Thursday - March 22, 2007

Gorbal Warming as a Religion

Or Someone Finally Gets It 

The Czech President gets it.  Global Warming is the new communism.  If you don't agree with it, you are harassed, called names, or it is suggested that you might even be insane.  Make a note of the comparisons he draws between global warming and communism and the impact global warming regulations will have on the less developed nations of this world.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus said on Wednesday that fighting global warming has turned into a 'religion' that replaced the ideology of communism and threatens to clip basic freedoms.

         

The right-wing president, a free-market champion, wrote to the U.S. Congress that adopting tough environmental policies to fight climate change would have destructive impact on national economies.

'Communism has been replaced by the threat of an ambitious environmentalism,' Klaus wrote in response to questions from the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Energy and Commerce.

The U.S. House Subcommittee for Energy and Air Quality was due to hold a hearing on climate on Wednesday with former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore, who sees global warming as a key challenge, and Danish sceptic Bjorn Lomborg, who says governments should focus on fight disease and hunger instead.

Gore, who won an Oscar for 'best documentary' for his 'An Inconvenient Truth' movie on climate change, has led a global warming awareness drive in the United States, the world's largest source of gases believed to cause it.

Klaus, who does not hold many executive powers but is by far the most popular politician in the ex-communist Czech Republic, has taken a decisively opposite stance on the issue.

Klaus said poor nations would also be hurt by efforts to impose limits and standards on emissions of gases believed to cause global warming.

'They will not be able to absorb new technological standards required by the anti-greenhouse religion, their products will have difficulty accessing the developed markets, and as a result the gap between them and the developed world will widen,' he wrote.

'This ideology preaches earth and nature and under the slogans of their protection – similarly to the old Marxists – wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central, now global, planning of the whole world,' he added. 

 

Thursday - March 22, 2007

I Bet They Are Liberals

Or They Voted for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 

Morality is something the left refuses to talk about.  At least morality as defined by normal and good people.  This is the morality of the left.

 A Rhode Island woman who routinely had sex with her boyfriend in front of her 9-year-old daughter to teach her about sex was sentenced to three years' probation, authorities said on Tuesday.

Rebecca Arnold, 37, and David Prata, 33, who received the same sentence this week, told investigators they thought the practice would help the child to learn, prosecutors said.

"Basically, and I'm tempted to say idiotically, they believed it was helpful to the girl, Ms. Arnold's daughter; they believed it was helpful to her development to see them engaging in various sex acts in front of her," said Mike Healey, spokesman for state attorney general Patrick Lynch.

The pair told investigators that they allowed the girl to watch their sexual romps but did not compel her to.

Thursday - March 22, 2007

Approval Ratings of the Democratically Controlled Congress Plummet

Or Why Isn't the Left Leaning Media Harping on this Story? 

During the 2006 election, the left leaning media repeated the dismal approval ratings for the President and Republican Congress, over and over and over again.  Yet Gallup came out with a poll on March 20th, that shows that the current Democratic controlled Congress has approval ratings just as low as the 2006 Republican Congress.

The modest uptick in approval of the job being done by Congress has dissipated for the most part after only two months. Congress job approval had risen over the last two months after the Democrats took over control of Congress in early January -- fueled in large part by a jump in approval among rank and file Democrats. This month, however, Congress job approval is back down to levels quite similar to where it was in 2006. Democrats have lost a good deal of the positivity exhibited in the first two months of the year after their party took over.

According to Gallup's monthly update on job approval of Congress -- in a March 11-14, 2007, national poll -- 28% of Americans approve of the job being done by Congress and 64% disapprove. This marks a substantial change from January and February, with approval down nine points and disapproval up nine points .

 

The current reading suggests that Americans are reverting back to their pessimistic attitudes of last year, when Congress approval ratings were in the 20s for much of the year.

The explanation for the increase in job approval ratings for Congress in January and February lies in the fact that Democrats, and to a degree independents, became much more positive. This more than offset a drop in approval among Republicans.

This month, however, Congress job approval among Democrats has fallen back, and to a lesser degree among independents. Republicans -- already much less positive in January and February after their party lost control of Congress -- became only slightly more negative this month. 

Bottom Line

It is difficult to pinpoint precisely what is behind the drop off in optimism about Congress among Democrats. One possibility is that Democrats are disappointed that their party has been unable to do anything substantive about the Iraq war -- the dominant issue in last November's midterm elections. The increase in the price of gas and/or other economic concerns may also be a factor. Overall satisfaction with the way things are going in the United States and ratings of economic optimism are both down in the March Gallup Poll.

The other possibility, which is once again a good thing, is that Americans are finding the Democrat's anti-American legislation extremely distasteful.  Either way, happy days aren't here again for the anti-war, anti-American Democratic Party.

Trackposted to sissunchi, The Random Yak, Faultline USA, Maggie's Notebook, and basil's blog, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Thursday - March 22, 2007

Of Course there is a Trailer Park Involved

 Or Did I Say there Was a Trailer Park Involved

Anytime there is a trailer park involved in the story, it is usually worth a laugh or two.

 Animal enforcement officers in Gary, Ind., have captured an alligator found wandering in the city.

The 3-foot alligator captured Tuesday was found in a local mobile home park, the Gary Post-Tribune reported Wednesday. Residents said they spotted the alligator creeping through the park Monday.

"It had been running around for at least that one day," police Lt. Sam Roberts said.

Roberts said none of the park's residents knew how the alligator, which is not native to the area, ended up in the park.

Tuesday - March 20, 2007

Sudan, Sharia, Stoning  

Or Death By Islam 

Death by Islam.  Why do Islamic cultures treat their women so poorly?  They force them to cover up, they can't travel unless accompanied by a male relative, education is often denied, then there are the honor killings and of course, there is stoning for the offense of adultery.

Two Sudanese women have been sentenced to death by stoning for adultery after a trial in which they had no lawyer and which used Arabic, not their first language, the rights group Amnesty International said.

Sadia Idriss Fadul was sentenced on February 13 and Amouna Abdallah Daldoum on March 6 and their sentences could be carried out at any time, the London-based group said in a statement released late on Monday.

North Sudan implements Islamic sharia law.

"The women had no lawyer during their trial and were not able to defend themselves, as their first languages are those of their ethnic groups," Amnesty said.

Both women are from non-Arab tribes but the proceedings were in Arabic and no interpreter was provided, Amnesty said. Their trial took place in central Al Gezira state.

"One of the women, Sadia Idriss Fadul, has one of her children with her in prison," Amnesty said.

 

This hatred for women cannot be tolerated.  Satan suggests that the United States should withhold economic, diplomatic, and military aid for all nations that do not allow basic speech, religious, economic, family, and personal freedoms for women.  There is no reason the United States or its Western allies should grant full diplomatic status to nations that practice a religion that is governed by the barbarity of the 7th century.  The Sudan would be a good place to start.

Sunday - March 18, 2007

Flame of the Week:  Ray Nagin

 Or Can You Spare Some Tin Foil?

Satan isn't sure who is the stupider of the two, Ray Nagin, or the people who re-elected him to office.  We in Hell, though, think that those people of New Orleans, who voted for Ray Nagin, deserve everything they get, or probably, in this case, everything they don't get, like an effective and honest police force, a declining crime rate, or even working traffic lights.  Satan feels sorry for the normal folk down in the Big Easy, whose lives are being ruined by this new class of clueless people.

Do the morons who voted for Nagin realize, he thinks "the gubment", or maybe it is BushHitler, has some sort of ray that creates massive storms and disperses black people across this nation, disenfranchising them in the process?  

New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin has suggested that the slow recovery and rebuilding of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina -- which has prevented many black former residents from returning -- is part of a plan to change the racial makeup and political leadership of his and other cities.

"Ladies and gentlemen, what happened in New Orleans could happen anywhere," Nagin said at a dinner sponsored by the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a trade group for newspapers that target black readers. "They are studying this model of natural disasters, dispersing the community and changing the electoral process in that community."

Saturday - March 17, 2007

Satan's Saturday Hell and Brimstone:  Carl Levin and Lindsay Graham 

Or Waterboarding Apparently Works 

Senators Carl Levin and Lindsay Graham feels that Khaled Sheikh Muhammad's accusations of torture while at Guantanamo, should be investigated.

Levin, D-Detroit, and Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., watched by video from a nearby room during the hearing on the status of Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, an al-Qaida operative. Muhammad admitted during the hearing that he led planning and training for the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist acts against the United States.

The senators' presence at the hearing, held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was first reported Friday by the Washington Post. Neither the lawmakers nor the military had disclosed their presence at the hearing, which was closed to the media and other observers.

In a joint statement, Levin and Graham said Muhammad presented a written statement alleging he was mistreated in U.S. custody before arriving at Guantanamo Bay, a statement the senators said was made part of the classified record of the hearing. "Allegations of prisoner mistreatment must be taken seriously and properly investigated. To do otherwise would reflect poorly on our nation," Levin and Graham said in their statement.

Friday - March 16, 2007

Satan's Friday Silliness

Or The New "Dog Ate My Homework" 

Is there nothing we can do about global warming?  I mean, this is where we need to draw the line:

Brothel owners in Bulgaria are blaming global warming for staff shortages.

They claim their best girls are working in ski resorts because a lack of snow has forced tourists to seek other pleasures.

Petra Nestorova, who runs an escort agency in Sofia, said: 'We have hired students, but they are temps and nothing like our elite girls.' 

Wednesday - March 14, 2007

The Dim Bulb of Global Warming

 Or Get Ready to Pay More and See Less

The Virtuous Republic makes a daily read of the EU Referendum.  For those not familiar with EU Referendum, it was made famous by exposing the " Green Helmet Guy" that seemed to be in every picture that came from Lebanon during the Hezbollah/Israeli war.  Additionally, the main focus of the blog, from a conservative focus of course, is to expose the encroaching control of the European Union over British sovereignty.  A few days ago, Richard North, one of the editors of the EU Referendum, wrote about the fallout from the recent Brussel's conference on global warming and how it affects even the lowly light bulb.

Whether it is Al Gore here in the U.S., or bureaucrats in Brussels, they wholeheartedly embrace global warming (remember when the left embraced overpopulation and then AIDS, because they were going to destroy the earth?) and propose solutions without thinking, without sound engineering principles behind them, and they come up with feel good solutions that don't cut energy consumption, but in the long run, cost the citizen more and make us slightly less comfortable.  All for the sake of making "our betters" feel good about themselves while they continue their lifestyles without interruption.

Richard, at the EU Referendum, was kind enough to grant The Virtuous Republic, the right to wholly reproduce a recent article exposing the folly of the global warming extremist.  The original article can be accessed here.

Light bulbs and Eco-Fascism

Today's Daily Mail carries a long op-ed from Booker setting out the case against the ban on incandescent light bulbs which was requested by the leaders of the 27 member states at the European Council last week.

To put it in context, Booker writes of us now being deluged with news of the latest proposals from our politicians about how to save the planet from global warming, citing Gordon Brown and his "new world order" to combat climate change, coming on top of Mr David Cameron's proposals for strict "green" limits on air travel.

Thus we have the EU declaring that a fifth of all our energy must be "green" by 2020, even though there is no chance of such an absurd target being met. We must have "green" homes, "green" cars, "green" fuel, even microchips in our rubbish bins to enforce "green" waste disposal... and now "green" lights.

Echoing this blog, Booker wonders whether these politicians any longer got the faintest idea what they are talking about. "Do they actually look at the hard, practical facts before they rush to compete with each other in this mad musical-chairs of gesture politics?" he asks.

And, in response to his own question he then points up "just one instance" of the hysteria now sweeping our political class off its feet, an instance which was bannered across the Daily Mail's front page on Saturday in the headline "EU to switch off our old light bulbs".

This was the news that, as part of its latest package of planet-saving measures, the EU plans, within two years, to ban the sale of those traditional incandescent light bulbs we all take for granted in our homes, forcing us to buy the so-called high energy efficent lights.

Aside from anything else, this is an incredible speed given that one of the main lobbyists for change, Philips Electronics, was calling only for a ten-year transition.

No doubt Tony Blair and the other heads of government who took this decision (following the lead of Fidel Castro's dictatorship in Cuba) purred with self-congratulation at striking such a daring blow against global warming. After all these "compact fluorescent bulbs" (or CFLs), to which they want us all to switch, use supposedly only a fifth of the energy needed by the familiar tungsten-filament bulbs now to be made illegal.

Booker notes that among the first to congratulate the EU's leaders was Green MEP Caroline Lucas, who claimed that "banning old-fashioned light bulbs across the EU would cut carbon emissions by around 20 million tonnes per year and save between €5-8 million per year in domestic fuel bills".

Put that way, of course, who could argue? Certainly not European light bulb manufacturers who are struggling to compete against cheap imports of incandescent lights, or the retailers who stand to benefit from the much higher margins on CFLs.

Yet some of the people who are arguing - and are far from impressed by the EU's decision - are not a few electrical engineers who have been clutching their heads in disbelief. Did those politicians, they wondered, actually take any expert advice before indulging in this latest planet-saving gesture?

In fact the virtues of these "low energy" bulbs are nothing like so wonderful as naïve (self-serving) enthusiasts like Ms Lucas imagine them to be. Indeed in many ways, the experts warn, by banning incandescent bulbs altogether the EU may have committed itself to an appallingly costly blunder.

It is a decision which will have a far greater impact on all our lives than most people are yet aware, presenting the UK alone with a bill which, on our government's own figures, could be £3 billion or more.

The result will provide a quality of lighting which in many ways will be markedly less efficient. Even Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor who put forward the proposal, admitted that, because the energy-saving bulbs she uses in her flat take some time to warm up, she often has "a bit of a problem" when she is looking for something she has "dropped on the carpet".

But even more significantly, because they must be kept on so much longer to run efficiently, the actual amount of energy saved by these bulbs has been vastly exaggerated.

So what are the disadvantages of CFLs over the traditional bulbs we will no longer be allowed to buy? Quite apart from the fact that the CFLs are larger, much heavier and mostly much uglier than familiar bulbs - and up to 20 times more expensive - the vast majority of them give off a harsher, less pleasant light.

Because they do not produce light in a steady stream, like an incandescent bulb, but flicker 50 times a second, some who use them for reading eventually find their eyes beginning to swim – and they can make fast-moving machine parts look stationary, posing a serious safety problem – the so-called "strobe effect".

CFLs cannot be used with dimmer switches or electronically-triggered security lights (see package label, illustrated below), so these will become a thing of the past. They cannot be used in microwaves, ovens or freezers, because these are either too hot or too cold for them to function (at any temperature above 50C or lower than –18C they don't work),

More seriously, because CFLs need much more ventilation than a standard bulb, they cannot be used in any enclosed light fitting which is not open at both bottom and top (such as the type illustrated) - the implications of which for homeowners are horrendous.

Astonishingly, according to a report on "energy scenarios in the domestic lighting sector", carried out last year for Defra by its Market Transformation Programme, "less than 50 percent of the fittings installed in UK homes can currently take CFLs".

In other words, on the government's own figures, the owners of Britain's 24 million homes will have to replace hundreds of millions of light fittings, at a cost upwards of £3 billion. Not only is this an unwelcome cost, but the time scale of two years to replace as many as 60 million light fittings is wholly unrealistic.

In addition to this, low-energy bulbs are much more complex to make than standard bulbs, requiring up to ten times as much energy to manufacture. Unlike standard bulbs, they use toxic materials, including mercury vapour, which the EU itself last year banned from landfill sites – which means that recycling the bulbs will itself create an enormously expensive problem.

Perhaps most significantly of all, however, to run CFLs economically they must be kept on more or less continuously. The more they are turned on and off, the shorter becomes their life, creating a fundamental paradox, as is explained by an Australian electrical expert Rod Elliott (whose Elliott Sound Products website provides as good a technical analysis of the disadvantages of CFLs as any on the internet).

If people continue switching their lights on and off when needed, as Mr Elliott puts it, they will find that their "green" bulbs have a much shorter life than promised, thus triggering a consumer backlash from those who think they have been fooled.

But if they keep their lights on all the time to maximise their life, CFLs can end up using almost as much electricity from power stations (creating CO2 emissions) as incandescent bulbs – thus cancelling out their one supposed advantage.

In other words, in every possible way this looks like a classic example of kneejerk politics, imposed on us not by our elected Parliament after full consultation and debate, but simply on the whim of 27 politicians sitting round that table in Brussels, not one of whom could have made an informed speech about the pluses and minuses of what they were proposing.

There was not a hint of democracy in this crackpot decision, which will have a major impact on all our lives, costing many of us thousands of pounds and our economy billions – all to achieve little useful purpose, while making our homes considerably less pleasant to live in.

Such is the price we are now beginning to pay for the "eco-madness" which is sweeping through our political class like a psychic epidemic, The great "Euro-bulb blunder" is arguably the starkest symbol to date of the crazy new world into which this is leading us.

Photo of light bulb showing components, courtesy of Rod Elliott.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Stuck On Stupid, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, third world county, and The Random Yak, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Tuesday - March 13, 2007

Expedition on Global Warming Canceled Due to Extreme Cold

Or I Bet That Just Freezes Their Asses 

Seems two explorers were on a trip through the Arctic to highlight global warming.  Funny thing happened, it was damned cold and the twosome had to cancel their trip.  Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen had planned to photograph evidence of global warming on their trip, even holding live broadcasts with schools to indoctrinate impressionable minds that global warming is a dire threat.  Hell they even brought swimsuits!

A North Pole expedition meant to bring attention to global warming was called off after one of the explorers got frostbite. The explorers, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen, on Saturday called off what was intended to be a 530-mile trek across the Arctic Ocean after Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes, and extreme cold temperatures drained the batteries in some of their electronic equipment.

"Ann said losing toes and going forward at all costs was never part of the journey," said Ann Atwood, who helped organize the expedition.

On Monday, the pair was at Canada's Ward Hunt Island, awaiting a plane to take them to Resolute, Canada, where they were to return to Minneapolis later this week.

Bancroft, 51, became the first woman to cross the North Pole on a 1986 expedition. She and Arnesen, 53, of Oslo, Norway, were the first women to ski across Antarctica in 2001.

But the latest trek got off to a bad start. The day they set off from Ward Hunt Island, a plane landing near the women hit their gear, punching a hole in Bancroft's sled and damaging one of Arnesen's snowshoes.

They repaired the snowshoe with binding from a ski, but Atwood said the patch job created pressure on Arnesen's left foot, which led to blisters that then turned into frostbite.

Then there was the cold — quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they measured the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero, and outside temperatures were exceeding 100 below zero at times, Atwood said.

"My first reaction when they called to say there were calling it off was that they just sounded really, really cold," Atwood said.

She said Bancroft and Arnesen were applying hot water bottles to Arnesen's foot every night, but had to wake up periodically because the bottles froze.

The explorers had planned to call in regular updates to school groups by satellite phone, and had planned online posts with photographic evidence of global warming. In contrast to Bancroft's 1986 trek across the Arctic with fellow Minnesota explorer Will Steger, this time she and Arnesen were prepared to don body suits and swim through areas where polar ice has melted.

Atwood said there was some irony that a trip to call attention to global warming was scuttled in part by extreme cold temperatures.

"They were experiencing temperatures that weren't expected with global warming," Atwood said. "But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability."

 

Satan really appreciates the last sentence.  Apparently hot weather is caused by global warming and now cold weather is caused by global warming.  And, does anyone else think that cold weather in the Arctic is normal and predictable?  Maybe the global warming models are wrong and unpredictable.

Tuesday - March 13, 2007

Satan's Salute of the Week

 Or I'm Speechless

As you know, the primary job of Satan, is to sow discord, disharmony, war, famine, and stupidity across the globe.  It seems Satan's minions have been working overtime in Cincinnati:

Ricky Lackey has six children on the way.

Just don’t call them sextuplets – they’re all with different women.

When Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Melba Marsh asked Lackey during sentencing Friday on a charge of attempted theft how many children he had, the 25-year-old said, “None, but I have six on the way.”

A stunned Marsh tried to clarify. “Are you marrying a woman with six children?” she asked.

“No, I be concubining,” he said. A concubine is a woman who cohabitates with a man to whom she is not married.

Prosecutors said Lackey is expectant father of six children with six different women. The women all are expected to deliver between August and October.

Lackey’s lawyer, Stephen Wenke, stopped his client from saying more.

Later, Marsh said she wasn’t sure how to respond so she let the issue drop since it wasn’t relevant to the proceedings.

Lackey, a music producer who told Marsh he was on the cusp of a $2 million deal that would net him $300,000 upfront, was convicted Friday on a reduced charge of attempted theft.

Prosecutors say the Avondale man defrauded U.S. Bank out of $3,975 by depositing empty envelopes into ATM machines, claiming they contained cash, and depositing bad checks. Once the accounts were falsely inflated, Lackey withdrew all the money before the bank could detect the fraud.

Lackey has repaid the money, according to court records.

Marsh ordered no other sentence since restitution had been paid.

As Lackey left the courtroom Friday, a group of teenage girls there for another case appeared to know Lackey. “Oh, there’s Ricky Lackey!” one swooned.

Lackey shrugged the attention off with one word and a wave of his hand. “Fans,” he said.

 

Theft, polygamy (or is that concubining), and madness all rolled into one.  I think Ricky has the making of a fine politician.

Monday - March 12, 2007

The Left Eats its Own

Or the Native Nutcases are Restless 

The Democrats built their recent rise to power on the backs of the kook left.  The very left that hates America first, hates America always.  The left that would revel in American defeat.  The left that thinks the U.S. deserved the attacks on on 9-11.  The left that started protesting against war on 9-12.  That very left is now starting to eat its own, as it feels that the current Democratic leadership isn't undermining American fast enough.

This past week, we've seen numerous revolts from the very far left against the far left Democratic leadership.  Right Voices has the rundown of the past week's events here.  

Satan was most amused, though, by a group of anti-war protesters who made their way to Nancy Pelosi's house in San Francisco.  They've decided to camp out in front of the Speaker's home, because, well, she isn't "anti-war" enough:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi left for Washington Monday morning as peace activists who marched across the Golden Gate Bridge remained outside her San Francisco home, demanding that Congress stop funding the war in Iraq.

Pelosi did not make any comments to the protesters as she departed her Pacific Heights residence.

She told reporters, "My home is my home."

"San Francisco has been against this war from the very beginning," said Toby Blome, a physical therapist who organized the event. "This is our fifth year of the war, and Nancy needs to wake up and represent San Franciscans."

Blome, holding a plate of cheese and bread and a glass of wine, was stopped on her way to Pelosi's front door and told the Speaker would not see them. Blom and about 10 other activists said they plan to camp outside the residence overnight.

"Speaker Pelosi shares the concerns of the protesters about the disastrous war in Iraq. The Speaker has put the House of Representatives on course to chart a new direction for the American people and the war in Iraq," said Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill, in a statement.

"Led by the Speaker, Democrats have put forward legislation that will measure the Iraqi government's actions by the standards President Bush himself set, conforms deployment of our troops to existing military standards for readiness and provides badly needed help to an overburdened military and veterans' medical system wracked by scandal."

Hammill would not say whether Pelosi was home Sunday or not.

The rally is the most recent "occupation" activists have staged in lawmakers' offices on Capitol Hill and in their home communities. U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel's office in Chicago was targeted on Thursday, and peace activists dressed in pink showed up recently at the Senate offices of presidential hopefuls John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Other recent protest targets include Reps. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio and David Obey of Wisconsin and Sens. Richard Durbin of Illinois and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland. All four Democrats voted against the 2002 measure authorizing the war.

On Wednesday, about 20 demonstrators gathered outside Pelosi's San Francisco office -- but before they could enter, a staff member ushered the group down to a conference room seven floors below, where many voiced frustration that Pelosi was not being aggressive enough in seeking an end to the war.

"They're continuing to fund the war, and it's ridiculous if you say you're against the war to keep funding it," Blome, a 51-year-old El Cerrito resident, said of Congressional Democrats. "It's shocking how little the Democrats are doing to stop this war."

After crossing San Francisco's scenic span, protesters arrived at Pelosi's Pacific Heights home around 4 p.m. They say they will sit, stand, sing, chant, pray, ring bells, and read letters from American troops sent home to their families -- tactics used in similar events with other politicians.

The rabid dogs of the left, are not only howling at Pelosi's front door, they are biting her squarely on the ass.  Satan predicts that this will be a long two years for Speaker Pelosi.  Supporting non-binding resolutions that only somewhat undermine America isn't enough for the Democrat's far left base.  They will settle for nothing less than total American defeat.  

Yet Pelosi and other Democrats know that to remain a viable party, they can only pander to the far left, and maybe once and awhile throw them a bone.  To remain a viable party, the Democrats know that they can't completely undermine the American war effort.  What a quandary.  Undermine America, or be hounded by your own.  Satan wishes them luck on the whole making a deal with the Devil thing.... 

Monday - March 12, 2007

Gerhard Schroeder Sells His Soul for a Few Rubles

 Or Who is Afraid of the Russian Bear?

Former German Chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder seems to be shill for the newly authoritarian Russia.  Shroeder, who presided over an economically declining Germany, and who vehemently challenged Bush's Iraq policy, now opposes the U.S. missile shield that is to be deployed in Poland and the Czech Republic. 

Keep in mind, both Poland and the Czech Republic (not to mention the Baltic States), who have adopted democratic forms of government, have no intention of falling back into the sphere of Russian hegemony.  Yet, Schroeder, a leftist, seems perfectly willing to condemn their aspirations to remain free.  Satan knows what he is thinking.  We can throw the Russians the Poles and Czechs and they will leave us alone.  Standing up to Russia would require fortitude and the acceptance of the fact that they won't like NATO on their borders.  That is the price Europe will have to pay to so that the former Eastern Bloc nations remain free.

U.S. plans to build a high-tech missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic are dangerous and absurd, former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said on Sunday.

"The missile defense system planned by the United States and which is to be installed in eastern Europe is politically extremely dangerous," Schroeder said in a speech in Dresden.

"It is viewed, rightly, in Russia, and not only there, as an attempt to establish an absurd encirclement policy, a policy which is everything but in the interest of Europe," he said.

The United States wants to set up a radar system in the Czech Republic and a missile battery in Poland as part of a shield that would counter missiles fired by what Washington calls "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

Moscow sees the system as an encroachment on its former sphere of influence and an attempt to shift the post-Cold War balance of power. Germany has criticized the project's planners for failing to discuss it sufficiently with Russia.

Schroeder said the missile shield plan was pushing Russia further away from the West at a time when the European Union should be trying to strengthen ties with Moscow.

"What we need instead is the exact opposite. Out of our own interest we must align Russia as closely as possible to Europe and European structures," he said.

Schroeder has famously referred to Russia President Vladimir Putin as an "impeccable democrat" in the past and reiterated that view in interviews last year when his memoirs were released.

Less than a month after leaving office in November 2005, Schroeder took a position as chairman of a controversial German-Russian gas pipeline consortium that he helped set up with Putin -- a move for which he was sharply criticized.

Satan has an especially cynical view of Schroeder.  First, he is working for the Russian fuel conglomerate, the same conglomerate that has browbeat the fledgling Ukrainian democracy.  So right now, Schroeder is in bed with Putin and his neo-communist regime.  Satan also thinks, that as a Western leftist, and like all Western leftists, Schroeder lacks to the will to stand up to the new Russian bullying tactics, such as economic blackmail and assassination. It seems Shroeder would rather throw the Poles, Czechs, and Ukrainians to the Russian bear than confront it.  And really, how sad and telling is it that Schroeder and his ilk aren't even willing to stand up to a very weak Russia?

Any of this sound familiar? 

Monday - March 12, 2007

You've Been a Very Bad Boy

 Or A Rubber Ball?

Satan finds the following story extremely humorous and Hell takes great delight in this man's embarrassment.

Israel has recalled its ambassador in El Salvador after he was found drunk and naked with sex toys lying nearby in the yard of his official residence, Israeli media reports said on Monday.

A foreign ministry spokeswoman confirmed that the ambassador, Tsuriel Raphael, was recalled but offered no details. "The ministry sees his behavior as unbecoming of a diplomat," the spokeswoman said.

Israeli media reported that local police found Raphael in the yard of the official residence in San Salvador. The reports said he was drunk, naked, and bound and gagged with a rubber ball in his mouth and sex toys lying near him.

A rubber ball!  

Trackposted to Overtaken by Events, Mark My Words, third world county, Conservative Thoughts, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Friday - March 09, 2007

Hell Freezes Over:  Local Court Declares Lawsuit Frivolous

 Or Trial Lawyers Everywhere Crying in their Beer

Satan was truly shocked to find that a Cincinnati court declared a lawsuit frivolous.  That in of itself made Hell freeze over.  But to add insult to injury, the court fined the man who brought the action.   Hell dropped another 5 degrees when that part of the ruling was read.

What’s the price of a good night’s sleep?

Try $2,500.

That’s what 1st District Court of Appeals judges charged Thomas Starks for filing a frivolous lawsuit against Econo Lodge and its parent company, Choice Hotels International, after Econo Lodge charged him for an extra day’s stay for checking out late.

Starks had checked in at 4:40 a.m. and argued he should not have had to meet the 11 a.m. checkout time.

“While the court system must remain open for the redress of a citizen’s perceived injustices, there is a point at which even the most liberal interpretation of personal rights fails in the light of common sense,” wrote Judge Sylvia Sieve Hendon in a concurring opinion.

In the 2006 lawsuit, Starks, 64, of Golf Manor, sought the return of $46 for the extra day’s stay at the Kingston Springs, Tenn. motel, damages of $750,000 and free lodging for life at the Econo Lodge.

Hendon and judges Mark Painter and Lee H. Hildebrandt in a unanimous decision determined Starks sued the wrong people, in the wrong place for the wrong reason. He should have sued in Tennessee, not Hamilton County.

“A morning checkout time is standard,” Painter wrote. “Perhaps Starks is nocturnal.

“Some walk by night, some fly by day,” Painter added quoting Al Jarreau in the theme song to the 1980’s detective show “Moonlighting.”

“But most people are diurnal,” Painter wrote. “It is patently unreasonable that anyone would think there is not a checkout time. After the checkout time has passed, the guest becomes a trespasser.”

The court said Starks must pay the motel and its parent company $1,250 each for their trouble in defending the lawsuit.

Trackposted to Blue Star Chronicles, The Amboy Times, Faultline USA, , and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Thursday - March 08, 2007

The Democrat's Defense Plan:  Disarm.  No F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Or The Left is Soft On Defense 

Satan shouldn't be surprised, but he really wonders if the Democrats are truly against defending this nation or if they are simply incompetent.  Satan leans towards the belief that the Democratic base is the kook left, anti-American, anti-defense, still high from the secondary buzz they got from the sixties.

House Democrats' Iraq war funding bill would deny the Bush administration's request for money to buy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft and EA-18 attack airplanes, according to a summary of the legislation.

"The bill denies funding for two Joint Strike Fighter purchases (by the Air Force) and five of the six EA-18G electronic attack airplanes (for the Navy) being requested" by the Bush administration, the House Appropriations panel summary said.

Satan knew once the Democrats regained power, they couldn't contain their disdain for America nor would they stand for its defense.  If this isn't true, why would they even, for a moment, suggest holding up the F-35, which is the cornerstone of our 21st century air power strategy?  So they can hold our Iraq policy hostage?  It is a dangerous game to play politics with our national security.

Technorati Tags F-35 Democrats

Wednesday - March 07, 2007

I Respect You Baby: Here's a Condom

Or Only the Left Equates a Condom with Respect

Brazil's socialist president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has a new theory about relations between the sexes.  If a man uses a condom, he shows the woman respect.  Satan wishes he would have come up with this pick up line. "Hey baby, let me slip on a little respect."  No wait, "Baby, I spell respect T R O J A N."  Or, "I respect you so much, I bought this box of condoms."

Brazilians must show women more respect by using condoms during sex, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said on Wednesday at an event to help women avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

"AIDS is growing among heterosexual women. We are going to fight hypocrisy. We need to give out condoms and teach people how to use them. People need to be taught how to have sex, that's the only way we will have an AIDS-free country," Lula said.

Lula's words marked the start of a new Health Ministry program to lower AIDS infection rates among women, up 44 percent from 1995 to 2005.

The program, started one day before International Women's Day on Thursday, aims to give out 14 million free female condoms and to double HIV-testing for women.

"Sex is something everybody likes, it's a biological necessity for humans, so what we must do is teach," Lula said.

Satan has a few thoughts on this twisted thinking.  We in Hell truly appreciate Lula's new contribution to getting in a woman's panties.   AIDS obviously is a grave problem, but Satan, in all seriousness, would like to suggest that the following actually shows women that a man respects them, but We guess that the use of a condoms is easier than changing the machismo embedded in Latin culture throughout South America (and get off Satan's back, the Reuter's article said the same damn thing):

•monogamy

•faithfulness in marriage

•no mistresses

•no visits to the local whorehouse

•postponing sex until marriage

Satan is pretty sure that the above measures would affect the AIDS rates rather prodigiously.  But then again, we in Hell know that the left would never consider the moral route that restrains human behavior as handing out condoms willy nilly is much easier.  Even Satan knows that respect begins with love and from love flows commitment.  

Trackposted to Rightlinx Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Random Yak, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, and Pursuing Holiness, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Saturday - March 03, 2007

World Military Power

Or Make of it What You Will 

Do we spend too much on our military?  Do we spend too little on our defense?  Do get our dollars worth?  Do our allies do their fair share?  Or maybe a better question might be, do our allies even have a credible military?  

Trackposted to Right Pundits, Cao's Blog, Faultline USA, Allie Is Wired, and stikNstein... has no mercy, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Wednesday - February 28, 2007

The Left Will Eat Their Own

 Or Make a Deal With the Devil and Their is Hell to Pay

Unable to derail the surge in Iraq and finding that most patriotic Americans don't hate their country, nor do they want to see it defeated, the Democrats are grasping for anything that they can call a victory.  The Democratic leadership might be hoping that they can pass some symbolic legislation and move on to other things, but Satan has some news for them.  Their anti-war base isn't going to let that happen.

Unfortunately, the base they courted isn't going to be happy with any measure that doesn't cause grave injury to the American national interest.  Satan expects that the rabid left that the Democrats wedded themselves to will soon turn on those who can't deliver an American embarrassment.  The cannibalism should be delicious to watch.

House Democratic leaders are developing an anti-war proposal that wouldn't cut off money for U.S. troops in Iraq but would require President Bush to acknowledge problems with an overburdened military.

The plan could draw bipartisan support but is expected to be a tough sell to members who say they don't think it goes far enough to assuage voters angered by the four-year conflict.

Bush "hasn't to date done anything we've asked him to do, so why we would think he would do anything in the future is beyond me," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., one of a group of liberal Democrats pushing for an immediate end to the war.

Democratic protests to the war grew louder in January after they took control of Congress and Bush announced he planned to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. Earlier this month, House Democrats pushed through a nonbinding resolution opposing the buildup.

Since then, Democrats have been trying to decide what to do next. Some worried that a plan by Rep. John Murtha to restrict funding for the war would go too far. Murtha, D-Pa., is extending his support to the revised proposal.

Sunday - February 25, 2007

Hell Freezes Over:  Illegal Immigrant Denied Citizenship

Or With the First Step Over the Border, a Law Was Broken 

Satan came across this story from June of 2006, but thought it was relevant to tonight's theme.

The Supreme Court has said a deported Mexican who lived in the US for 20 years cannot seek legal residency, in a blow to long-term illegal immigrants.

The judges upheld the decision of the immigration authorities in the case of Humberto Fernandez Vargas.

He had applied for citizenship but was sent back to Mexico under rules for migrants with prior deportation orders.

Correspondents say that the ruling will send a warning to some 11.5m illegal immigrants in the US.

It comes as the two congressional chambers are locked in a battle over new legislation on the high-profile issue.

Immigration is key as Republicans seek to retain control of Congress in November's mid-term polls.

Rival bills

Mr Fernandez Vargas was born in Mexico but worked north of the border in the 1970s, when he was deported several times.

He returned to the US in the early 1980s and then stayed for more than 20 years, marrying an American citizen and starting a company.

When he applied for citizenship he was deported under a law that streamlines the expulsion process for illegal migrants.

When he took the first step over the U.S. border, he broke American law.  In his case, Mr. Vargas apparently broke the law several times.  That makes him a criminal.  Do we want criminals as citizens?  At least the Supreme Court, in this case, said, no.