ID.…[W]e might have to move towards an ID system even for citizens.”

“People have to stop employing illegal immigrants,” Senator Clinton told the surprised WABC interviewer.

Whatever way the wind is perceived to be blowing, Hillary is a dutiful windsock. And she has plenty of monetary support. But will that support be enough?

Read the entire article for more. Ponte makes some astute observations, and Republicans would do well not to pooh-pooh Hillary's chances.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 29, 2006

How the Dems Will Catch Bin Laden

The DemoPrats have made a promise (that I'm sure they will keep) to eliminate Osama bin Laden. Here are some of the strategies they've come up with:

*They'll create giant pieces of flypaper and put them out in various places in the Middle East where bin Laden is thought to possibly be hiding out. Then, when bin Laden is out for his early morning constitutional, he'll stumble upon a piece of the paper and stick, unable to flee when U.N. "peacekeepers" come to take him away.

*Cindy Sheehan, who earlier this year met with Venezuelan president/dictator Hugo Chavez, has been recruited to have a similar hug-fest with bin Laden. The opportunity to meet with an ardent anti-war activist and big name Bush hater will surely draw bin Laden out of his cave.

*In exchange for his peaceful surrender, bin Laden has been promised a blog on the Huffington Post and his own show on Air America. It hasn't been decided who will be dumped, Al Franken or Janeane Garofalo.

*More special forces will be recruited to flush bin Laden out. However, to appease extreme left voters, they will be armed with Super Soakers and commanded by Ramsey Clarke and John Murtha.

Believe me, we'll have bin Laden in jail in no time! Take that, President Bush!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:23 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

Connecticut Senators on the Illegal Immigration Debate

UPDATE (12:21): I just e-mailed my senators. We'll see if they reply. Plus, you simply must see these photos on Michelle Malkin's site. I included the link in my messages to Lieberman and Dodd. Pass them on to everyone you know...they show what many illegals really think about America.

My senators from Connecticut are (not surprisingly) letting me down regarding illegal immigration. Here's what Joe Lieberman has to say:

Washington—Senator Lieberman issued the following statement in response to last night’s vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee to approve Immigration reform legislation:

"The resounding bipartisan vote by the Judiciary Committee in favor of comprehensive immigration reform is an important step forward. By bringing honest, hard-working immigrants out of the shadows, we can better focus our enforcement resources on looking for the few who pose real threats to the country. The bill would also reduce unacceptably long backlogs for legal immigrants waiting to be reunited with their spouses and children. And by channeling foreign workers into new work visa programs, we can reduce the often dangerous flow of illegal immigration and stimulate our economy. I applaud the work of Chairman Specter and the members of the Judiciary Committee, and I hope we can improve the bill further as it is considered by the full Senate."

For illegals who don't read or speak English, Joe has kindly included a Spanish version on his Website.

I usually give Lieberman a lot of credit for being pretty savvy. He falls short here. Does he not realize that large majorities in various polls show that most Americans want tougher legislation regarding illegal immigration and closing up our porous border? Is it more important to curry votes with those who can't vote than to ignore the wishes of voting citizens? And don't give me any civil liberties claptrap. You have to be a citizen to have the liberties guaranteed to Americans.

And now for uber-lib Chris Dodd's statement...er, he doesn't have one on his Website. I wonder why?

I'll be sure to contact my Senators to let them know what I think about illegal immigration and our borders. All of you should do the same!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:56 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

Kids Today Don't Know Hardship!!!

My good friend Jeanette sent this to me, and I simply had to pass it on. All you thirty-somethings out there, enjoy!

When I was a kid, adults used to bore me to tears with their tedious diatribes about how hard things were when they were growing up; what with walking twenty-five miles to school every morning...uphill BOTH ways...through year 'round blizzards. Carrying their younger siblings on their backs...to their one-room schoolhouse, where they maintained a straight-A average, despite their full-time, after-school job at the local textile mill...where they worked for
35 cents an hour just to help keep their family from starving to death!

And I remember promising myself that when I grew up, there was no way in hell I was going to lay a bunch of crap like that on kids about how hard I had it and how easy they've got it!

But now that I'm over the ripe old age of thirty, I can't help but look around and notice the youth of today. You've got it so easy! I mean, compared to my childhood, you live in a damn Utopia! And I hate to say it, but you kids today don't know how good you've got it! I mean, when I was a kid, we didn't have the Internet. If we wanted to know something, we had to go to the damn library and look it up ourselves, in the card catalog!

There was no e-mail! You had to actually write somebody a letter with a pen! Then you had to walk all the way across the street and put it in the mailbox and it would take a week to get there!

There were no MP3's, there was no Napster! If you wanted to steal music, you had to hitchhike to the damn record store and shoplift it yourself! Or you had to wait around all day to tape it off the radio and the DJ would usually talk over the beginning and @#*% it all up!

And talk about hardship? You couldn't just download porn! You had to steal it from your brother or bribe some homeless dude to buy you a copy of "Hustler" at the 7-11! Those were your options!

We didn't have fancy crap like call waiting! If you were on the phone and somebody else called they got a busy signal, that's it! And we didn't have fancy caller ID Boxes either! When the phone rang, you had no idea who it was! It could be your school, your mom, your boss, your bookie, your drug dealer, a collections agent...you just didn't know!!! You had to pick it up and take your chances, mister!

We didn't have any fancy Sony Playstation video games with high-resolution 3D graphics! We had the Atari 2600, with games like "Space Invaders" and "Asteroids" and the graphics sucked a**! Your guy was a little square! You actually had to use your imagination! And there were no multiple levels or screens, it was just one screen forever! And you could never win. The game just kept getting harder and harder and faster and faster until you died! ... Just like LIFE!

When we went to the movie theater there no such thing as stadium seating! All the seats were the same height! If a tall guy or some old broad with a hat sat in front of you and you couldn't see, you were just screwed!

Sure, we had cable television, but back then that was only like 15 channels and there was no onscreen menu and no remote control! You had to use a little book called a TV Guide to find out what was on! You were screwed when it came to channel surfing! You had to get off your a** and walk over to the TV to change the channel and there was no Cartoon Network or Nickelodeon either! You could only get cartoons on Saturday morning. Do you hear what I'm saying!?! We had to wait ALL WEEK for cartoons, you spoiled little b*****ds!

And we didn't have microwaves. If you wanted to heat something up, you had to use the stove or go build a frigging fire. Imagine that!

If we wanted popcorn, we had to use that stupid JiffyPop thing and shake it over the stove forever like an idiot. That's exactly what I'm talking about! You kids today have got it too easy. You're spoiled.

You guys wouldn't have lasted five minutes back in 1980.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:39 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

March 28, 2006

The Anagram Meme

Pat over at Brainster tagged me for this anagram meme. An anagram is when you take the letters in one word and rearrange them to make other words. The results for Blogmeister are here.

A couple of my favorites are Bogle Smiter and Glob Meister.

OK, my turn to tag: Joe Six-Pack and The Good Lieutenant.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:19 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

I'm Getting Closer...

...to that coveted #1 spot on The Right Place's caption contest. This week I came in at #4. Check out the winnahs here.

And here's this week's contest. Go on, enter!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Illegal Immigration, the U.S. and Rome

When thousands show up at a protest against illegal immigration reform, you know we have a problem. Click the link above and you'll see some photos of the march. One shows a person holding a sign that says, "We are not criminals."

Well, yes, you are. By circumventing the immigration process and entering the country without permission, you are breaking the law the moment you step over the border. One of the definitions of the word criminal is "one who has committed or been legally convicted of a crime."

The idea that we ought to create a guest worker program is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard of. It's bad enough that thousands of people swarm over our borders daily uninvited. Who's to say that when we invite them to take part in this program that they won't overstay their welcome as many do when their visas expire? And will we be able to accomodate the millions more who will decide to come here once such a program is implemented? Don't even get me started on amnesty for those who are already here. It sends a message: Americans are a bunch of pushovers.

Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Here's a bit of history worth remembering.

During the end of what we call the great Roman Empire, the Romans were off fighting the Persians. Their volunteer military was still highly trained and highly effective. While the Romans concentrated their efforts in Persia, they allowed the Germanic tribes to come in to Rome. Not as citizens, mind you. Roman citizenship was not handed out like candy at Halloween. They were treated them like, well, illegal immigrants. Kind of pesky, not desirable, but what harm overall could they do?

There was a little battle called Adrianople. And it was the beginning of the end of the Roman Empire. Because the Romans didn't take the Germanic tribes seriously, that situation began the downturn of one of the greatest civilizations ever known.

Quite a parallel, hmm? No, I am not suggesting we shouldn't be in Iraq or fighting terrorists elsewhere. That is necessary and I believe our commitment shouldn't waver. But to treat our illegal immigrant problem lightly is a problem --one that won't go away unless we are firm in our resolve to not water down our immigration laws and to enforce them. They have broken our laws and should not be rewarded for doing so.

We need to let our government know that we won't stand for it.

John Hawkins has more on what he calls an illegal immigration horror show.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

March 27, 2006

On Being Proud to Be Conservative

Burt Prelutsky, who writes a regular column for Town Hall, has written an excellent one this week, entitled Proud to Be A Conservative. (Apparently it's a rerun from late last year.)

The other day I was listening to a talk radio show, and heard a caller announce that there’s no freedom of speech in this country, that, because of the fascistic administration in Washington, people are afraid to criticize the government. His proof was that Cindy Sheehan had been rebuked for merely exercising her constitutional right to mouth off against authority figures. The show’s host correctly pointed out that the 1st Amendment guarantees her freedom to speak her mind, such as it is, but that doesn’t in any way curtail the right of other Americans to call her an idiot.

What the host didn’t point out was that even as the caller spoke, he was contradicting his own statement. He was freely sharing his own foolish thoughts with millions of listeners.

That's a great observation. Was this caller rounded up and hauled off to the gulag for daring to say what he did? Used for horrible medical experiments? Overworked and then starved to death? Give me a break. Whenever lefties have their views criticized, they give the rallying cry, "My free speech is being violated!" The only thing being violated in this instance is common sense.

Frankly, I’m amazed that liberals can be wrong so often about so many things. One of the few issues they are occasionally right about is protecting the environment. But even when it comes down to that, the radical element that infests their ranks like termites are always trying to stop any and all forms of development, the source of homes and jobs for those of us who don’t want to live in trees. Their love for Mother Earth leads them to blow up buildings, bomb car dealerships, and sabotage logging sites, all with an air of moral authority. They don’t, in fact, love snail darters, spotted owls or Alaska’s caribou, anymore than the rest of us; they merely hate western civilization in much the same way that Islamic fascists do.

A fact worth noting is that during LBJ’s administration, a group of tree huggers got an injunction to prevent the feds from working on a certain project in the South, for fear it would harm the environment. The project involved shoring up the levees of New Orleans.

Here's a link regarding that injunction. Why has this gotten less play than that of the current administration's role in the Katrina mess? Because being a leftie means never having to say either "I was wrong" or "I'm sorry."

I too am proud to be a conservative. Like Prelutsky I tend to vote for Republicans. Likewise, I know that all politicians have flaws. There's plenty I disagree with regarding President Bush's policies. An example I cite often is his handling of the illegal immigration problem. However, that doesn't mean I throw the baby out with the bathwater. An "all or nothing" ideology doesn't make for a strong party. Which is why, I think, the Democrats are in the trouble they are. The radical left is making it hard for moderates to come to the fore. And if Republicans aren't careful, they'll end up having the same problem.

Looking back on my own political metamorphosis, I realize how typical it is that, as one matures, takes on responsibilities, deals with tragedy and loss, one tends to drift from left to right, and how rarely the reverse occurs.

I've made this journey myself, and therefore believe it to be true.

Oh, and if anyone decides to leave a comment disagreeing with what I've said here, I promise not to claim that my First Amendment rights have been violated.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Commentary

Tony Blair on Anti-Americanism

Tony Blair, during an official visit to Australia, had a few frank words regarding America's role in international affairs:

Solving the world's problems needed an "active foreign policy of engagement, not isolation" between countries, the British Labour Party leader told lawmakers, and Washington needed to be on board as much as possible.

But he pointed out: "This alliance does not end with, but it does begin with America. For us in Europe and for you, this alliance is central. And I want to speak plainly here. I do not always agree with the US.

"Sometimes they can be difficult friends to have. But the strain of, frankly, anti-American feeling in parts of European politics is madness when set against the long-term interests of the world we believe in.

"The danger with America today is not that they are too much involved. The danger is that they decide to pull up the drawbridge and disengage. We need them involved. We want them engaged."

Thanks, Tony. We don't always agree with Britain either. Being able to deal with the occasional disagreement shows maturity. And we're grateful for friends like the UK and Australia, and others who haven't turned their backs on us.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:30 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | International

March 23, 2006

Family Emergency

I won't be posting for a day or two. Please keep checking back...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:57 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Personal

March 22, 2006

Charlie Sheen: The Nut Doesn’t Fall Far From the Tree

Martin Sheen must be very proud of son Charlie, who has gotten on the 9/11 conspiracy bandwagon. (cue circus music)

Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.

Charlie Sheen is highly credible? Since when does being an actor (and a marginal one at that) and a drug addict (oh sorry, he’s in “recovery”) make one credible with regard to national and world affairs?

"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions.”


"It feels like from the people I talk to in and around my circles, it seems like the worm is turning."

People he talks to in and around his circles. That says it all right there. The Hollywood left. And that’s not the worm turning, it’s my stomach.

"I was up early and we were gonna do a pre-shoot on Spin City, the show I used to do, I was watching the news and the north tower was burning. I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball."

"There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life and then when the buildings came down later on that day I said to my brother 'call me insane, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition'?"

Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

I guess this photo must have been faked. I guess those who live in a fake world like Hollywood tend to think that everything is subject to whitewash and fabrication.

Sheen lets his “I Hate President Bush” bias show quite clearly here.

By remaining at a location where it was publicly known the President would be before 9/11, he was not only putting his own life in danger, but the lives of hundreds of schoolchildren. That is unless the government knew for sure what the targets were beforehand and that President Bush wasn't one of them.

"It seems to me that upon the revelation of that news that the secret service would grab the President as if he was on fire and remove him from that room," said Sheen.

The question of how Bush saw the first plane hit the north tower, when no live footage of that incident was carried, an assertion that Bush repeated twice, was also put under the spotlight.

"I guess one of the perks of being President is that you get access to TV channels that don't exist in the known universe," said Sheen.

"It might lead you to believe that he'd seen similar images in some type of rehearsal as it were, I don't know."

Yes. The U.S. government blew up the World Trade center. The government killed nearly 3,000 innocent people. Why? Who knows? Oh wait, I know…so we could start a war about oil. It sure sounds like a movie that Charlie Sheen might want to star in.

Sheen said that "September 11 wasn't the Zapruder film, it was the Zapruder film festival," and that the inquiry had to be, "headed, if this is possible, by some neutral investigative committee. What if we used retired political foreign nationals? What if we used experts that don't have any ties whatsoever to this administration?"

"It is up to us to reveal the truth. It is up to us because we owe it to the families, we owe it to the victims. We owe it to everybody's life who was drastically altered, horrifically that day and forever. We owe it to them to uncover what happened."

I have to say that Charlie Sheen rivals Michael Moore with this conspiracy theory. He offers no reason why the government might want to do something like this. I guess we just need to take him at his word. After all, he did star in “Platoon,” so he kind of knows about military stuff, right? Question for him: if the government really did blow up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, do you think you would still be around after giving this interview? A government that plots to kill nearly 3,000 people would not think twice about quietly detaining a two-bit actor and making him disappear, never to be seen again. Check out the antics of Stalin and Hitler if you want to know how that works.

That anyone would take this guy seriously is a very disturbing sign of the times. We owe it to the victims of 9/11 and their families to blow this kind of idiocy out of the water. If you want to see a government brutalizing its citizens in action, read this story about North Korea and its policy of killing babies born with defects shortly after birth.

I’m sure, though, that Sheen doesn’t have much to say about that...mainly because anything anti-Bush gets more press. Hey, he has his career to think about!

ThirdWaveDave has more. Michelle Malkin says Sheen's ex Denise Richards was right to dump him, and Moonbattery wonders how WWII America would have dealt with this nutjob.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:35 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

March 21, 2006

Racism: The Gospel According to the UN

Today is the International Day for the Elimination of Discrimination. Here's how the UN chooses to represent it:


No word on what the UN thinks of this reaction to the cartoons printed:


Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:14 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | United Nations

First He's Stupid, Then He's Evil, Now He's...Manly?

We've heard all sorts of reasons why President Bush is a lousy president. Among them are: he's evil (a la Adolf Hitler) and stupid (primates are considered to be his betters). Now, Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post has come up with something new: he's too manly.

The undisputed manliness of the Bush White House stands in contrast to its predecessors and wannabes. If Republicans are the Daddy Party and Democrats the Mommy Party, the Clinton White House often operated like Mansfield's vision of an estrogen-fueled kaffeeklatsch: indecisive and undisciplined. (Okay, there were some unfortunate, testosterone-filled moments, too.) Bill Clinton's would-be successor, Al Gore, was mocked for enlisting Naomi Wolf to help him emerge as an alpha male; after that, French-speaking John Kerry had to give up windsurfing and don hunting gear to prove he was a real man. And Bush's father, of course, had to battle the Wimp Factor. Mansfield recalls Thatcher's manly admonition to 41 on the eve of the Persian Gulf War: "Don't go wobbly on me, George."

No wimpiness worries now. This is an administration headed by a cowboy boot-wearing brush-clearer, backstopped by a quail-shooting fly fisherman comfortable with long stretches of manly silence -- very "Brokeback Mountain," except this crowd considers itself too manly for such PC Hollywood fare. "I would be glad to talk about ranchin', but I haven't seen the movie," Bush told a questioner.

So now man bashing, which has become quite popular in the last decade or so (for example, my e-mail is constantly being bombarded with "men are stupid" jokes), has become fair game when discussing Bush administration foreign policy.

I am somewhat surprised that Marcus would take this tack, considering her view of the Larry Summers vs. feminists at Harvard flap.

Is it so heretical, though, so irredeemably oafish, to consider whether gender differences also play some role? As the daughter of two scientists and the mother of two daughters, I think not. After all, scientists are reporting day by day about their breakthroughs in understanding the genetic basis of diseases or personality traits. Brain studies of men and women show that the two genders use different parts of their brain to process language. (Men tend to be left-siders, women both-lobers.)

If Marcus thinks biology might be a reasonable explanation for why fewer women choose scientific careers, why does she seem to think manliness is suddenly such a bad thing? After all, isn't manliness the result of thousands of years of biological evolution?

Denigrating the president's manliness may score Marcus brownie points with the left -- after all, don't many of them think that men should be emasculated so that men and women can finally be "equal"? -- but it does nothing to further debate. According to Marcus, "the swaggering dismissal of dissenting views as the carping of those not on the team" is part and parcel of her proof that manliness is at the root of a war she disagrees with.

That's not proof, it's namecalling. Something the left and its MSM cheerleaders have become quite good at, since it gets more press than nonexistent alternatives from the Democrats.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:36 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

March 20, 2006

Back...for Now

OK, thanks to Gary for posting my "Out of Order" post yesterday. I am still unable to sign on from home, but can do so now from work (not that I'll have lots of time today...heading into a training session shortly). I have someone looking into the issue and hope to have it resolved soon!

I should have some time at lunch to post something. Until then, please be sure to check out the blogs and other websites on my sidebar...there is sure to be something there to pique your interest!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

March 19, 2006

Out Of Order

I haven't been able to post since Thursday due to a technical glitch that I'm still trying to work out. Gary from Ex-Donkey Blog has kindly signed on for me to post this message. Please keep checking back; I'm hoping to have this solved within the next couple of days.

Thanks for your support!

Show Comments

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

March 16, 2006

New Additions to the Blogroll

I'm pleased to add the following blogs to my blogroll:

Iowa Voice: A group blog based in the Midwest discussing American politics and social issues. One of their bloggers is originally from London and he has traveled a great deal, and so is able to provide discussion on U.S. policy from an international point of view.

My most recent perusal of Davids Medienkritik (which I try to read at least once or twice a week) led me to discover Pursuit of Serenity, a blog by a German written in English. (Thank goodness; I didn't keep up with my study of German and can only make out a few words of the language now.) Blogger Marian Tobias Wirth is pro-American, a rarity in Europe these days, and I look forward to his views on America and the world in general. Being of German descent (five out of eight great-grandparents hailed from Deutschland), I'm always glad to discover that not everyone there despises us...

Be sure to check out both of these fine blogs!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:26 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Who Is This Man?

Who can forget this photo from 9/11 (although some wish it would go away)? It was taken by Richard Drew of the AP.


For years, many have wondered who he was. Tom Junod, writing for Esquire, speculated that it might be Jonathan Briley, an employee of Windows on the World.

Michelle Malkin has more on this incredible story. Some think this kind of speculation is ghoulish. It's not. It's important to put names and faces to the people who died on that day -- lest we forget what they suffered and we forget what we continue to face.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:33 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Other

Blogs for Heather: Patricia Madrid's Supporters

Once upon a time, a local congressional race would stay local. This is no longer the case in today's politics. Candidates often receive donations and support from people outside of their jurisdiction. It's legal, of course, but the nature of such support can be telling.

Take the race in New Mexico. Incumbent Rep. Heather Wilson is facing opposition from New Mexico DA Patricia Madrid. A fundraiser was held for Madrid recently...in San Francisco. And who organized the event? Stephen Elliott, a member of the transgender S&M community.

Big deal, you might say. But Chris at Lucky Dawg News (a New Mexico resident who is represented by Heather Wilson) has this to say:

New Mexico is a conservative state for the most part, with the exceptions being places like Albuquerque and Santa Fe. These cities have been overrun with blue state transplants. Thanks to these people, places like Santa Fe, have become too expensive to live in. They bring their lack of morality with them too. I often refer to Santa Fe as the adobe San Francisco.

Will conservatives care who's supporting Madrid in San Fran? Time will tell. Chris also has this to say about the race in general:

I've mentioned quite often on this thread that the race between Congresswoman Heather Wilson and her liberal opponent Patricia Madrid isn't just a New Mexico thing. This race has implications that reach far beyond this state. Patricia Madrid doesn't represent New Mexicans in any way, shape, or form. She represents the out of state hate Bush crowd, the appeasement crowd, the bath house crowd, and the absolute vilest pond scum of the left. Madrid is a tool for Howeird Dean and Nancy Pelosi to regain control of our congress.

Keep your eyes on this one, folks.

Show Comments

Newsflash: Bush IS Hitler!

Painstaking research by Mr. Right has revealed what leftists have asserted all along: George W. Bush is the reincarnation of Hitler. Read about it here at In the Right Place.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

March 15, 2006

No Class


Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) went to the Senate floor Tuesday afternoon and displayed an enormous sign that read “Dangerously Incompetent” while giving a speech attacking the Bush administration over Homeland Security funding...
(source: Drudge)

And the Dems wonder why Americans aren't voting for them. Who wants to vote for a bunch of people with middle school mentalities?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:36 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

March 13, 2006

Progress in Iraq: The Human Variable

Obviously those who say that there is no progress in Iraq don't read beyond the NY Times and Washington Post front pages. Take this article from Stars and Stripes. Think we'll be reading about this in the MSM?

While some Iraqi army units outside the capital remain months away from operating independently, Iraqi units in the core of Baghdad are among the country’s most developed, forging a path that many U.S. and Iraqi officials hope will lead to nationwide stability and the eventual drawdown of U.S. forces here.

That's been the plan all along, hasn't it? To help the Iraqi government and military stand alone? The problem is, you can't put an exact time on how long it will take.

Like many Iraqi army leaders, those here in Baghdad say they still depend on American air support for large-scale operations. They also say they need more heavy weapons, more vehicles, more high-tech communications equipment.

“We can do these patrols, but the coalition forces cannot leave us until we get enough power. Help from the coalition is still required,” said Col. Abbas Rihy El Azauwi, commander of an Iraqi battalion that borders the International Zone.

When a child first signs up for swimming lessons, is it possible to predict that he will be a competent swimmer in six months? A year? Two years? No. We can't predict something like that because it involves a human variable. The Iraqi army is the same. They're trying, but they're rebuilding an entire army from scratch -- using men, not machines.

U.S. soldiers are working with Iraqis to create training programs to help them maintain the progress they have gained working with the Americans. That includes not only designing training programs but helping the Iraqis develop a permanent rhythm of assigning some soldiers to public security duties while sending others to training programs.

“These are all new concepts for them because they didn’t think about them to this level of detail,” said Maj. Bill McClary, who heads a battalion-level military transition team.

Time frames for U.S. troop withdrawal remain hazy, but the process for carefully weaning the Iraqi army units from American support may be in sight.

“The goal for [the U.S. troops] is ‘How do we write ourselves out of the equation?’” McClary said.

And that's a decision I'd like to see made by military leaders who know what they're doing, not a bunch of yahoos in Congress trying to score political points.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

There's a Full Moon Coming Tomorrow!

How do I know? The moonbats are out in force:

Full Moon.jpg
Al Bore in Florida: "I truly believe that American democracy faces a time of challenge and trials that are more serious than we have ever faced," Gore said. He pointed to the current White House, backed by a Republican Congress, which allows the government to eavesdrop on anyone's home, "sneak and peek," without a warrant. "It sounds so strange, doesn't it, so contrary to the Constitution?"

The good news, however, is that "America is waking up to their game, to what they are all about," Gore said. Although he was addressing a Democratic rally, he said, "Much more is required, much more than partisanship."

If that's true, then we need someone other than Al "I Wuz Robbed" Gore on the case.

At Harvard, that bastion of balanced learning, students turned on lefty John Kerry:

Anti-war protesters amassed at the Kennedy School of Government on Friday, when 2004 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass) spoke with former Senator Max Cleland and a group of veterans to a packed John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum.

While Kerry came to Harvard for the premiere of “Hidden Wounds,” a documentary on veterans of the war in Iraq suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the event took a political turn as several dozen protesters gathered together at 79 JFK Street.

“Bush Lied. Kerry Complied. Bring the troops home now,” they chanted outside the Kennedy School.

The protest was sponsored by the organizations Not One More (NOM) and Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) as part of their continued effort to provoke a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

One man, who was sitting inside the forum, called out to Kerry after the documentary.

“Stop this war, John, grow some b*lls” the man said. “You can do something, John.”

From presidential nominee to chopped liver. That's quite a feat! Good thing he has all that ketchup available to mask the nasty aftertaste.

And Kos is thrilled that he constantly backs losers (hat tip: Brainster):

Backing the underdog means you will lose more often than not. Backing outside-the-establishment candidates mean we have to build momentum over time. Good thing for the modern conservative movement that they didn't pack it in after Barry Goldwater got crushed. They knew they were in it for the long haul, unlike the bitter, obsolete crew over at New Republic, cursing that newfangled people-powered media that has stripped them of whatever ill-gotten influence they used to wield.

Kos calling the New Republic bitter? Hello pot? Kettle here.

Oh, and Barbra Streisand has come out with another "I'm proud to be outspoken on politics" bit:

I have said in the past that I believe art does not exist only to entertain, but also to challenge one to think, to provoke, even to disturb, to engage in a constant search for the truth. In spite of the many films that get released every year that aim to just entertain or break box office records, the industry has also produced films that tackle controversial social and political issues. This year alone, Best Picture nominees such as "Munich" and "Good Night and Good Luck" had strong political messages. And in the past, Hollywood films have inspired a discourse and a healthy exchange of ideas that is normally not a part of the American conversation. "To Kill a Mockingbird," "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner," "In the Heat of the Night," "The Color Purple," and "Crash" all dealt candidly with issues of race. "The Pianist" and "Schindler's List" tackled anti-Semitism and the atrocities committed during the Holocaust. "Coming Home" and "Born on the Fourth of July" showed America the harsh realities of war. We reflected on issues of poverty with "The Grapes of Wrath" and provided the world with an honest depiction of a gay man's reality when diagnosed with the AIDS virus in "Philadelphia." Considering the incredible breadth of Hollywood's movie making history, the list can go on and on.

Members of the Hollywood community should not be apologetic, but proud - proud to have provoked conversations, proud to have challenged ignorance and proud to have helped shape our history for the better.

Gee, a tear just came to my eye. Not because of what Barbra said, but because there aren't any misspelled words in her post (the whole of which you can read here.) You CAN teach an old dog new tricks. What was that sound I just heard? Oh, it was Barbra's shoulder dislocating from all that patting herself on the back.

Finally, George Clooney actually makes some sense:

Clooney exhorts the lily-livered Dems to stop being cowards and put some steel in their spines.

"It's not merely our right to question our government, it's our duty. Whatever the consequences," he lectures.

"We can't demand freedom of speech, then turn around and say, 'But please don't say bad things about us.' You gotta be a grownup and take your hits."

Like I said, there's a full moon out tomorrow night. Beware!

Crossposted to Lifelike Pundits.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

March 11, 2006

Saturday Links

For those of you who are looking for something good to read today:

The Weekend Pundit has an interesting take on the Blame Game.

Van Helsing at Moonbattery talks about the havoc being wreaked on our southern borders.

Check out the latest caption contest at GOP and the City.

Finally, what does the death of culture sound like? Tammy Bruce has the answer.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Milosevic Dead

Via AP:

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - Slobodan Milosevic, the former Yugoslav leader, who was branded "the butcher of the Balkans" and was on trial for war crimes after orchestrating a decade of bloodshed during the breakup of his country, was found dead Saturday in his prison cell. He was 64.

Milosevic, who suffered chronic heart ailments and high blood pressure, apparently died of natural causes and was found in his bed, the U.N. tribunal said, without giving an exact time of death.

More here.

Two words: good riddance.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | International

And the winner is...

Two, count them, TWO of my captions made the top 25 over at In the Right Place this past week (#23 and #8). Check out the results here.

The new contest is here.

Woo hoo!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:13 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

It's My Blogiversary!

One year ago today I started Blogmeister USA! (I started on Blogger, and back in October moved to the much more hospitable hosting grounds of MuNu.)

While I'm certainly not the most influential blogger in the blogosphere, I enjoy what I do, and I have seen my daily readership grow at a slow but steady pace. Thanks to all of you who make a point of stopping by!


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:58 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

The Transformation Begins...

HillBill emerges:


Thanks to GD for passing it on!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:50 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

March 10, 2006

The Three Rs...er, Ts

Great cartoon by Cox & Forkum today (click for larger view):


Hat tip: Michelle Malkin, who also has more on the Yale/Taliban connection.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

What's Sauce For the Goose...

Mona Charen has an interesting article on today's edition on Town Hall:

A group called the National Center for Men has filed a lawsuit they are calling "Roe v. Wade for Men." Here are the facts: A 25-year-old computer programmer named Matt Dubay of Saginaw, Mich., was ordered by a judge to pay $500 per month in child support for a daughter he fathered with his ex-girlfriend. His contention -- and that of the National Center for Men -- is that this requirement is unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection clause.

Dubay does not dispute that he is the child's father. Rather, he claims that during the course of his relationship with the mother, he was given to understand that she could not become pregnant because of a physical condition. He insists that she knew he did not want to have children with her. The courts, he and his advocates argue, are forcing parenthood upon him in a way that they cannot do to a woman. Here's the money quote from the NCM website:

More than three decades ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as the price of intimacy.

Charen points out:

The point (and it is not one the feminists will find in their quiver) is that sexuality requires responsibility -- and that doesn't just mean using birth control. It means that if you engage in sex you have an automatic obligation to any child that may result. Pro-choice women have been vociferously rejecting this responsibility for decades. It should come as no surprise that men are inclined to do the same.

What is not being discussed here are men who have a relationship, have children, and then shirk their financial duties toward the kids (as in cases of divorce, abandonment, etc.). What is being discussed are men who unknowingly impregnate a woman (as in the case described above) and then are forced to support the child if the woman decides to have it.

Why is that fair? Don't they get to have reproductive choice too?

I am what's called an abortion moderate. I don't think it should be outlawed completely, but I believe in a first trimester limit (except in cases where the mother's life is endangered), and I also believe it should be a state legislative matter, not a national one. Oh, and birth control? More people should be utilizing it if they aren't planning on having children.

I also think that this whole "it only affects the woman thing" is a big bunch of marlarkey.

The problem here is the double standard. Men are expected to shut up both when the woman decides to abort and when she decides to keep a child. When does he get a say?

Sadly enough, the ones who are really affected are the children. If more people thought about them, perhaps we wouldn't be hearing so much about sexual and reproductive rights.

The feminist reaction? I can't wait to hear it.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

March 08, 2006

Leftwing Hypocrisy

Who said the following:

"We should replace our dependence on foreign oil, not by drilling in the priceless Arctic National Wildlife Refugee in Alaska, but by investing in clean energy."

If you guessed Teddy Kennedy, you'd be right. Now, guess who's tried to kill the wind farm off of Cape Cod?

Our pal in the Senate, Teddy Kennedy. Read about it here. You'll also find out about a few more hypocrites on the left. Who knew?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Obscene Phone Caller Arrested


This story makes me think of these two Einsteins:
Authorities arrested a man accused of making thousands of harassing and obscene calls to random cell phone numbers in at least eight counties.

James R. Hood, 43, was charged with one count of compelling prostitution, or offering money for sex. He posted bond and was released from the Coshocton County jail, the sheriff's office said Wednesday.

Can you imagine what his phone bill was like?

Here's the best part: Hood lives in Licking County, Ohio.

You can't make this stuff up, folks!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Just Plain Stupid

March 07, 2006

Picking and Choosing a Cause

Some feel that conservatives are a bit, well, hypocritical in the recent spate of support for Denmark regarding freedom of speech and the publishing of Muhammed cartoons that have caused (well planned) rioting throughout Europe.

You know what's funny? American conservatives generally hate Europe. Especially France, of course, but the loathing is generally quite continental. Europe may have given birth to Western Civilization, but now it's a socialist secular wasteland that's rapidly sinking into oblivion and irrelevance, that is, in essence, becoming extinct, dying. At best, conservatives want Europe to be more American, hence their enthusiastic support of Italian conservative Silvio Berlusconi and German conservative Angela Merkel. Indeed, it wasn't so long ago that they enthusiastically supported a French conservative by the name of Jacques Chirac.


So how funny it is, in an odd sort of way, to see conservatives falling all over themselves in support of that great European power, Denmark, just because a Danish newspaper published a few provocatively offensive cartoons that belittled Islam (see here, here, and here). It's a case of free speech, conservatives argue, but the fact that speech is free, and ought to remain so, doesn't make it right. Are we witnessing a rush of conservative support to Holocaust-denier David Irving? Not so much. But conservatives are jumping gleefully aboard their self-made pro-Denmark bandwagon — see here, here, and here.

The Moderate Voice makes some interesting points. I'd like to address them. This is a long post; you'll need a few minutes to read it if you can spare the time.

Read More "Picking and Choosing a Cause"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:45 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Commentary

Why Does Everyone Hate Wal-Mart?

logo_always.gifFor many people these days, it seems, Wal-Mart is at the top of the "hate" list. Some of the grievances against the retail giant include:

*Wal-Mart doesn't give healthcare to half its employees.
*Women claim they are discriminated against when it comes to pay and promotions.
*Wal-Mart buys too many products from China
*Wal-Mart puts small mom-and-pop organizations out of business.
*Wal-Mart doesn't pay its employees enough.
*Wal-Mart is building too many stores.

Oh, and the latest rumor is that Wal-Mart is paying bloggers to portray it positively (John Ruberry has more). I would like to state for the record that I have never been paid by Wal-Mart. In fact, they don't even know I exist!!

Back to Wal-Mart. Why is it the target of so much venom? According to its own Website:

*Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million associates worldwide in more than 3,600 stores in the United States and more than 1,500 international stores.
*76% of our store management started in hourly positions.
*Our average hourly wage for regular full-time associates in the U.S. is $9.68 an hour, almost double the federal minimum wage.

Of course, one wouldn't expect Wal-Mart to badmouth itself on its own Website. However, are they really as horrible as they are being portrayed?

Think about it: How many independent retailers offer more than minimum wage to start? How many offer insurance? How many offer plenty of room for advancement? For many years I worked for an independent pharmacy. I started out at minimum wage (back then it wasn't even $5/hour) and my raises were at my employer's discretion, not on any set schedule. Also, as he was sole proprieter, it wasn't likely that any of us who worked there would rise to great managerial heights there. I also had no insurance coverage.

That was a part-time job while I was in high school and college. I've "moved up" since then, something many Wal-Mart employees can do as well.

If working for Wal-Mart is such a raw deal, why is it that over 25,000 people applied for 300 available jobs at this outlet?

Wages? It's the usual thing: some people think that wages should be regulated. The unions would love to get in on the Wal-Mart racket, and they're the ones making the most noise. It's not so much that they want to help the poor, oppressed 1.6 million Wal-Mart workers, but they look upon it as a cash cow opportunity. Think of how much dues money 1.6 million people can generate! (I found this story about union picketers at Wal-Mart to be sadly funny in its hypocrisy.)

As for the other issues mentioned above, there are going to be complaints about women being discriminated against in the workforce for the forseeable future. There are plenty of retailers who buy from China, and not just Wal-Mart. Blame the government for granting China most-favored-nation trade status, if you must, but not Wal-Mart, as it is simply looking to please its customers by offering low prices. And like any healthy business, Wal-Mart will continue to expand. If a community doesn't want Wal-Mart then they can try to block it from moving in.

Why aren't people complaining about other chain stores, like Target or Kohls?

I think Wal-Mart has become a target for three main reasons: it won't let unions in, it doesn't cater to the elitist classes, and it is successful. Any institution that is a success is subject to envy.

Makes me think about the world view of the US in general.

For more on the Wal-Mart controversy from someone much more qualified than I am to discuss it, read this article by Thomas Sowell.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:18 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Business

March 06, 2006

If You Can't Win, Complain

Oy vey. Who would have thought one of the writers of Brokeback Mountain would complain about bias against...rural stories? From Contact Music:

BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN co-writer LARRY MCMURTRY believes urban drama CRASH beat his film to the Best Picture Award, because Academy members discriminate against rural stories. The writer, who has been involved with four Oscar nominated films including THE LAST PICTURE SHOW and TERMS OF ENDEARMENT, claims Crash won because it was set in Los Angeles - where most Academy voters live. He explains, "The three rural films (I was involved with) lost. The one urban film, Terms of Endearment, won. "Members of the Academy are mostly urban people. Crash was a hometown movie."

Gosh, I don't know...maybe the Academy thought it was a better movie. Or maybe they were tired of hearing about Brokeback Mountain being the "best film of the year." I have no opinion either way, since I didn't see any of those nominated for Best Picture.

Hey Larry, I hear Stilton cheese goes well with whine. And, let's hope that's the last we hear about this year's Oscars.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:30 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Entertainment

Camille Paglia on Harvard After Summers

Camille Paglia has written an informative and incisive editorial for the New York Times today (yes, the New York Times...sometimes they can put out something worthwhile) regarding the state of higher education and its ability to regulate itself. Specifically, she discusses Harvard after the resignation of President Larry Summers.

IT now remains to be seen whether Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences is capable of self-critique. Will its members acknowledge their own insularity and excesses, or will they continue down the path of smug self-congratulation and vanity? Harvard's reputation for disinterested scholarship has been severely gored by the shadowy manipulations of the self-serving cabal who forced Mr. Summers's premature resignation. That so few of the ostensibly aggrieved faculty members deigned to speak on the record to The Crimson, the student newspaper, illustrates the cagey hypocrisy that permeates fashionable campus leftism, which worships diversity in all things except diversity of thought.

Read it all. (Free registration required.)

Hat tip: My co-blogger at Lifelike Pundits, Aaron.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:31 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Education

March 05, 2006

It's Oscar Night: Does Anyone Care?

I know I don't, but there are obviously people who do. Most notably, of course, Hollywood and the sycophants who feed off it. OSCAR_statue.jpg

An article in today's WaPo tackles the topic of Hollywood and social change:

The awards season in Hollywood is by its very nature a self-congratulatory affair. But this year, the filmmakers say their serious, somber movies really do matter -- not just as entertainment or art, but politically, socially. Hollywood thinks the movies are important again.

Ang Lee, director of "Brokeback Mountain," speaks of "the power of movies to change the way we're thinking." Steven Spielberg, director of "Munich," has called this year's Oscar-nominated films "courageous" for the risks they took with stories about racism, terrorism, government and corporate crime, and homosexuality. Mark R. Harris, a producer of "Crash," said "this movie has changed people's lives."

Perhaps they have changed the lives of a handful of people. But as my friend Gary at Ex-Donkey Blog points out, these films haven't been seen by the multitudes the moviemakers want to think:

Look at the five films nominated for Best Picture and look at their box office gross:

"Brokeback Mountain": $76,078,000
"Crash": $53,404,817
"Munich": $46,227,050
"Good Night And Good Luck": $30,506,195
"Capote": $23,441,493
Total Combined Gross: $229,657,555

Combined, these five films earned 25% less than "The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe", which earned $288,193,914. That's a difference of $58,536,359 (room for an extra nominee or two).

Gary goes on:

Now consider some of the films that earned more than four of the five nominees (put "Brokeback" aside for one moment"):

"Fun With Dick and Jane", a remake of a 1970's comedy with Jim Carrey and Tea Leoni: $110,333,000
"Flightplan", a mystery aboard a commercial airliner staring Jodie Foster: $89,700,000
"Cheaper By The Dozen 2", a sequel to a remake starring Steve Martin: $81,528,000
"Big Momma's House 2", Martin Lawrence as an undercover cop disguised as a large black woman - also a sequel: $65,800,000
"Underword: Evolution", Kate Beckinsale as a hot vampire chick fighting werewolves - and, yes, it's a sequel: $61,426,000
"The Pink Panther", another remake with Steve Martin: $60,847,000

Right now you're saying "OK, dude. What's your point?"

Hear me out. I'm willing to bet that the above films weren't all that great. I'm also willing to bet that most of the people who payed to see these films probably knew going into the theater that they weren't going to be all that great.

But that means that more people were interested in paying to see these mediocre movies than four of the five nominees for Best Picture! This speaks volumes to the Academy. Yet they choose not to listen. I'm not saying that box office gross should be the only factor in determining Oscar nominations. And I'm certainly not saying that the five films that were nominated are without merit. What I am saying is that they have limited appeal. And all the hype in the world isn't going to change that. (emphasis mine)

Gary hits it right on the nose. Films that have limited appeal aren't as likely to move mountains as Hollywood wants them to. Most people go to the movies to be entertained. I know I don't go to be preached at. If I want to be preached at, I can give any number of family members a call.

Hollywood can preach all it wants. George Clooney, Stephen Spielberg, Ang Lee and the rest can try to tell the rest of us what's important and what's not. But if we aren't going to be entertained, we won't be buying the rest of the package either.

Not that it matters to them. They have Oscar to think about!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:39 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Entertainment

March 04, 2006

Soda: The Next Nanny State Target

Like to guzzle Pepsi or Coke? Hold on to your soda cans, folks:

coke.jpgIn reports to be published in science journals this week, two groups of researchers hope to add evidence to the theory that soda and other sugar-sweetened drinks don't just go hand-in-hand with obesity, but actually cause it. Not that these drinks are the only cause - genetics, exercise and other factors are involved - but that they are one cause, perhaps the leading cause.

A small point? In reality, proving this would be a scientific leap that could help make the case for higher taxes on soda, restrictions on how and where it is sold - maybe even a surgeon general's warning on labels. (emphasis mine)

As usual, some folks think that by regulating a product and hiking up the tax, the public will come to its senses and be grateful for being shown the light.

Whatever happened to self-reliance? Making one's own decisions? Eating anything in excess is unhealthy. And, I don't know of anyone who would say that soda is a healthy choice. Moderation is the key. Just like it's okay to have a handful of chips with your sandwich, having a soda once in a while is not going to kill you...or in this case, cause you to gain a ton.

Let's face it: Most people gain weight because they eat too much and exercise too little. They could be gaining weight on healthy choices as easily as unhealthy choices. What's next, assigning us minders to see how much we eat?

Then again, think of all the tax money to be made on such a venture. Despite the fact that scientists can't agree on what the data says, lawmakers will probably jump on the chance to line the coffers with more cash to spend on special interest projects.

States like California will probably be first on the soda tax bandwagon.

Show Comments

Caption Contests for This Week!

Be sure to head on over to The Right Place and GOP and the City for this week's caption contests. Where do these guys find these photos?

Place your entry and read the others. Laughter is good for the soul!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

Aaron Brown: News is a Business

According to Contact Music, former CNN anchor Aaron Brown complained that the news in this country is a business.

Well, no kidding.

We live in a capitalist society. People have jobs to make money. Business owners have those businesses to make money. And yes, Aaron, television stations are businesses too. I don't know of too many television anchors (or any other reporters, etc.) who work for free because they are more passionate about getting information to the public than paying the rent.

Sounds more like sour grapes over why he left CNN than any concern about how television news is run.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:46 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | MSM

March 03, 2006

Support Denmark Rally

Photos now up! Click on each for a larger image. Scroll down...

Welcome Michelle Malkin readers!

I went to the rally at the Danish embassy in NYC during my lunch hour. I took plenty of photos, but am not able to post them until I get home tonight. Until then, a few impressions:

Only a few folks were there when I arrived, and I was worried that not many people would show. As it turned out, we probably had about 100 people. (I'm not good at estimating crowds, though, so the number may actually be higher or lower.) There were some great signs, great hats and face makeup, and a bunch of great people out for a great cause.

Denmark Rally NYC 003.jpg

Media? Fuhgeddaboutit. There were some freelance reporters, but no bigshots that I know of. No cameras from CNN, ABC, CBS or NBC. Not even FOX was there. Around 12:45 (with 15 minutes to go) some students from the Columbia School of Journalism came with a camera and interviewed Michael Weiss of Snarksmith, the organizer of the rally. They also interviewed a few other people. The widow of a journalist kidnapped and killed in Basra was there as well (her name escapes me; I'll figure it out...should have brought a notepad!), and she was grateful to see all the people there. (Lisa Vincent, widow of Stephen Vincent, shown below addressing the crowd...thanks to Katie for providing me with her name.)

Denmark Rally NYC 009.jpg

The Man from GOP and the City was there for a short time (he's originally from the South and got cold, poor guy, and left shortly after he arrived). About 15 minutes into the rally, we were told by a cop to move from the front of the embassy to the Dag Hammarskjold Plaza park across the street. We weren't sure why, but the crowd moved peacefully.

Denmark Rally NYC 005.jpg

Denmark Rally NYC 010.jpg
Pamela of Atlas Shrugs speaks to the crowd

There were a lot of diverse people there with diverse opinions about religion and politics. A lot of people spoke out about why they were there. We all agreed on one thing: that a free society cannot have one special interest group dictate what can and cannot be said and/or published. One interesting quote came from a black woman. I don't have exactly what she said, but basically it was that thousands of people died so that she could be where she is today, and she was not about to miss a rally of such importance. That got a big round of applause!

Denmark Rally NYC 011.jpg

Denmark Rally NYC 012.jpg

The MSM didn't come out of this looking too rosy. There was plenty of criticism of them not printing the cartoons because they were being "sensitive," when really they are afraid. Why can't they be honest about it? If the NY Times and other big outlets would simply admit they were afraid of the violent outbursts, then we might not be so hard on them. But for them to act sanctimoniously when they are really just a bunch of wimps is very misleading.

Denmark Rally NYC 013.jpg
Michael Weiss, organizer of the rally

Denmark Rally NYC 019.jpg
Weiss being interviewed by CSJ students

It was cold but fun. I'm glad I was able to be a part of it. Check back tonight (after 8 pm Eastern) and I will have my photos up.

Denmark Rally NYC 015.jpg

More coverage: Atlas Shrugs, The Resplendent Mango

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:56 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack (9) | Dhimi Watch

REMINDER: Solidarity Rally at Danish Embassy in NYC Today

From noon-1 pm today, there is a solidarity rally at the Danish Embassy, located at 885 Second Avenue (at 47th). Participants may bring signs, flags, and whatever else they would like to use to show support of Denmark, but no electronic sound amplification devices (i.e. bullhorns, microphones). This is to be a peaceful rally!

Snarksmith reports that there will be a small police presence for those of you who may be worried about the possibility of unrest.

I'll be there, and I'll be taking photos...which I won't be able to post until tonight when I get home.

If you're in the area, I hope you can make it!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:17 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Dhimi Watch

March 02, 2006

Student Complains of Teacher's Left Wing Rants


Woo hoo! Someone give this kid a medal:

AURORA - A 16-year-old boy at Overland High School doesn't want to hear what he calls his teacher's left-wing political rants.

Sean Allen frequently recorded his teachers to back up his notes. Allen recorded Jay Bennish, his 10th grade World Geography teacher, making comments about President Bush's State of the Union Address.

Allen's father claims the comments made in the recording are biased and inappropriate for a geography class.

"I'm not saying Bush and Hitler are exactly the same, obviously they're not. OK? But there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use," says Bennish in his critique of U.S. economic and foreign policy.

Towards the end of the class, Bennish goes on to say, "I'm not in anyway implying that you should agree with me, I don't even know if I'm necessarily taking a position. But what I'm trying to get you to do is to think about these issues more in depth and not to just take things from the surface."

The Cherry Creek School District is conducting a thorough investigation of the complaint from the Overland High School parent and student concerning comments.

The school district says at first glance it does appear the teacher acted inappropriately at the very least.

A spokesperson for the Cherry Creek School District said they have placed Bennish on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation. This is not a disciplinary action; the school district wants to remove him while they sort through the rest of the investigation.

The Cherry Creek School District expects to finish the investigation by the end of the week. (all bold emphasis mine)

One guess which state this happened in.

And kudos to the Cherry Creek School District for taking his complaint seriously and not dismissing it out of hand.

Had the class been political science or current affairs, that might have been different. Even so, to compare our president, even ever so slightly, to Hitler in a classroom is plainly over the top. I don't care who is sitting in the Oval Office, Republican or Democrat. There are some things that you just shouldn't do.

Michelle Malkin has more. In fact, she prints the entire offensive portion of the tape. Note how the article I link above (and that's the whole article) leaves out some of the juicier bits? There's a lot more there than just the "Bush is Hitler's twin" type commentary. Stuff like "Who is probably the single most violent nation on the face of planet Earth?!" Guess who?

What media bias? Well, I suppose I should be happy it's being reported on at all...

UPDATE (6 pm): I just listened to the audio (located here), and the guy sounds like a typical angry leftwinger. Holy cow! The student who taped the segment was the only one asking pointed questions about what the teacher was saying, but Bennish didn't make much of an attempt to answer them. Listen for yourself to see what I mean. Had Bennish's concerns taken the form of point-counterpoint, not many could complain. But he was on a roll, and only one student had the sense enough to question him. What does that tell you about the state of our education system today?

UPDATE II (6:45 pm): According to Stop the ACLU, Bennish has hired an ACLU lawyer -- David Lane. Does the name sound familiar? It should. He's the same guy retained by none other than American Indian fraud Ward Churchill. Not much of a surprise there...

UPDATE III (3/3/06, 10:35 am): Here's the teacher's photo (I presume from a yearbook). Yep...looks the part to me!


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:39 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (3) | Education

March 01, 2006

The State of Higher Education

Right Wing Prof of Right Wing Nation is back in school and having to grit his teeth. He has the excruciatingly painful duty of dealing with the leftwing students -- some are fresh out of high school. Check this out:

It was the beginning of the semester, and we were talking about distributions. My aha! experience went something like this:

"Why do you call it a normal distribution? That's a value judgment."

I'm rarely speechless, but I was then. What do you say to something that breathtakingly stupid? But then, another student chimed in:

"You're saying some distributions are more normal than others, and that's offensive."

And as if that weren't enough, a third student said:

"I agree. Can we call it something else?"

These were freshmen, and it was the fall semester. Had they just taken freshman comp or some wackjob "disadvantaged studies" class, that would have explained where they picked up this stupidity. But these kids were right out of high school, less than three months out of high school. (The good news is that most of the other students were at least curling their lips, if not out and out snickering.)

I'm afraid I was rather unyielding. No, it's not a value judgment, and no, we can't call it something else, because it's a normal distribution, period, the end, that's all folks, moving right along. The three students weren't happy that I hadn't caved to their PC braindeath, but they got over it.

That same, first student also objected to "deviation" in "standard deviation," and for the same reason (though nobody seemed to mind "standard"). She also objected to "error" (as in "standard error"), and said "it's just different, not in error."

Freshmen. Three months out of high school.

The PC culture has been so ingrained in today's students in their public school days that they can't even deal with accepted business phrases such as "normal distribution" and "[standard] deviation." They are quick to see insult in even the most benign of phrases, courtesy of your leftist-dominated school systems.

The Prof himself sums it up nicely:

Liberals are fond of talking about power, and in one thing they are correct: We do hold power over students. This is precisely why leftist indoctrination passing itself off as education is an abuse of that power, and should be strenuously punished.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Education

Ex-Donkey Quoted by Howard Kurtz

Kudos to my friend Gary at Ex-Donkey Blog for being quoted by Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post (hey, even the MSM can sometimes hit it right!).

Click here to see Gary's post about it, and here to see the column by Kurtz. The quote is near the bottom.

Well done, Gary!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Conyers in Ethics Flap? Fuhgeddaboutit

Two former aides to Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) allege that he forced them to babysit and chauffer his kids. They also claim that some of his other aides used his office to plump their pocketbooks.

Some shrug off the allegations:

A former staffer who has worked for two House Democrats said, “This type of behavior is so prevalent, the unofficial duties that members require you to do off-the-record. Most staffers are subjected to this unfair treatment. It’s the great untold story on Capitol Hill.”

Will there be an outcry demanding that Conyers be investigated? Not from the Democrats, I'm sure, nor its MSM mouthpiece. A Google search of "conyers former aides babysit ethics" brings up nothing. Any other search keyword ideas?

Granted, it may not be as serious as taking bribes or stealing from the kitty. But an ethics violation is an ethics violation. Will this be investigated or ignored?

In other words, don't expect the usual hue and cry regarding one of their own.

Moonbattery has more.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:55 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Stand Up for Free Speech: Danish Embassy, NYC

danish flag.jpg
Mirroring last week's peaceful gathering at the Danish embassy in Washington DC (jump started by Christopher Hitchens), likeminded folks are invited to an event at the Danish embassy in New York City. Snarksmith has details:

There is no way that a city like New York should neglect to stand up for free speech, democracy and secular cosmopolitan values. So I am pleased to inform you that the rally for Solidarity With Denmark is indeed on for this week.

It will be held outside the Danish consulate at One Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, 885 Second Avenue, on FRIDAY, MARCH 3RD, FROM 12:00 PM TO 1:00 PM. (A fitting an emulation of the hugely successful D.C. version.)

I've been in touch with the consul-general himself, and he has graciously welcomed us. I promised the event would be as civilized and dignified as this noble cause demands, and in order to obviate a city permit, please note that NO electronically amplified sound equipment or bullhorns may be used. But signs and placards -- the cleverer the better -- are of course highly encouraged. Relevant cheeses, plastic toy building blocks and Shakespeare allusions also kosher...

Spread the word.

I'll be there. Will you?

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

Show Comments

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

    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