January 09, 2006
Will the Progressives ever realize we're in a WORLD WAR?
HERE IS yet another example of plain speaking by a representative of Islamofacism, outlineing their end goal; nothing less than a world-wide Islamic state under Shar'ia.
Progressives are constantly trying to blame the US and/or "Western Culture" as the cause of the conflict, yet the Islamofacists themselves make no such claims.
They state their end goal clearly enough, as well as continually demonstrate their willingness to commit any act of atrocity in furthurance of that goal:
"Second, install sharia (Islamic law) on the entire Earth and spread Islamic justice there (...). The attacks will not cease until after the victory of Islam and the setting up of sharia," he swore.
~Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (emph. mine D)
HOW'S THIS for "hate speech"?:
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, said in an audio tape put onto the Internet Sunday that rockets had been fired at Israel from Lebanon last month "on the instructions" of the network's overall chief Osama bin Laden.
"The rocket firing at the ancestors of monkeys and pigs from the south of Lebanon was only the start of a blessed in-depth strike against the Zionist enemy"
These are the people that Cindy Sheehan considers "freedom fighters"?!?
Also interesting to note:
"Zarqawi also said the guerrillas had carried out nearly 800 operations against "the crusader forces" since the occupation of Iraq, putting "crusader" casualties at around 40,000 soldiers."
Funny, I thought we had only lost 2038 ? Not to make light of those that paid the ultimate cost of freedom, but thats quite a discrepancy; between 2038 and 40,000....maybe it's some new form of Islamic math?
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
01:08 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.
1
maybe the ragheads are counting all those civilians they have killed in various places around the globe
Posted by: GUYK at January 09, 2006 03:12 PM (iAhlK)
2
What makes you think 'progressives' don't realize we're in a war?
I don't see anyone denying we're in the middle of a war. Of course I don't know if you could say 'the middle' because we're in the midst of a war with no end. How do you win the war on terror? By defeating the terrorist. Which considerning we don't know who is and who is not a terrorist and exactly where they're all hiding out, it's pretty much an unending and unwinnable war.
Let me ask you this, how is the idea of spreading Islam throught the world any different than the idea of spreading Christianity? Or democracy for that matter. Of course we think our religion and our idea of government is better. It's OUR's it has to be better. But guess what? Muslims think THEIR's is better. They believe there's is the one true God. Granted, most Christians would never harm anyone in their pursuit of spreading their faith, but one only need look at Pat Robertson and James Dobson to know even Christians have their radicals.
Do you think for one minute that George W. Bush is not as determined and as passionate about his goal of 'spreading democracy' as Abu Musab al-Azrqawi is about spreading Islam? Do you understand they see us as the infidels?
The truth is we are engaged in a war of religion and beliefs. It's becoming increasingly clear that both sides are willing to do ANYTHING to win. That, Delfsman is the realty of the war in which we are in.
Posted by: wanda at January 09, 2006 04:44 PM (cVji6)
3
Wanda, your idiocy is showing.
The "war" between Islam and civilization was declared about 1200 years ago, by Mohammed.
You also seem to think that spreading "democracy" is a bad thing, and should be halted.
Of course, being a Regressive, you aren't a big fan of individuality, or the rights of the individual to speak for themselves. Dialectic Materialism doesn't allow for individuality. You really should read up on the philosophy that guides your beliefs and actions.
Moron.
Posted by: the Humble Devildog at January 09, 2006 07:14 PM (hcTHz)
4
"how is the idea of spreading Islam throught the world any different than the idea of spreading Christianity? Or democracy for that matter."
Well Wanda, the difference is that we don't behead those that won't convert, we don't specifically target women and babies with bombs.
Radical Islam is a byproduct of the tyranies that much of the ME lives under, so yes, I do believe spreading democracy is a way to fight terrorism. Democracy can free people that would otherwise BECOME terrorists, because they see no other choice. (yes that is a dream at the moment, but who said dreamers were the exclusive province of the Progressives?; the difference is we don't pretend the dream can be the reality if we just say it is so long and loud enough, we do the nitty gritty, dreary work to prepare the soil so that the dream may blossom.)
".. our idea of government is better. It's OUR's it has to be better. But guess what? Muslims think THEIR's is better."
But ours IS demonstrably better, not just because it's the system WE live under, but because it provides more and better for the greatest number of people. We lament the plight of the "poor" in this country, but that's a relative term..only in America do the poor own cars, have airconditioning, and color tvs, and if a certain Democratic proposal goes through they will soon have computers and broadband access PROVIDED by Uncle Sugar too.
My parents raised 6 kids on $60-75 a week, so I know what it's like to be "poor",but compared to the REAl poor in most of the world, we were living in luxury.
"but one only need look at Pat Robertson and James Dobson to know even Christians have their radicals."
Yeah we DO have our "radicals" and nutjobs, but that's ANOTHER difference between "us' and "them"...here, we laugh at them, there, they follow them as holy men, to the point of strapping semtex on their children at their "holy man's" command and sending them out to kill "infidel" women and children. THERE the president of their country calls Jews the "progenitors of apes and swine", and strangly enough, without one word of approbation from the PC Progressives. I'm sick of the attempts to make moral equivilencies were truly none exist.
"Do you think for one minute that George W. Bush is not as determined and as passionate about his goal of 'spreading democracy' as Abu Musab al-Azrqawi is about spreading Islam?"
I sure HOPE so! Democracy will be the only way to prevent a holocaust the likes of which I don't believe anyone younger than 70 or so can even truly imagine. I have second hand "memories" of the Death Camps and the brutalities of WW2 from my father, who lived it, and I don't think for one moment that what I imagine and "remember" comes even close to the reality
"Do you understand they see us as the infidels?"
I truly believe that the average conservative actually understands that better than the average progressive. you see, WE actually understand what the term means in their context, and understand the depth of what it means to them. All too many progressives just consider it a hollow bargaining position from which to strike a bargain from.
"It's becoming increasingly clear that both sides are willing to do ANYTHING to win. That, Delfsman is the realty of the war in which we are in."
There JUST may be hope for you yet, Wanda. As soon as you come to realize the underlying truths of that statement, we'll be here to welcome you into the fold of a TRUE reality based world. A world where we see it as it truly is; with the HOPE of someday turning it into what we would WISH it to be.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 09, 2006 11:13 PM (Y5CFT)
5
Humble, your response is why I don't comment on more rightwing blogs. You people are incapable of having a civil conversation.
Please tell me how it is that I can be both a regressive and a progressive?
Being a "pro"gressive, I'm a big fan of individuality, and the rights of the individual to speak for themselves. Apparently far more than you are. Since you have no respect for me or my opinions.
Democracy is not a bad thing. But neither is Islam. It is only the radicals on both sides that want to force others to bow to their idea of what is 'right'. If what we're experiencing in this country today is the kind of democracy your talking about, then maybe we should try sweeping around our own back door before we go trying to tell other people how to live their lives.
People of other countries have their own cultures, their own ways of life. The United States has no business trying to force them to bend to our idea of government or religion. It is one thing to defend oneself from those who attack you. It's entirely another to try to force your ideals on others.
I believe to each his own. I believe in the right of every individual to worship as he or she pleases. I believe in the right of free speech and the right to make one's own personal private choices. I believe the government should stay out of my bedroom, my bank account, and my library account.
If there's anyone who's displaying regressive characteristics it's you.
Delftsman, I find it interesting that you would mention the holocaust. I recently read an article by a holocaust survivor who said he was moving back to Germany. Why? Because he said he recognized what what happening here in this country. He'd seen it before. I fear he may be right. I know you don't want to believe that, but the reality is the 'right' of today has more in common with the narrowminded one one deminsional viewpoint of communisim than liberals ever could. Liberals by definition believe in liberation, not repression. Am I a liberal? You bet I am. Am I progressive? Yes sir! Do I support the rights of all granted by our Constitution? Yes I do. Do I think we have the right or responsiblity to force those beliefs on people of other countries? I do not.
Democracy is a great thing. If it's really a democracy.
Posted by: wanda at January 10, 2006 06:57 PM (cVji6)
6
HDD did paint with too broad a brush when it comes to you Wanda, but when you align yourself with dogs, you're going to suffer fleas.
"I believe in the right of every individual to worship as he or she pleases."
UNLESS they do it in public, of course. THAT might offend someone.
"Do I support the rights of all granted by our Constitution?"
WITH the exception of the 2nd. Amendment. I believe you do think you support the rights in the Constitution (with the one exception above)...even the rights not enumerated in it, but put in place under "emanations of the penumbra" thereof.
"Democracy is a great thing. If it's really a democracy."
One problem there Wanda..we are NOT and were never designed to be a democracy, we are a Republic. The U.S. certainly has it's faults, but it's still the closest thing to goal of individual freedom and opportunity that has ever existed. Only the Progressives seem to think that "if it's not perfect, it must be evil".
"The United States has no business trying to force them to bend to our idea of government or religion. It is one thing to defend oneself from those who attack you."
I would agree with you but for one thing,
Wanda...just WHAT do you do when the end goal of a different culture and/or religion is your utter destruction? THEY say it's their goal. THEY have demonstrated a willingness and an ability to turn their rhetoric into physical action. THEY say that they will continue until they have achieved their goal. EVERY time diplomacy was engaged in, THEY used it as a way to rebuild strength to be able to continue the fight. We gave them money for development and the betterment of their people, and it was used for the benefit of the despots and their arms aquisition programs, even as they continued to build resentments against their benefactors.
There is a time for diplomacy, and there is a time for arms; I don't supppose it's any secret which time I believe it is.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 10, 2006 11:30 PM (Y5CFT)
7
Interestingly enough, Wanda, Delfts' father is a non-Jewish holocaust survivor as well. And given the opportunity to return to Europe, I can truly say he would not avail himself of it.
Second, and this is to all of you from both ends of this situation, please remember that this country does not base its method of governing on Democracy. This is not a democracy by any stretch of the imagination. And I, for one, would rue the day this nation ever becomes one.
A democratically elected Representative Republic is what we live in, regardless of what Miss Smith may have told all of you in the third grade. If we lived in the "Democracy" that so many either believe we have, or that so many more wish we have, we'd be mired in ridiculous votes and referenda on a weekly basis. Do I really want Mob Rule? No, and absent the pitchforks and torches that is what a true Democracy is.
I'll take a pass on that, please. And if that is what your friend wants, Wanda, I wish him well and good luck. He'll never find it, and he'll find himself in fear of the Mob once again. You'd think people would learn, wouldn't you?
Posted by: Mamamontezz at January 10, 2006 11:58 PM (Y5CFT)
8
Okay, Wanda, you asked for it.
You label yourself a "progressive", but, you are actually a REgressive. Your "ideas" on individuality and governing have already been tried, MANY times in history. Each time, those "ideas" were a colossal FAILURE.
The "progressive" movement is based upon Dialectic Materialism, which is the philosophy created by Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels, which they then used to create the economic model of Communism. DM holds that individuals have NO effect on society, only movements do. Don't believe me? Look it up. Research it. I did.
Individuality is anathema to the "progressive" movement. What are you "progressing" towards? Communism. Communism doesn't recognize the rights of the individual.
In addition, EVERY SINGLE PRIMARY ADVOCATE of "individual rights" in the US since about 1920 has been a Communist. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE! I do not speak of the current Useful Idiots (Stalin's term for you all), but, the philosophers and thinkers who shaped the arguement.
As to your idiocy of "We don't have the right to tell immigrants how to live in the US": Are you aware that Islam allows slavery, the beating of women, forced prostitution, killing of women, counts women as less than half a man, and does not recognize the rights of others to be non-Muslim? And those are just the highlights of it! According to you, Muslims should be allowed to follow THEIR religion, even though it runs counter to our LAWS and culture! What idiocy!
In addition to that, name me ONE country that has prospered without a central cultural identity. JUST ONE!
I'll give you a hint: Find the Austrio-Hungarian Empire on your map sometime, and book a flight there. That should keep you occupied for the rest of your life.
Posted by: the Humble Devildog at January 11, 2006 12:19 AM (hcTHz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 08, 2006
Wild Thang, You are the GREATEST!
Wild Thing is the best at Photoshop I've ever seen, as demonstrated by this little example I
ripped off borrowed from her site:
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
11:28 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
Weird Howard Puts his foot in it ---AGAIN
“There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican. Every person under investigation is a Republican. Every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money and we’ve looked through all of the F.E.C. reports to make sure that’s true…I know the Republican National Committee would like to get the Democrats involved in this. They're scared. They should be scared. They haven't told the truth. They have misled the American people, and now it appears they're stealing from Indian tribes. The Democrats are not involved in this.”
~Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean CNNÂ’s Late Edition,1/8/2006
Read it and weep Howie!
40 Of The 45 Members Of The Senate Democrat Caucus:
Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) Received At Least – $22,500
Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) Received At Least – $6,500
Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) Received At Least – $1,250
Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) Received At Least – $2,000
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Received At Least – $20,250
Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Received At Least – $21,765
Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) Received At Least – $7,500
Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Received At Least – $12,950
Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) Received At Least – $8,000
Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Received At Least – $7,500
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) Received At Least – $14,792
Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Received At Least – $79,300
Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Received At Least – $14,000
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Received At Least – $2,000
Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Received At Least – $1,250
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) Received At Least – $45,750
Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Received At Least – $9,000
Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT) Received At Least – $2,000
Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) Received At Least – $14,250
Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Received At Least – $3,300
Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Received At Least – $98,550
Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Received At Least – $28,000
Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) Received At Least – $4,000
Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,000
Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Received At Least – $29,830
Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) Received At Least – $14,891
Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Received At Least – $10,550
Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Received At Least – $78,991
Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) Received At Least – $20,168
Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) Received At Least – $5,200
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) Received At Least – $7,500
Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) Received At Least – $2,300
Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Received At Least – $3,500
Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) Received At Least – $68,941
Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) Received At Least – $4,000
Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) Received At Least – $4,500
Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) Received At Least – $4,300
Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Received At Least – $29,550
Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,250
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Received At Least – $6,250
Lil' Howie proves yet again that he doesn't live in the same world as the rest of us. I just hope that he keeps bloviating though, he's the best thing for the Republican party since they passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (Another rewrite of history that doesn't seem to be recalled, but that's a different post.)
I blatently stole this from Wild Thing, only I don't have the cool art work.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
11:01 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 591 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Source on those numbers? I've been trying to confirm this and can't find the source.
Posted by: Steph Mineart at January 09, 2006 11:16 AM (s2yPb)
2
Steph, check the CBO and the Campaign finance offices, they're all a matter of public record.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 09, 2006 12:06 PM (Y5CFT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
WHY didn't I think of this?
Finally, someone has come out with a 100 % bipartisan
political bumper sticker. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes
from New York State:
2008 - "RUN, HILLARY, RUN"
Democrats put it on the rear bumper
Republicans put it on the front bumper.
H/T to Catfish
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
10:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.
Bubba
Bubba Knows Everyone!
Bubba was bragging to his boss one day, "You know, I know everyone that there is to know. Just name someone, anyone, and I know them." Tired of his boasting, his boss called his bluff, "OK, Bubba how about Tom Cruise?"
"Sure, yes, Tom and I are old friends, and I can prove it."
So Bubba and his boss fly out to Hollywood and knock on Tom Cruise's door, and sure enough, Tom Cruise, shouts, "Bubba! Great to see you! You and your friend come right in and join me for lunch!"
Although impressed, Bubba's boss is still skeptical. After they leave Cruise's house, he tells Bubba that he thinks Bubba's knowing Cruise was just lucky.
"No, no, just name anyone else," Bubba says.
"President Clinton, "his boss quickly retorts.
"Yes," Bubba says, "I know him, let's fly out to Washington." And off they go.
At the White House, Clinton spots Bubba on the tour and motions him and his boss over, saying, "Bubba, what a surprise, I was just on my way to a meeting, but you and your friend come on in and let's have a cup of coffee first and catch up."
Well, the boss is very shaken by now, but still not totally convinced. After they leave the White House grounds, he expresses his doubts to Bubba, who again implores him to name anyone else.
"The Pope," his boss replies. "Sure!" says Bubba. "My folks are from Poland, and I've known the Pope a long time." So off they fly to Rome.
Bubba and his boss are assembled with the masses in Vatican Square when Bubba says, "This will never work. I can't catch the Pope's eye among all these people. Tell you what, I know all the guards so let me just go upstairs and I'll come out on the balcony with the Pope." And he disappears into the crowd headed toward the Vatican.
Sure enough, half an hour later Bubba emerges with the Pope on the balcony. But by the time Bubba returns, he finds that his boss has had a heart attack and is surrounded by paramedics. Working his way to his boss' side, Bubba asks him, "What happened?"
His boss looks up and says, "I was doing fine until you and the Pope came out on the balcony and the man next to me said, 'Who's that on the balcony with Bubba?'"
H/T to Jack
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
10:26 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 408 words, total size 2 kb.
New Prayer
My friend Jack sent me this today, and even though I'm an Agnostic, I feel the same outrage at the anti-religion atitude in the government
schools indoctrination centers. The only thing that I can affirm is that, as long as there are quizzes, tests, and year end exams, they can never truly get prayer out of school.
Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.
If Scripture now the class recites,
It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.
Our hair can be purple, orange or green,
That's no offense; it's a freedom scene.
The law is specific, the law is precise.
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.
For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all
In silence alone we must meditate,
God's name is prohibited by the state.
We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the 'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.
It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgments" do not belong.
We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,
No word of God must reach this crowd.
It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns the school's a mess.
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot; My soul please take!
Amen
If you aren't ashamed to do this, please pass this on.
Jesus said, " If you are ashamed of me," I will be ashamed
of you before my Father."
Not ashamed. Passing this on.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
10:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.
Best Blond Joke Ever
I love Blond jokes, and Samantha Burns has the
BEST ONE EVER!
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
09:48 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Thanks for the link. Any interest in a blogroll exchange?
Posted by: sam at January 11, 2006 01:47 AM (/HV50)
2
I'm pointing to here with my post!
Posted by: andy at January 12, 2006 05:08 PM (TV3yM)
3
Priceless! I've never heard a blonde joke so funny in my life.
Posted by: Temujin at January 18, 2006 04:23 PM (u3DY0)
4
best blonde joke I have ever seen
) I'm on the 6th page right now
Posted by: Funny Guy at February 18, 2006 10:18 AM (uP9SF)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Murtha's Comeuppance
Michelle Malkin isolated the video of Rep. Murtha getting his clock cleaned by one of those "demoralized" soldiers he keeps harping about.
The look on Murthas face says it all.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
04:14 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Someone must have incriminating pictures of "Martha."
Posted by: Walter E. Wallis at January 08, 2006 10:41 AM (+UTEO)
2
Walter, I'd say this video would be pretty incriminating, along with video of most of his speeches, with regard to any treason proceedings that might take place.
RWR
Posted by: RightWingRocker at January 08, 2006 01:40 PM (ctBjJ)
3
heh.
I love it when a politician gets verbally mugged by one of the "unwashed masses" or "stupid grunts" they love to condescend to.
hm....gives me an idea...maybe we could organized a Town Hall Meeting Brigade, and just scurry across the country, verbally mugging all these stupid politicians, and making them eat their own words?
Posted by: the Humble Devildog at January 08, 2006 01:51 PM (hcTHz)
4
Well darn, it won't let me post my comment.
I hope that's going to be a non partisian town hall meeting. Because there are quite a few politicians on both sides (well in all fairness there will be more on one side than the other) that are about to get their comeuppance. Just ask 'the hammer'.
Posted by: wanda at January 08, 2006 04:42 PM (cVji6)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 07, 2006
Yeah, Saddam was "just misunderstood"
Yeah, the Left and their "experts" say that Saddam would
never have worked with Al Qiada and vice versa.
One group were religious fanatics and Saddam was a secularist, after all....Too bad that the
documentation found in Iraq on three Terrorist training camps run by Saddams Elite Republican Guard belie that meme....facts have such a bad habit of ruining a perfectly good meme to use against President Bush..
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
03:20 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Do you think they will let something like a fact get in the way of trying to spread it? They knew it was bogus when they started. Their entire strategy is based on hoping enough people who hear the lie never actually hear the truth.
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at January 07, 2006 02:50 PM (DdRjH)
2
I doubt that this will make the major media but the bloggers will know the truth
Posted by: GUYK at January 07, 2006 10:58 PM (iAhlK)
3
Of course the truth is all that really matters. Right?
Posted by: wanda at January 08, 2006 04:37 PM (cVji6)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 06, 2006
"Justice"?!?!
Romeocat and
Misha do far more justice to
this story than I ever could.
I'll just limit myself to six words on the matter:
ROPE
JUDGE
TREE
(some assembly required)
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
10:08 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I just popped in here and saw the conservative wear image to the right which says "join the darkside"
How sadly appropriate that is.
Posted by: Navywxman at January 07, 2006 12:19 AM (qcIpc)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Pictures that make you go "Hmmm"
Truth in advertising comes to panhandling. I might be tempted to assist this man in his "research", as at least he was honest in his goals.
Hunting is a brutal activity...you never know when the hunter may become the hunted.
Finally!, a totally accurate weather indicater.
Democrats introduced new military cost-cutting proposals in weapons systems in Congress today.
Further proof that Bush is hated around the world, and our troops are bloodthirtsty barbarians as Murtha and Kerry allege.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
08:01 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 90 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wow, those are some great photo opps! By the way I have some ocean front property for sale in Arizona. Would you be interested? I have some lovely pictures I could send you.
Posted by: wanda at January 08, 2006 04:39 PM (cVji6)
2
I know you'd rather see the Bahgdad chapter of Code Pink demonstrating, Wanda.
Sorry to disapoint you. Seems all of the type of people that openly protest government in the ME are either in mass graves or are "insurgents" not willing to do more than attack women and children, when they aren't setting off bombs to kill our troops.
You know, those troops you support so much?
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 09, 2006 07:53 AM (Y5CFT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Points to Ponder
As the New Year begins, here are just a few things to keep in mind:
Number 10 - Life is sexually transmitted.
Number 9 - Good health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one
can die.
Number 8 - Ladies: Men have two emotions: Hungry and Horny. If you see him
without an erection, make him a sandwich.
Number 7 - Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach a
person to use the Internet and they won't bother you for weeks.
Number 6 - Some people are like a Slinky .. not really good for anything,
but you still can't help but smile when you shove them down the stairs.
Number 5 - Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in
hospitals dying of nothing.
Number 4 - All of us could take a lesson from the weather. It pays no
attention to criticism.
Number 3 - Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial
tax cut saves you 30 cents?
Number 2 - In the 60s, people took acid to make the world weird. Now the
world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal.
AND THE NUMBER 1 THOUGHT FOR 2006: We know exactly where one cow with
mad-cow-disease is located among the millions and millions of cows in
America but we haven't got a clue as to where thousands of illegal
immigrants and terrorists are located. Maybe we should put the Department
of Agriculture in charge of immigration.
-------------------------------------------------------
H/T to Catfish
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
07:47 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 1 kb.
Good News
They released my Father in Law from the hospital. The treatments worked to relieve the stress on the heart, and they determined that the heart had sustained no lasting damage.
Wesley's still weak and having trouble breathing, but that's to be expected with his COPD. It's just a matter of (not much) time until that condition takes him, but at least he's home for now. We only hope he survives untill his 50 wedding anniversary in May.
THANK YOU ALL for your thoughts and prayers in this time, it's meant a lot to both Mamamontezz and I.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
05:09 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
Year End Review
Odysseus has his own perspective on the "
Year in Review" that's really worth the read. I especially liked his handling of Cindy Sheehans antics.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
04:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.
Culture Wars
If you really want to see an
Ass in action...too bad that the Letterman is a Hoosier...musta been corrupted by his time in New York.
You were correct in one thing Dave...you ARE'NT smart enough to debate anything of meaningful consequence. O'Reilly is an pompous ass too, but at least he puts out a train of reasoning for his position, and welcomes a debate from those who disagree.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
12:16 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Letterman does not come out best in that discussion, he is condescending and pompus. O'Reilly wears me out, he often wins his "debates" by being louder and cutting off the opposition. But for Letterman to proclaim that 60% of what O'Reilly says is bunk, then admit he has never seen the show, is liberal asshattery at its finest.
Now I remember why I usually watch Leno.
Posted by: hoosierboy at January 06, 2006 08:52 AM (o/kfU)
2
Thankfully I don't watch the night shows and usually switch off O'Reilly too. At least O'Reilly has strong opinions and will jump into a controversy. All too often all they are doing is getting up in the pulpit and preaching to the choir what some writer has prepped for them in the hopes that the congregation will follow along like mindless minions. Like a pro-wrestling match only verbal, it's all for entertainment ratings and not for journalistic accuracy. Factoids if you will, unverified portions of the truth that can be skewed as they please with plausible deniability.
Posted by: Jack at January 06, 2006 02:49 PM (30iDw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 05, 2006
MATH 101
ROMANCE MATHEMATICS
Smart man + smart woman = romance
Smart man + dumb woman = affair
Dumb man + smart woman = marriage
Dumb man + dumb woman = pregnancy
______________________________
OFFICE ARITHMETIC
Smart boss + smart employee = profit
Smart boss + dumb employee = production
Dumb boss + smart employee = promotion
Dumb boss + dumb employee = overtime
_____________________________
SHOPPING MATH
A man will pay $20 for a $10 item he needs.
A woman will pay $10 for a $20 item that she doesn't need.
_____________________________
GENERAL EQUATIONS & STATISTICS
A woman worries about the future until she gets a husband.
A man never worries about the future until he gets a wife.
A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend.
A successful woman is one who can find such a man.
_____________________________
HAPPINESS
To be happy with a man, you must understand him a lot and love him a
little.
To be happy with a woman, you must love her a lot and not try to
understand her at all.
______________________________
LONGEVITY
Married men live longer than single men do, but married men are a lot
more willing to die.
______________________________
PROPENSITY TO CHANGE
A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn't.
A man marries a woman expecting that she won't change, and she does.
_____________________________
DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE
A woman has the last word in any argument.
Anything a man says after that is the beginning of a new argument.
_____________________________
HOW TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BUGGING YOU ABOUT GETTING MARRIED
Old aunts used to come up to me at weddings, poking me in the ribs and
cackling, telling me, "You're next."
They stopped after I started doing the same thing to them at funerals.
<><><><<><><><><><><><><><><<><>
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
10:14 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.
January 04, 2006
RIP
I'm sure everyone's aware that those miners, with one exception, in W.Virginia didn't survive their ordeal. All I can do is offor my heartfelt condolences to the families. I hope that the one surviver, who was still in critical condition the last I heard, continues to recover.
We all take it for granted that we will have power at the flick of a switch, and that the fuel needed to generate that power will be there, but we forget that that fuel carries a price. Mining has always been, and IS, a dangerous profession. We need to remember those brave souls that toil within the bowels of the earth to help provide a better life for us all.
I've been in a coal mine ONCE, and it scared the hell out of me. I've been a cave rat since I was 11 years old, and I'm not claustrophobic, so it wasn't the dark or the close spaces that bothered me. It was the knowledge that it wasn't a natural space I was in, but one torn out by man and inherently unstable without constant vigilence and shoring. In other words, it's a space held open by the technology and will of man, and we know all too well the flaws of anything done by man.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
07:29 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 1 kb.
January 03, 2006
Let the Citizens decide? NO, they won't vote the way WE want!
No matter how you feel about gay marriage, don't you think that it's up to the people of a state to determine whether or not to allow it?
Not according to the Gay and Lesbian Advocates & Defenders(GLAD) in Mass.
Gay marriage was "legalized" by a landmark court known as Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health in 2003. It ended "discrimination" in marriage by judicial fiat.
A number of citizens were incensed at this ruling and decided to request a ballot initiative be placed on the ballot calling for an amendment to the Mass. state constitution banning same sex marriage. Sounds like the American way, doesn't it? Letting the citizenry of a state decide what they will and will not allow in their state? Not according to GLAD. They contend that the citizens of the state can not constitutionally initiate any sort of plebacite to reverse a judicial ruling, that it can only originate from within the legislature. The REAL horror here is that they may be legally correct...Mass.'s constitution does seem to contain such a stricture. In other words, the people of the state have no voice in public policy question other than that which can be induced by one of their elected representatives. That seems to be reasonable on it's face...after all , that's why we elect representatives, to ensure that the will of the people is carried out in an orderly. measured manner, but it's discounting the fact that in todays PC world, it's the loudest minority that seems to get the most attention from the political class, and that class can be cowardly when faced with accusations of not being PC by an ultravocal minority, with the possible subsequent loss of their seats if they don't buckle to the pressure.
Seems to me that the good people of Mass. need to have TWO Constitutional reform referendums placed on the ballot in 2008. When enough people are dissatisfied with the current trend of major issues, it seems to me that it would be within their basic rights to attempt to redress those grievences with a public referendum. If they lose, fine, the people have made their voice known. But that isn't what GLAD believes. They KNOW that their position would be a hard fought one,and one where they could very possibly lose, and so would rather rely on the decision of one man in a black robe to press their agenda forward, no matter what the people may believe, and they're perfectly willing to stack the deck to ensure that the people will have no real voice in the matter.
That is could even be "legally" possible to do so points out to a flaw in the state constitution. But what else would you expect from a state that would continually re-elect an alcoholic manslaughterer to it's senior Senate seat position?
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
05:15 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 498 words, total size 3 kb.
1
They've got just what they deserve in that state, let's be Frank (Barney) about it and say they've got Ted Kennedy and Jean Fraud Kerry too. All Socialists.
Posted by: Jack at January 03, 2006 09:10 PM (9ltgc)
2
"No matter how you feel about gay marriage, don't you think that it's up to the people of a state to determine whether or not to allow it?"
ABSOLUTELY!
I couldn't agree with you more on this one.
Posted by: wanda at January 04, 2006 04:43 PM (cVji6)
3
actually the 14th amendment which privides for equal opportunity under the law for all has already decided it.
Posted by: GUYK at January 04, 2006 05:28 PM (iAhlK)
4
I don't like this "once the gays can marry who knows where it'll stop" thing. Thats a slippery slope fallacy. letting two men get married is HUGELY different than letting a woman marry a car. If my sister wants to marry her girlfriend, than I'm not going to stand in her way. I may not
like it, but I love her and would do anything to see her happy. *shrug*
Posted by: Alli at January 04, 2006 06:46 PM (9BW95)
5
It's not the joining of two people that bothers me, it's the false equivilence to marriage wherin the slippery slope resides.
Should a same sex couple have the same legal rights of inheritence and ownership ? ABSOLUTELY! Should a long term partner have a say in the medical treatment of an incapacitated loved one? ABSOLUTLEY! Should they have the right to live where they will? ABSOLUTELY!
Should they be considered "married"? ABSOLUTLY NOT! The word carries connotations that simply don't and CAN NOT apply to a same sex couple. We need to have some sort of legal recoginition of the bond of a same sex couple, but marriage isn't it.
My brother has had two such long term relationships Alli, and as you say, who am I to stand in the way of the happiness of two deserving people? But I just couldn't ever refer to them as "married"...they were lovers, best friends, life partners...but not married.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 04, 2006 07:43 PM (1V3kn)
6
I don't like the term "marriage" either, but what is marriage other than a complete merging of two lives? 2 become 1 in the eyes of G-d, the state and the world. I dunno. I don't have the answers.
Posted by: Alli at January 05, 2006 01:08 PM (9BW95)
7
you know, an easy fix for this would be to drop the term "marriage" out of any legal context entirely. I, for one, wouldn't think any less of my wife and I if we were only considered a "legal union."
Posted by: cappy at January 08, 2006 11:47 PM (mb0+O)
8
Why not just call Gay joinings "legal unions", that way, they have the legal rights of marriage, and marriage itself isn't diluted.
It shows that the agenda here is NOT "equal rights" that that isn't acceptable to the gay community, it shows that they just want to blur traditional mores.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 09, 2006 07:59 AM (Y5CFT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 02, 2006
50 Things to eat before you Die
Chelle had a meme that I could really get into.
What foods have you eaten? Just copy the list and BOLD the one's you've at least tasted, and add any items you think should be added.
1. Fresh fish
2. Lobster
3. Steak
4. Thai food
5. Chinese food
6. Ice cream
7. Pizza
8. Crab
9. Curry
10. Prawns
11. Moreton Bay Bugs (I've never HEARD of these...)
12. Clam chowder
13. Barbecues
14. Pancakes
15. Pasta
16. Mussels
17. Cheesecake
18. Lamb
19. Cream tea
20. Alligator (not yet, but I'm hoping Catfish will get me some this summer!)
21. Oysters
22. Kangaroo (hard to get in Indiana, but if I ever find it, I'll try it!)
23. Chocolate
24. Sandwiches
25. Greek food
26. Burgers
27. Mexican food
28. Squid
29. American diner breakfast( I was a truck driver, I LIVED on these!)
30. Salmon
31. Venison
32. Guinea pig
33. Shark
34. Sushi
35. Paella
36. Barramundi
37. Reindeer
38. Kebab
39. Scallops
40. Australian meat pie(IF the "Outback" version counts)
41. Mango
42. Durian fruit (It STINKS, but it does taste good!)
43. Octopus(actually it's one of my favorite foods.)
44. Ribs
45. Roast beef
46. Tapas
47. Jerk chicken/pork
48. Haggis (find me a Scotsman to make it...I'll try it)
49. Caviar
50. Cornish Pastry
My own choices to add would be Bear, whale, and conger eel
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
08:35 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wow. What an easy post for me. Just copy and paste yours. they'd be the same except for the meat pie. I'ved never been to an Outback!
And after googling I don't think I ever even seen a Durian fruit before.
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at January 02, 2006 09:02 PM (DdRjH)
2
You can find them in any oriental specialty store Stephen. looks like a large prickly burr.
STINKS to high heaven, but has a sweet, cooling taste.
Posted by: delftsman3 at January 02, 2006 11:12 PM (1V3kn)
3
Ate pretty near everything on the list with 4 or 5 exceptions. I would add:
Foie Gras (VERY un-p.c., but Lordy its the best thing you can put into your mouth and still swallow)
Crawfish - especially when boiled South Louisiana style
Posted by: Streetgang6 at January 03, 2006 12:30 PM (Od0/R)
4
I've tried whale and Muktuk, I didn't care for either, Seal meat was too greasy, Gator is good, Beaver or Porcupine isn't bad either .
Posted by: Jack at January 03, 2006 09:23 PM (9ltgc)
5
Alligator is weird. I had some cajun at the Taste of Chicago a few years ago.
For the love of G-d don't eat haggis. *shudder* There are some things that should
never
Posted by: Alli at January 04, 2006 06:40 PM (9BW95)
6
That last one is Cornish pasty. It's an empenada without any seasoning. There's a company about a mile north of me in Milwaukee that makes them.
If Moreton Bay Bugs are similar to our mudbugs (crawfish) I had some for lunch, along with octopus, squid, and mussels (at a Chinese buffet). Haggis is just sausage cut with oatmeal, I don't wee why anyone would object to it after a few wee drams of good peated malt.
Posted by: triticale at January 06, 2006 05:32 PM (tUFVc)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
And Will you, Flipper, take this woman...
A while back I was engaged in a lively debate about same sex marriage with a person that could see o problems with it whatsoever, I on the other hand, while believing that there must be some sort of provision made to protect the assets of same sex couples in inheritence and health decisions, felt that allowing same sex "marriage" was the wrong way to go. One of my arguments was that, once the gates were opened, under any sort of legal language allowing it, all sorts of "marriages would have to be allowed. Adults with children, humans with animals, humans with inanimate items...my partner in the debate poh-poohed thes ideas as "paranoia" and "extremist extrapolations that couldn't possibly occur".
Well Chelle, I TOLD YOU SO! Granted, it didn't happen here in the States, but in an even STRICTER society when it comes to marriage..., even you would have to agree that you wouldn't think that it would be the normal course for her to take...
I'm just waiting for the story about a woman wanting to marry her Miata....
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
08:15 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.
1
yewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Of course that would happen here in Israel.
Excuse me while I barf.
Posted by: Rachel Ann at January 03, 2006 12:28 PM (f1Ywo)
2
The key issue, which you seem to constantly overlook, is CONSENT. Of course adults can't marry dogs. The dogs can't sign the marriage certificate, signalling they understand what marriage is. Children can't provide informed consent to marriage or to sex, because they're too young. Have sex with children HARMS them. Having responsible sex with consenting adults doesn't. There is no slippery slope here, the wall that keeps us from sliding down it is "consent."
Posted by: Steph Mineart at January 03, 2006 02:30 PM (s2yPb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
84kb generated in CPU 0.0312, elapsed 0.0969 seconds.
55 queries taking 0.0742 seconds, 209 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
