I cry for the country of my birth. Seems that the Moonbats have totally taken over.

Pedaphiles have banded together to form their own political party...and they just may succeed in being on the next election's slate of choices.

The goal of the new party is to reduce the age of sexual consent from 16 to 12 (with the ultimate goal of erasing any limit whatsoever), allow the private possession of child porn, legalize beastiality, and allow porn to be telecast on broadcast tv.

HOW can the Dutch people allow even the consideration of such a platform?!?!? the fact is that most Dutch DO oppose this travesty. An opinion poll published Tuesday showed that 82 percent wanted the government to do something to stop the new party, while 67 percent said promoting pedophilia should be illegal.

What really bothers me is that, if that poll is to be believed, some 18% of the people are in line with the goals of this new party, and WORSE 33% of those polled are tolerant of Pedaphilia.

That is not the Dutch people I know. We have long had a well deserved reputation of tolerance for "different" lifestyles and choices and for having a "live and let live as long as you don't harm anyone" philosophy; but NEVER in my wildest dreams would I have thought that that tolerance would extend to these depths of depravity. By it's very nature, Pedophilia and child porn harms those least able to defend themselves, and as such, should be fought with the greatest vigor possible.

But this is the only possible end result of "total acceptance of every view as valid" as is espoused by the Progressives here. NO, I don't believe that Progressives are child molesters and kiddie porn afficianados...but if you follow their "moral neutral" policies to their logical conclusion, that is what you WILL end up with. Let what is happening in Holland serve as a warning, lest we slide down the same slope.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:28 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.

It's finally happened, folks. A major member of the LSM has come right out and admitted the agenda that most of the media follows, but denies.

In a commencment speech delivered to the State University of New York, New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. urged "protection for his reporters and photographers "in war-torn Iraq" so they can bring back stories about a "misbegotten war" (and thus help undermine the Bush Administration's foreign policy)".

Read the speech and read between the lines, and you can have no doubt as to the agenda being espoused. Moonbats may say that he "didn't SAY to "impeach Bush", or "show the white flag in Iraq", but as a newspaper publisher, Mr. Sulzberger should be very aware that words have meaning and the subtext of the speech is clear (thats "nuance" for you in the Progressive community).

I can wholeheartedly agree with him when he says to: "Engage. Help make decisions. Vote......Knowing whatÂ’s happening in your world, your country, your neighborhood is the critical precursor to being a citizen of a democracy. Each one of you who forsakes your role in keeping our democracy alive by either inaction or, perhaps worse, by action based on ignorance, threatens all the rest of us."

My disconnect from his statement ensues when he urges those students to "read a newspaper" (presumably the NY Times) to be sure that they are informed about what is going on.

Knowing many people serving in the war zone, and comparing their version on events to what the major news outlets put out to the public, I am confident that if I relied solely on the Media, I would have a far different opinion (about the war) than I do. I believe that "the truth" probably lies somewhere in between the two versions. And what I believe to be "the truth" more than justifies our presence on the field of battle.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.

They WALKED!?!!?

I SINCERELY hope that it's just so Homeland Security can moniter their contacts!

If not, DHS is screwed up even more than I had believed...CALL Jack Bauer!

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

I don't know why THIS isn't front page news, but is damned sure SHOULD be!

According to BC, it wasn't even above the fold in the LOCAL newsrag...

And yet the media will scream AFTER the fact about "why wasn't this detected before the act"?

People, we need to WAKE UP; we are engaged in a WAR! complacency is a luxury that we just can no longer afford.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 03:51 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Professor Saul Cornell of Ohio State University has written an op-ed piece called Reconstructing the Second Amendment that purports to show that we should have stricter gun control laws to ensure that the citizenry has "less cause to fear gun violence".

He furthur posits that, historically,

"One of the many embarrassing
truths about the debate over the right to bear arms that neither side wishes to admit is that gun rights ideology is the illegitimate and spurned child of gun control."

Oh REALLY Professor?

He goes on to say:

If the Founders had imbibed the strong gun rights ideology that drives today's gun debate we would all be drinking tea and singing, "God save our gracious Queen."

In other words, he is saying that the Founding Fathers weren't all that keen on the individual's right to bear arms...and this guy purports to be a HISTORY expert?!?!

The Founders made it plain that the whole concept of a free state is that which requires security, but also a state (is) inherently free, from its own government if necessary. (emph. mine)

Let's see what those Founding Fathers had to say on the subject, and who can best explain the original intent of the Second Amendment, because they wrote it,:

Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison all understood the importance of private gun ownership in a free society.

Jefferson:

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." (in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy p. 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)

Adams:

"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense."

Hamilton:

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of the original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government."

Madison (in Federalist No. 46, predicting that encroachments by the federal government) said that these would provoke "plans of resistance" and an "appeal to the trial of force." Madison also said (still in Fed. No. 46):

"The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

And Hamilton again:

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."

Those were the Authors of the Amendment...what did some of the leading Citizens think?

Thomas Paine:

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..."

Thoughts on Defensive War in 1775

While Tench Coxe said:

"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an AmericanÂ… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

(Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 178

While weÂ’re about it, letÂ’s also quote again another of the great men, Patrick Henry, commenting on the Second Amendment in 1788:

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."

And another from Mr. Henry:

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"

(3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

What about some people that you might not think of as being on the gun owners side of the debate?

From the foremost practitioner of passive resistance and non-violence:

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

-- Mahatma Gandhi (Autobiography, by M.K. Gandhi, p.446)

And from the worldÂ’s gentlest human being:

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."

The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate

And lastly, opinions from a couple of bad guys:

"Gun control? ItÂ’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If IÂ’m a bad guy, IÂ’m always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? YouÂ’ll pull the trigger with a lock on, and IÂ’ll pull the trigger. WeÂ’ll see who wins."

-- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Mafia hit man

“A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”

-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty."

-- Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, HitlerÂ’s Table Talks 1941-1944)

So Mr. Cornell, I submit that, IF you want credibility, you'd best serve yourself by actually going back into your history books and finding out what was REALLY thought, and STATED, instead of serving the PC GFW* lobby with misstatements, half-truths, and outright lies.

*Gun Fearing Weenie

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 10:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1181 words, total size 8 kb.

Idiocy of the day. If this creep gets anywhere with this lawsuit, you'll know that the end time IS near.

As far as I'm concerned: Rope, Tree, Complaintant; some assembly required.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

John Hinderaker over at Powerline has some very sound advice for you Mr. President, I hope you take it to heart and follow it.

I'd like to add my own .02 in too.

Mr. President, we have a robust and growing economy, but if you listen to the MSM, you'de almost believe that we are almost in a second Great Depression.
And if we don't take a firm stand on reducing the amount of deficit spending, that may come to pass yet.

Our citizens are under a heavy tax burden, and that burden is much larger than they realize because so many of the taxes they are paying are hidden. what is worse, the burden is borne by the most productive citizens as a matter of fact, but the VISIBLE burden is being borne by the middle and uppermiddle class.

Please, Mr. President, come out in favor of the Fair Tax, your endorsement could be the best boost possible at the moment. The reissue of The Fair Tax Book (N. Boortz/Rep. H. Linder) debuted at #3 on the NYT's Best Seller list, the highest debut of a paperback in over 40 years. The People are starting to catch on, and if they are not heeded, the results could be dire for those Politco's that didn't care to listen.

We also need to reform the education system to ensure that we have an informed electorate. PLEASE! Return educational control back to the states and local communities, where it belongs. Dismantal the Education Dept. and back any measure that reduces the power that the NEA now holds over the hostages of our future, our children.

If you truly want to leave a legacy of strengthening our Republic, these are items you must address. You have done well in your policies against Terror, but what good is it if you ignore the rot that is ruining us from within?

Fair taxation and REAL education (not the indoctrination we currently are employing) are the two lynchpins to retrieving our great nation from the brink and returning it to it's greatest possible potential. We CAN do it, we MUST do it; the only question is, who will lead us to it? If not a true statesman of the political class, WE THE PEOPLE will be forced to do it ourselves, and that could be a troubling time indeed, in terms of both violence and uncertainty; I think we would survive it, but the political class certainly would not, and there there is no reason that we should have to suffer such a period of upheaval, if YOU and your bretheran would just do the right thing. Be Bold, Be Brave, Be Honest, and the people will follow.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:19 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 458 words, total size 3 kb.

As all my longtime readers are well aware, I have always been a supporter of most of President Bush's policies, but with recent events, I'm afraid that the time has come when impeachment procedings may be warrented.

I wasn't a fan of a great deal of the spending policies of this administration, but I was willing to try to understand the reasoning behind them.

As far as the WoT is concerned, I still believe that the policies were, in the main, correct. Mistakes were made, it's true, but such is the result of normal human errors endemic to any great enterprise.

I was totally opposed to the amnesty policies towards illegal aliens invaders, but I was willing to grant the President some leeway in trying to deal with an almost insurmountable problem; always believing that the best interests of the country as a whole were always at the heart of those policies, regardless of the fact that I didn't see the problem in the same way as the Administration did.

I can no longer support that view however.

With recent revelations that members of the border patrol were, in effect, ordered to reveal the names, locations and activities of members of the group known as the Minutemen as far incountry as Illinois to the Mexican government, I can only conclude that some segment of the Administration has forsaken their oath to defend the country against foreign influance in a manner that can only be seen as treason. Giving intelligence-type information about US citizens acting in a legal manner in their own country to a foreign power is in direct violation of every concept of freedom that we hold dear, and can only be viewed as at least the start of the breakdown of a free government. Using the Vienna Convention as an excuse doesn't jive with the standard use or intent of the Convention. While the Convention does require the disclosure of the circumstances surounding the detection/detention of a foreign citizen to their Counsular Representatives, the information given the Mexican Counsul is far in excess of that required, to the point where it represents intelligence of a sort only required in going after multinational criminal or terrorist organizations.

I do not know if this is a direct Bush policy, but unless President Bush takes action stemming these acts IMMEDIATLY, I can only conclude that he at least tacitly endorses them. This is in DIRECT violation of his Presidential Oath to protect the country from enemies both foreign and domestic.

It truly pains me to take this position, I have always had the greatest respect for President Bush, but I owe my loyalty to the Constitution and the country for which it stands rather than to any one man or party. By inaction in this matter, President Bush has crossed over the line of espousing policy that reasonable people can disagree about to overt treason and malfeasence in office.

PLEASE, Mr. President, take the proper actions to correct this NOW, before you take a deserved fall. You are a better man than that, DON'T let ill-advised "easy route" politics tarnish your legacy, and to be forever castigated as a traitor on the level of Benedict Arnold.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:05 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 543 words, total size 3 kb.

What would you think of the following as the official policies of the United States?

1. If you migrate to this county, you must speak the native language

2. You have to be a professional or an investor. No unskilled workers allowed.

3. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, all government business will be conducted in our language.

4. Foreigners will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.

5 Foreigners will NEVER be able to hold political office.

6. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs.

7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.

8. If foreigners do come and want to buy land that will be okay, BUT options will be restricted. You are not allowed waterfront property. That is reserved for citizens naturally born into this country.

9. Foreigners may not protest; no demonstrations, no waving a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies, if you do you will be sent home.

10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be hunted down and sent straight to jail.

Harsh, you say? The above laws happen to be the immigration laws of MEXICO!

Just remember these facts the next time you might feel a little sympathy toward those that are invading OUR country and playing the race card when they are held acountable for their actions. Compare their actions here and the policies of their home country and ask yourself whether or not they have earned any sympathy.

H/t to Catfish

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:22 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

Yeah, she's SUCH a grieving mother that she hasn't placed a marker on her son's grave.

She can travel the world denouncing the war and the Bush administration, she can go have her picture taken with anti-American polititions in Venezuela, she can vacation in Hawaii, she can buy a new VW convertable....she can accept $250,000 in death benefits from the DoD, but she's just grieving too much to even mark her son's grave...after all, it's only been two years.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 11:33 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 91 words, total size 1 kb.

Neal Boortz has a great example of how are schools are not educating our children, and demonstrates the he's correct when he calls them "government indoctrination centers".

The ONLY true option for the bulk of the populace, should they wish their children to recieve a true education is to home school. Too bad that governmental policies make that option so difficult to do.

We need to abolish the NEA and the Federal Dept. of Education and return choice back to where it belongs, the parents and local communities.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, gas around the Citadel is averageing at around $2.84 a gallon, with only the prospects of furthur rises in sight. The chickens of inane past policies have finally come home to roost, and our current crop of polititians are arguing only over more of the same.

The latest proposal from Dennis Hastert includes a $100. "rebate" to be given to every family to "help them over the hump". EXCUSE ME?!? Given the increase in the costs of all goods due to increased costs of production and transportation absorb that paltry amount faster than a drop of water falling on a hot rock under a desert sun. It's an insult to any logicaly thinking person.

Another part of the proposal resolves to change the tax structure on oil company reserves; effectively imposing a huge tax increase on those companies....and increasing the cost of doing business lowers gas prices at the pumps how? It's bad enough that the general populace should be so ignorant of economics, but for a supposedly highly educated man to pursue such a course is
bordering on the criminal.

Prices are a function of supply and demand, and for at least the last twenty years, the government has fostered policies that served to limit domestically produced supply and making us hostage to the vageries of a volatile Middle East and/or South America.

The Politicoes are trying to blame the oil companies for "gouging", citing "record profits"....and with an uninformed populace, they are getting away with the scapegoatism yet once again. The numbers on the profit side of the ledger do look high, but when you delve into it and determine the profit margin after expenses, you will find that oil is among the lowest returns on investment of any commodities. And when you realize that the GOVERNMENT'S
"profit" from a gallon of gas in the form of taxes is between four and five times higher than the profit realized by the companies themselves, we need to ask ourselves just WHO is doing the gouging.

Government has restricted the oil companies from developing most areas of domestic production; made it economically impossible to increase our refining capabilities for the last twenty two years,mandated "special blends" that increase the cost to the consumer and have made the costs of marketing and distribution much higher than need be.

While some practices of the oil companies are reprehensible, what the government has done is even more so.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 410 words, total size 2 kb.