• 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

November 30, 2007

Merry Tossmas!

A new tradition for you and yours! Click here to see the how-to video.

h/t: Mark D.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Holiday

November 29, 2007

CNN's YouTube Republican Debate: The Shenanigans Continue

Good lord, will CNN never learn? There were 5,000 questions submitted for last night's debate and a *surprising* number of them were from committed Democrat candidate supporters.

Michelle Malkin and Hot Air have lots and lots of details.

I only caught the second hour of the debate and watched the first half hour of the discussion afterward. The alarm bells first started ringing when Bill Bennett (the only conservative commentator out of six in the after-debate mish mash) said he was getting e-mails saying one of the questioners (I think the guy who said, "What would Jesus do?" about capital punishment) was connected with the Hillary Clinton campaign. Anderson Cooper started hemming and hawing, saying that he didn't know anything about that, but CNN would look into it.

Seems to me they might have wanted to look into it BEFORE the debate. Or did they?

I also enjoyed watching the 12 "undecided Republicans" whose reactions were being monitored. One of them said after the debate that she was supporting John Edwards! Quite the interesting turn of events. Can you imagine a Democrat debate on CNN where an "undecided Democrat" announced he was supporting Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney? I can't either.

Despite the penchant for bias against them, Republicans go on these networks for debate...yet Democrats refuse to go on Fox. What is it they're afraid of? They'd likely be treated more fairly than the Republicans were last night...and for all that, the candidates did fairly well. (Some better than others, of course.)

And frankly, I'm still undecided.

UPDATE: Paul tried to post a comment in the comments section, but MuNu rejected it for "questionable content." No idea why, so I'm including it below:

Actually it was a retired general who asked about gaes in the military
being part of a Gay/Les/etc. group that has ties to HRC (thanks for the clarification Paul -- ed.). As I pointed out
in LLP post, I thought it was odd he was the only one allowed a follow up, live at that!

The HRC connection was noted afterwards, and A Cooper seemed angry about
it. I think it was a mistake, but the fact is, he works for HRC because
of his views; he didn't ask the question because HRC paid him off. I
think it's important to remember that he was expressing his own views,
although I agree CNN made a mistake in not having the connection beforehand
(which they've acknowledged).

UPDATE 2 (Nov. 30): Another rejected comment...what's up with that? (channeling Seinfeld)...this one from husband-dude:

The political preference wouldn't matter at all if it had been disclosed beforehand that the questioners were for the most part Democratic activists. They were not represented as such.

Democratic candidates flat out refused to have a debate on Fox because "the network was biased against their party."

Republicans went ahead and had the debate with CNN where the network was apparently VERY biased against their party - and did very well.


The Clinton News Network strikes again...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:07 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Once More, With Feeling: Pop Culture and the Presidency

My article at FSM today:

But seriously, when Americans begin to salivate over a candidate only after an overpaid, out of touch entertainer living in a ritzy Malibu cocoon makes The Announcement as to whom she is backing, its time to discuss priorities. Thats not to say that the glitterati shouldnt have an opinion on presidential candidates. Most everyone has an opinion, including you, me and the mailman, and those opinions will come into play when we all head to the polls next November. But when I want an educated opinion about who will do the best job in steering this country through murky waters infested with illegal aliens, Islamist terrorists and serious financial issues, the last person I plan on turning to is one whose claim to fame is singing You Dont Bring Me Flowers and Im the Greatest Star.

Read it all here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | FSM

November 23, 2007

PC Mob Forces Nobel Laureate to Resign in Disgrace

James Watson put his foot into a pile of politically correct poop last month. The Nobel Laureate, famous for his pioneering work in genetics, was quoted in the Sunday Times of London that he was inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa because all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really.

Within days, he had been forced to resign his position at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL). With his presentations cancelled by the Science Museum of London, he then left Britain "in disgrace" after being pummeled by a mob of critics. The common refrain against Watson's remarks were that they were "racist and most regrettable," not "backed by science" and only of use to the "far-right organizations such as the British National Party."

However, Watson is backed up by scientific research that can be referenced here and here in excruciating detail. With "over 100 years of data showing that ethnic groups differ in their general intelligence" the refusal to examine this body of evidence rationally reflects poorly on a scientific community terrified to buck the current social dogma.

James Watson felt it necessary to issue an apology -- quoted out of context by the New York Times. (Surprise!) So to those few reading about this unfortunate witch hunt, here is what he really said:

"We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things. The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity. It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science."

The full text of his remarks were published at the Independent on October 19, 2007.

Thus a distinguished career goes down in flames, thanks to the howling mobs who are so wedded to the PC mantra that they can't even bring themselves to acknowledge something that may (or may not) be true. It brings to mind the hell Lawrence Summers went through for daring to suggest the brains of men and women are wired differently, a possible reason fewer women are involved in hard sciences.

(On a related note, police in Britain find they cant even arrest drug dealers because of racism.)

With many thanks to husband-dude for this post!

Show Comments

Culture Shock: Majority of Those Polled Prefer 'Merry Christmas'

Deck those halls and ring the bells: a recent Rasmussen poll says 67% of respondents prefer the term "Merry Christmas" to the bland "Happy Holidays" in seasonal advertising by retailers. Naturally, more Republicans preferred it than Democrats, but even a slim majority of Dems like saying "Merry Christmas."

No wonder Lowe's had to back off their "Family Tree" catalog offering.

A large majority of Americans -- 95% -- celebrate Christmas, Christian or not. Don't worry, Christmas haters...no one is going to force you to have a Merry Christmas. But is having someone say it to you akin to having water doused on the Wicked Witch of the West? Get over your phobia already!


Don't be afraid to say it...the majority prefers it!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:28 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Culture

November 21, 2007

Top Five Reasons to Be Thankful This Year

My weekly FSM column a day early:

We cannot go back and undo history. The history of man worldwide is littered with tales of conquest and war, and America is no different in that regard. What does make us different is that we try to learn from our mistakes and move forward. Was there slavery? Yes and we abolished that during the long and bloody Civil War. (Ask your friendly neighborhood liberal what he thinks about the slavery that goes on in parts of the Middle East and Africa to this day.) Were American Indians routed from their lands? Yes that happened too. (Dont forget, they did fight back!) But continuing to cry over spilled milk and, even worse, making children feel guilty for anticipating their holiday feast with family and friends is despicable.

Be sure to read the rest here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | FSM

November 19, 2007

Guest Spot Tonight on Outside the Wire

UPDATE (11/20): Click here for the podcast for the November 19th show...I'm on during the 1st hour; from 9:30 to 10.

Tonight I'll be starting my bi-weekly guest stint on Outside the Wire with Bob Parks (I love this guy's voice!) in conjunction with my FamilySecurityMatters.org gig. We'll be talking about Diana West's new book "Death of the Grownup."

Click here to see a list of the 40 plus stations Outside the Wire can be heard on (it's part of the new Intel Radio Network). If there isn't a station near you, you can listen to a podcast of the show afterward...I believe the live streaming is still having its kinks worked out.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:42 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Media Appearances

November 16, 2007

'Pro-War' Boy Scouts in Cambridge...the Horror!

News about this story has been heating up over the last week.

Those horrible Boy Scouts! How dare they set up collection boxes at the polls to raise money for care packages to send to our troops in the Middle East? They should be hung and quartered for sending the message the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts might possibly support the war effort or, at the very least, the troops. (You know, the "we support the troops but not the war" mantra?) That just won't do.

Well, being a civilized society, the next best thing in Cambridge (Home of the Liberal) was done: have the boxes removed and tell those dastardly Boy Scouts they're too (shudder) pro-war.

That's what "Executive Director of the city's Election Commission" (sounds fancy!) Marsha Weinerman did. Due to one complaint by some overly-sensitive liberal citizen, and citing a law that doesn't allow political messages within 150 feet of polling stations, Weinerman sure showed the Boy Scouts who's in charge in Cambridge!

It doesn't matter that the Massachusetts secretary of state said the collection boxes were legal because they didn't pertain to that particular election. And the Boy Scouts claim they received permission, twice.

I wonder...had it been another group, would this have happened? We all know libs have it in for the Boy Scouts in general, believing in God and all, so perhaps this was just one more nail they could pound in the coffin.

Here in Connecticut, we have a special name for people from Massachusetts: Massholes. Usually we only refer to them that way on the roads when we're trying to avoid being hit by cars with MASS plates, but in Weinerman's case, I think the name fits.

As the Boston Daily Blog said, "way to stand up to those preteen hawks."

Melanie Morgan has something to say about it, both at her site and in her weekly WND column. Moonbattery also posted about it this week.


Proudly told the Boy Scouts where to get off!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:38 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

November 15, 2007



Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:39 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

My Take on Robert Spencer's MEF Talk

On Tuesday, I was fortunate to be among those who saw Robert Spencer speak in New York City. He was sponsored by the Middle East Forum, and I wrote about his talk on FSM today:

How tough is our current crop of presidential hopefuls when it comes to the war on terror? Not very, said Spencer. In fact, he said that its the great missing issue so far in the campaign. The Democrats have done little but criticize, and while the Republicans may have a more realistic view of the dangers we face from Jihadists, Mitt Romney is the only major candidate to use the word Jihad up to this point. He used it in a television ad that has been vilified by the press and his detractors including being spoofed on Saturday Night Live. While Spencer made it clear he is not endorsing Romneys candidacy, he found Romneys willingness to use the word Jihad to describe the current situation to be admirable.

Read the rest here.

Show Comments

November 12, 2007

IEDs: Land Mines in All but Name?

One was internationally "banned" 10 years ago; the other is used with disturbing frequency in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East by al Qaeda and its allies. So what exactly is the difference?

According to Wikipedia, "a land mine is an explosive device designed to be placed on or in the ground to explode when triggered by an operator or the proximity of a vehicle, person or animal." And "an improvised explosive device (IED) is a bomb constructed and deployed in ways other than in conventional military action. They may be partially comprised of conventional military explosives, such as an artillery round, attached to a detonating mechanism...IEDs are often placed on the curb of roads so as to detonate at passing vehicles or pedestrians, and so are sometimes known as roadside bombs."

In other words, both of them can either set in or on the road so that passing vehicles or pedestrians will trigger them to explode OR detonated in another manner. What's the difference? Not much, as far as I can see. The big question is, are IEDs called what they are because land mines were "banned" internationally? Is this a way for the "international community" to save face? If anyone can clarify this for me, I'd be most grateful.


Detonating an IED...or is it a land mine?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:30 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Military

Good News Today

First, the Dems tried to cobble a pork-laden appropriations bill with a defense bill with money for veterans so that the president couldn't, in good conscience, veto them. What happened instead is that Republicans were able to split the veterans spending portion away from the rest due to a rule made by Democrats earlier this year. Robert Novak has details.

The second piece of good news is that Sunni tribesmen were engaged in an hours-long armed conflict with al Qaeda and beat the stuffing out of them!

But don't expect to hear much about this from the old guard media.

On a tip from Tim B.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Good News

November 09, 2007

Deck the Halls with Bombs and Shrapnel

Over at FSM today:

Targeting malls at Christmastime makes sense, of course, if youre a terrorist malls and other retail centers will be packed to the gills with shoppers during the month of December. And while I wouldnt recommend becoming a recluse as a result of the news, as the old saying goes: forewarned is forearmed. Unless, of course, forearmed is now considered a non-PC term due to its vague reference to arms/weapons, thus making the use of it one of those zero tolerance issues we hear so much about. If you know for sure please send me an e-mail, as I dont wish to be offensive. (Oh, darn it, Ive already crossed the line by saying Christmas instead of holiday. Sixty lashes with a wet noodle for me.)

Read it all here!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:58 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | FSM

November 07, 2007

Run, Al, Run...Er, Never Mind

I laughed OUT LOUD when I read the following:

Iowans who support former Vice President Al Gore have been forced to cancel a concert in his honor.

The $20 per ticket "Run, Al, Run" event, which I wrote about last month and was scheduled for Sunday in Des Moines, was called off because organizers feared they wouldn't sell enough tickets.

Peter Ryder of Cedar Rapids told me there are two reasons the rally and concert won't go on as planned, despite folk singer Paul Kaplan writing an original song in Gore's honor.

The idea was to "send a message to Al Gore there is a tremendous surge of feeling about you running, but after he won the Nobel Peace Prize, he really got that message pretty loud and clear," Ryder said.

Given the importance of Iowa for the declared Democratic candidates, "we felt it would be difficult to sell the number of tickets to make the whole thing financially viable," Ryder added.

The rest of the Washington Times piece is here.

They didn't think they'd sell enough tickets, even though they only cost $20 each? That's not exactly breaking the bank. And a special song written for the occasion by folk singer Paul Kaplan...well, what crunchy granola type could resist such an opportunity?

You know, there's a reason why folk music isn't a big moneymaker. It looks like Paul can't even afford a haircut or moustache trim. And now his big shot at stardom won't even happen. Sigh...it's a cruel world.

Here's the song in question, if you can stomach it. You might want to have a trashcan or paper bag handy for the retching that might result. Don't say I didn't warn you! (The graphics of George W. Bush followed by the Twin Towers before 9/11 were especially effective...that is, if you like false innuendo and scaremongering.)

As for the Nobel Peace Prize being a "loud and clear" message for Gore to run, I'd like to remind this Peter Ryder (who couldn't manage to sell enough $20 tickets for this non-event) that the Nobel Peace Prize committee is a bunch of Norweigians in Norway. Despite the fervent wishes of many lefties, the rest of the world is not allowed to have a say in American elections.

Maybe if we get those illegal aliens their licenses, that dream can finally come true...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:00 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Politics

Tonight on Family Feud: Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens? Survey Said

My article over at Family Security Matters today. Here's an excerpt:

Newsflash to Washington insiders: a majority of Americans are not in favor of illegal aliens being in their country, much less receiving privileges and entitlement programs being handed out like cocktails at a party at the Kennedy compound. If youd bother to get out of Washington a little more often and talk to the folks down here, you might know that. Our displeasure about the amnesty bill over the summer and the recent Dream Act proposal were not mere quirks, but its how we really feel. We dont work hard and pay our taxes just so millions of interlopers with extended palms can reap the benefits of privileges they didnt earn.

Be sure to read it all here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:59 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | FSM

November 06, 2007

Fred's New Campaign Ad

I like it:

Will it give his campaign the extra oomph it needs? That remains to be seen.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:59 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Fred!

November 05, 2007

On Your Hands

Tim B. passed something interesting on to me, and so I thought I'd share it with you. It's been in an e-mail that has made the rounds, and I wondered about its authenticity...and so I took the bold step of looking this guy, J.D. Pendry, up on the Internet (after a Snopes.com search came up empty).

And what do you know? He exists, and he has a website. J.D. Pendry (CSM USA, ret.), according to his bio, is not a combat veteran, but:

I served my 28 years in the Cold War Army with an active strength hovering around 760,000, nearly twice that of todays Hot War active Army. For those 28 years I did what other Soldiers did. I deployed on extended training exercises away from the family, worked many 12 hour plus days, many weekends and holidays and missed many of the family events that are often taken for granted. I had 5 overseas tours and moved my family 13 times. I went where I was sent and did what I was asked. Like my Brothers and Sisters at Arms, I endured the idiocy of politicians without ever offering an opinion and served an American population that barely knew I existed. I have no regrets and I certainly make no apologies for who I am, what I did in the service of my country, or what I have to say.

I love him already.

Anyway, the e-mail I received was entitled "Axis of Idiots," but Pendry prefers to call it "On Your Hands." I'll reprint part of it here, but then be sure to click over to his site for the rest...it is a definite must-read. While this is over a year old at this point, I think it remains relevant today...what with the "leadership" we have in Congress and other know-it-alls who would throw our military under the bus as long as it means there's a possibility such an act would get them more votes (and thus more power) on election day:

Jimmy Carter, youre the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. Youre the runner-in-chief.

Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.

John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. Youve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. Youre a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.

Good stuff. Read the rest, and be sure to check out the rest of his site...he seems to post about once a week.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:14 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

November 03, 2007

Oklahoma: Toughest on Illegal Aliens

Oklahoma now has the toughest immigration legislation in the land. Here are the provisions of a new law that just went into effect:

*Illegal aliens may NOT receive public assistance
*Anyone arrested for a felony or drinking and driving will have citizenship verified
*Illegal to transfer to transfer or harbor illegal aliens
*Public employers must register with a program to verify immigration status of all employees

I say, GOOD FOR OKLAHOMA! America has laws; let's obey them.

As you'll see from the video below, not everyone is happy...and of course, the last image we are left with is that of a poor child whose mother (a citizen) married an illegal alien. It's all about the children, of course...not the bad choices made by their parents.

Now let's hope the other 49 states will follow suit.

h/t: Hot Air

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:12 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

    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