Sunday, September 30, 2007

Can we question their patriotism yet?

Hat tips to Michelle Malkin and Take Our Country Back for this, right of the bat, before I dive in. Outstanding work, Michelle and Snooper.


To set aside the temper and let the words come out rationally...

The left goes into a frenzy when we question their sense of patriotism. They snarl, they growl, they demand that the right not DO that, proudly proclaiming themselves to be every bit as patriotic as the next person.

Where is the proof? We have taking out a full page ad to call our commanding general in Iraq a liar. We have Cindy Sheehan and her disgraceful disrespectful behavior that dishonors the memory of her son. We have the defacing of the Wall...

And now we have Oakland International Airport not allowing Marines and Soldiers into the main terminal.

From The National Review Online:

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Spitting on the Marines [Michael Ledeen]

Here is an e-mail from a Marine chaplain recently returned from Iraq. The story speaks for itself—lousy treatment of our troops at our own airports. He writes about Oakland, and while checking around I find that this is a common experience. I hope that one of our leaders will find a way to put an end to such behavior.

Marines and Soldiers Returning from Iraq not allowed into Oakland terminal.

On September 27th 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport. Instead they had to deplane about 400 yards away from the terminal where the extra baggage trailers were located...

And they wonder WHY we become furious with them? They wonder WHY we look at THEM with the same contempt in which they look at US? They wonder WHY WE stand fast WITH our troops while they pay lip service to "protecting the troops" by demanding that they be withdrawn from the job that they have signed on to DO?

From DailyKos, where they've never met a supporter of the troops or our war effort that they haven't tried to discredit:

Michael Ledeen has never seen a "spitting on the troops" story he didn't like. In this post, entitled "Spitting on the Marines," [woo hoo!] he tells us about an email he received:

Guess what? You Kossacks are going to LOVE this.


I'm going to whisper it, ok?

Michelle Malkin obtained the Oakland Airport response and received verification that the story is true.

I have also obtained the Port of Oakland’s response about the incident to Captain David Epstein of the Reserve Officers Association. The Port official blames a lack of “clear communication” from the charter airline hired by the military. In other words: it’s the troops’ fault:

Thank you so much for sharing with me the information you had regarding the incident at the airport. As you know sometimes the way things appear initially regarding an incident turn out to be different after looking into the details. We checked into this once you had called me and raised your public relations concern, so again thank you. Here is the background information I have about the incident as well as the procedures and policies that affected decision-making that day.

In the case of North American Airlines Flight #1777, a military charter flight that arrived at OAK on Thursday, September 27, aircraft parking and passenger service arrangements were coordinated and approved in advance between the ground handling company and Airside Operations. The airport received information that the passengers were not TSA-screened at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft. Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac. It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements.

Upon landing and parking at OAK, the pilot-in-command advised the ground handling company that the parking and passenger handling provisions did not meet expectations. Upon learning this, Airside Operations and Aviation Security worked with the ground handling company and other law enforcement partners to coordinate a plan that was satisfactory to the pilot and passengers, and which was compliant with all airport safety and security standards.

Oakland International Airport (OAK) makes customer service a priority for all its passengers, whether they are traveling on commercial, military or general aviation aircraft. Charter airlines operating at OAK can choose to contract with a number of ground handling companies. Ground handlers coordinate flight services such as passenger handling, and aircraft fueling, cleaning and catering. It is the responsibility of ground handling companies to communicate aircraft and passenger operational needs to OAK’s Airside Operations Office in advance so that special accommodations can be coordinated to ensure that all airport operational, safety and security concerns are addressed.

The scheduled arrival and departure time of the flight is set by the aircraft operator. Time is needed to refuel the aircraft, perform maintenance inspections, refresh the catering, and give passengers time to stretch to break-up long travel periods. An analysis of the incident and prior correspondence between OAK’s Airside Operations and the ground handler determined that the airport did not receive clear communication in advance from the charter airline that was hired by the military.

I am out of town starting tomorrow for a convention. If you have any further inquiries about this incident and the way it was handled, Rosemary Barnes who is part of our Public Affairs team would be happy to speak with you. You may also call Joanne Holloway, the acting manager of the Port’s Community and Customer Relations Department.

Kindest regards,
Marilyn Sandifur
Port Spokesperson
Port of Oakland

Well isn't that just DANDY?

But then, can you really expect much more from an area that promotes the Folsom Street Fair and their promotional poster for this year of The Last Supper done by gay men in leather (Oakland is about 15 miles from San Francisco)?

Can we REQUEST that another state secede from the Union? Just an idea...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Sunday, September 23, 2007

I say she's both...

From Samuel Taylor Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink ;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.

The very deep did rot : O Christ !
That ever this should be !
Yea, slimy things did crawl with legs
Upon the slimy sea.

About, about, in reel and rout
The death-fires danced at night ;
The water, like a witch's oils,
Burnt green, and blue and white.


Her lips were red, her looks were free,
Her locks were yellow as gold :
Her skin was as white as leprosy,
The Night-mare LIFE-IN-DEATH was she,
Who thicks man's blood with cold.

Is it there a reason that we aren't seeing a poll showing Rudy ahead of Hillary? Is there some sort of unspoken agreement between the dinosaur media outlets that they are keeping this from us? Hat tip to The Influence Peddler for their posting, Hillary Clinton: Albatross or Millstone, on a story that you AREN'T seeing in the dinosaur media...yet. I predict that after enough of us in the blog world start talking about it, it, like so many other stories that bloggers have broken in the past year or so, will soon be a major talking point by the reluctant Jurassic era outlets...

In Swing Districts, Democratic Enthusiasm Is Harder to Come By

By Chris Cillizza And Shailagh Murray
Sunday, September 23, 2007; Page A02

Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic voters are thrilled with their choices for president, bursting at the seams to rally behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) or whoever gets the party's nod next year.

A recent survey by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, however, showed Clinton and Obama trailing former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) in the 31 Democratic-held House districts regarded as most imperiled in 2008, and even potentially serving as a drag on those lawmakers' reelection chances.

The poll was conducted in August but has not been previously reported. It paints a "sobering picture" for Democrats, according to a memo by Lake and Daniel Gotoff that accompanies the poll report.

Giuliani takes 49 percent to Clinton's 39 percent, while the former mayor's lead over Obama is far smaller, 41 percent to 40 percent. "Despite Obama's relative advantage over Clinton, both candidates are significantly underperforming against the generic Democratic edge in the presidential and even against party identification," Lake and Gotoff wrote.


Guliani ahead of Clinton by ten points, and the dino's aren't reporting it. It makes you wonder what, exactly, ARE they any good for any more? Kudo's to WAPO for being the first to carry it.
I'm sure there were many, many tight sphincter muscles as the story went to press. I'll let ya'll decide why I would say that.

Personally, and I know there are those out there who don't agree with me, that's their right, but I'm with Fred. I've made no bones about that since BEFORE he was a candidate, even before he started "testing the waters."

For the main stream media to SIT on a story for over A MONTH is irresponsible journalism, in my book.

Ten points.

And if you take a look around at Democrats across the country, and listen to what they are saying, they ain't happy. They were counting on 2006 to be the year that everything changed for them. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. What has Congress actually DONE since the Democrats took the majority last election? They've renamed a few post offices, and put forth bill after bill that has been shot down like Mallards and Canada Honkers during duck season.

It's been the season of change for the Democrats, all right. It's been a real wake up call for the country exactly how deeply the party leadership is willing to go to shoot themselves in the foot. Wait, scratch that analogy, everyone knows that TRUE leftinistra's are pro gun control, so they wouldn't be shooting anything but dirty looks and the middle finger while they defecate on the American flag...

Is that REALLY what we want for America?

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Saturday, September 22, 2007

Talk about not getting it...

The left have an agenda, and they have a new target. One could say a TALL target. And what they are doing is EXACTLY the reason that I wrote Underestimating Southern Demeanor last month.

It is this mindset that seems to have shrouded Fred Thompson during the first stages of what is likely to be his bid for the White House. Critics, especially Northern critics, have labeled him as "slow, unfocused, and gloomy." Is it gloomy to present the reality of things to the American people rather than doing the standard dance of rhetoric? I think not, and in Jonathan Martin's Fred: Sober and Serious, I find that I'm not alone in thinking so.

The latest polls show Fred slipping ahead of the pack of the Republican front runners. That little factoid seems to complete be out of the grasp of comprehension of Steve Benen, who has this to say at TalkingPointsMemo.

By any reasonable measure, Fred Thompson, the actor-lobbyist-presidential candidate, is off to a rough start. Particularly on policy matters, Thompson has been confused and uninformed about everything from Social Security policy to drilling the Everglades for oil to the 2005 Schiavo controversy.

But this has to be my favorite.

NBC's "First Read' reports that when Thompson was asked Thursday about Louisiana's "Jena Six" protest of Old South racism on his way into a San Antonio fundraiser, he replied: "I don't know anything about it."

Bush fielded a question about it at his news conference the same day, saying the events in Louisiana had "saddened" him. Thompson's staff said he knew all about the issue but was unfamiliar with the expression "Jena Six."

So what? I knew about the situation and the incident as well, but until this week I, too, was unfamiliar with the term "Jena Six." And I keep up with the news all day while I'm working.

With SO MUCH going on on the international level, especially with that little tin god from Iran coming onto OUR SOIL, THIS is what Benen picks as showing Thompson as being unaware? AND THEN has the audacity to put up another blog on his OWN site about NITPICKING?


Put me in that same boat, amigo, and hand me the damned oars. I certainly don't mind rowing the "I'm not fully up to date with all the bullshit catchphrases coined by the media" boat. How asinine.

They're grasping if they're going after him for things like this, and for taking stances on issues that are more common SENSE rather than being politically correct. Politically correct doesn't have much weight where we come from down here in Tennessee. Common sense goes a long way.

Maybe Mr. Benen needs to come down here for a while. We might even convince him to try some grits and join us in the long standing debate: with gravy or sweetened?

That's my kind of debate. I'm in favor of both.

OH YEAH, and while I'm thinking about it, I don't know anyone who isn't of the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton mindset (you know, stirring shit up and creating situations out of things where they should stay the hell away) who thinks that criminals being prosecuted for committing a crime is "Old South Racism."

There just may be a rubber chicken award in that whole situation for this week, methinks.

Just a few thoughts regarding people blow off when they don't know what they're talking about from:

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Thursday, September 20, 2007

...but don't even THINK of starting an ROTC program....

I am constantly amazed by the number of people willing to just GREET a terrorist or an enemy leader with open arms and make them feel like they're just part of the family.

Have we always been this way and I just really didn't realize it because I was focusing on self interests more and was too BUSY to notice? Or have we really and truly headed for the deep end of the pool when we haven't even gotten our swimmies off yet? (swimmies - those inflatable little things that you blow up on your kids arms when they're little and go swimming. Or at least that's what my daughter called them when she was two and three.)

It's an amazing thing, reading Ayn Rand's Fountainhead, that I notice things even more differently than after first reading (at spree's suggestion, hat tip for that) Atlas Shrugged.

Socialist influence doesn't go after the poor or the middle class. It goes after the bored wealthy, those who they can make feel guilty for their wealth, not those who made their money by EARNING it, but more those who INHERITED it. That, and through sufficiently disgusted (and in many cases, disgusting) entertainers who make it "fashionable" (Barbara Streisand comes to mind here for her many causes through the years, as does Jane Fonda).

What better place to indoctrinate young wealthy heirs and heiresses than at the Ivy League colleges and universities they attend?

Columbia University has invited Mahmud Ahmadinejad to speak at their college.

From the Anti-Defamation League:

ADL Calls On Columbia University To Rescind Invitation To Iranian President Ahmadinejad

New York, NY, September 20, 2007 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called on Columbia University to reconsider its decision to host Iran's president at a question and answer session with faculty and students. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to speak September 24 at a forum sponsored by the university's School of International and Public Affairs.

A similar invitation to Ahmadinejad was revoked last year by Columbia President Lee Bollinger.

"It is inappropriate and a perversion of the concept of freedom of speech," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Columbia University has no moral imperative, no legal imperative, no social imperative to give Ahmadinejad a platform, which he would not give them in Tehran. Why give him the credibility and the respectability of a major institution of higher learning? What message does that send to the students? This is not what the First Amendment is all about."


Columbia University will invite a man who is KNOWN to sponsor and promote acts of terrorism and who personally calls for the extermination of the nation of Israel.


But they won't allow an ROTC program on their campus for those students who wish to pursue a career in the armed forces?

From FrontPage Magazine:

Prior to the late 1960s, Columbia’s current anti-US military atmosphere seems to have been almost nonexistent. Indeed, as early as 1916 an ROTC program was instituted on campus, where it matured and grew during the two World Wars, the Cold War, the Korean War, and even part of the Vietnam War era. Producing some of the finest naval officers ever to serve our country, at one point Columbia was actually churning out more Navy ensigns per year than even the US Naval Academy. In 1968, however, the university’s administration expelled all ROTC programs from campus in order to appease the sometimes-violent student protesters who opposed the Vietnam War – one of whom actually decimated Columbia’s ROTC offices with a Molotov cocktail.

The university’s ban on ROTC remained in place until a 1980 decision to not only allow its students to participate in the ROTC program at nearby Fordham University, but also to have a record of ROTC classes displayed on their Columbia transcripts. In 1990 however, this policy came to an end. While Columbia students could still take part in ROTC programs on neighboring college campuses, their transcripts no longer reflected that participation. To this day, ROTC classes are not considered part of the regular curriculum of studies. When the military recently forced Columbia to allow on-campus military recruiting (under the banner of the Solomon Amendment, which allows for the denial of federal funding to colleges that prohibit or prevent ROTC or military recruitment), the university’s president openly urged students not to interview – because of what he called the military’s discrimination against homosexuals.

Such is the nature of Columbia’s assault on American patriotism and self-defense – by no means unique in the world of higher education. Such is the intensity of academia’s dogged effort to instill, in the mind of a new generation, contempt for all this country does . . . and is.

Very interesting indeed...

Aren't you just on PINS AND NEEDLES for your sons and daughters to go there?

Fortunately, Columbia University students are exercising their First Amendment rights and protesting this outrage. You have to sign up for a Facebook account in order to follow the link, but it's worth it to get the information to help rally to protest this.

Click here for more details on the Rally, for bussing information, and to RSVP:

WHEN: Monday, September 24, 1:00-3:00


COLUMBIA STUDENTS (w/ Columbia ID's): On campus, outside Lerner Hall

NON-COLUMBIA STUDENTS: The Columbia Gates. 116th and Broadway - we have secured a permit to stage a protest there.

Click here for more details:

WHO: YOU and your friends, along with Hillel, Hasbara, StandWithUs, Amcha, ZOA, The David Project, Columbia student groups, concerned citizens. Expected attendance is in the thousands.

WHAT TO BRING: Flyers and posters (see below for links). There will also be many people handing out information, flyers, posters, stickers, banners, etc.

Click here to get protest signs:

Click here for flyers:{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}/NYTimes_Iran_09202006.pdf{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}/AJC_Times_IHT_01272006.pdf

Remember - the world is watching. This is a monumental opportunity to make our voices heard. Generations will ask us, What did we do to protest? Where were we?

Video: Ahmadinejad "Death to Israel"

Video: On the Holocaust:


Hasbara Fellowships will be organizing busses from various campuses and points around the city.

They are planning to provide busses from: NYU, Rutgers, Baruch, Queens, Hofstra, Brooklyn, and from the earlier rally in front of the UN. YU and Stern students probably have their own busses, ask around.

We also need people to step up and be campus leaders to organize the bussing and rallying. Please be in touch.

More details will be forthcoming.

For more information, and to volunteer, please contact Jenn Cogan at or 347 585 0060.

For more information on the Rally and bussing, go to:

SPEAK OUT, Americans, let the world know that we WILL NOT pander to terrorists!

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Monday, September 17, 2007

The Dragon is dead. LONG LIVE THE DRAGON!

I'm sure Robert Jordan would have very much understood the title, and the significance of the meaning behind it.

To the Rigney family, from the depths of my heart, my condolences and sympathies.

He will be missed by the world.

Sometimes even when you’ve fought your best…
Posted by Wilson on September 16th, 2007 in the Robert Jordan's Blog category

It is with great sadness that I tell you that the Dragon is gone. RJ left us today at 2:45 PM. He fought a valiant fight against this most horrid disease. In the end, he left peacefully and in no pain. In the years he had fought this, he taught me much about living and about facing death. He never waivered in his faith, nor questioned our God’s timing. I could not possibly be more proud of anyone. I am eternally grateful for the time that I had with him on this earth and look forward to our reunion, though as I told him this afternoon, not yet. I love you bubba.

Our beloved Harriet was at his side through the entire fight and to the end. The last words from his mouth were to tell her that he loved her.

James Oliver Rigney, Jr. aka Robert Jordan
October 17, 1948 – September 16, 2007
May the Wheel of Time return you unto green grass and blue skies...

Once and Always, An American Fighting Man


Comedy Night at the Emmy's

Al Gore is now the proud recipient of an Emmy.

What was Al's contribution to television to receive this coveted award?

Outstanding Creative Achievement in Interactive Television.

That's right, a new category, from what I've heard.

Something created JUST FOR the former Vice President, I'm sure.

Outstanding Creative Achievement in Interactive Television

What a laugh.

I have another award for you, Mr. Gore.

Wake Up America's Rubber Chicken Award, for your tree hugging, your very bad beard a few years back, along with the flannel shirts, your blatant hypocricy concerning energy conservation, and just because you make Tennesseans look STUPID in general. It's Tennesseans like YOU, Mr "I've really lived inside the beltway most of my life but my family comes from Tennessee," who make the rest of us look BAD.

CONGRATULATIONS, here's your chicken.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Sunday, September 16, 2007

Totally at Random

This is one of those nights where I sit at the screen thinking, "Where do I start? What do I start with?"

Ever have those nights? Those of you who write know what I'm talking about. It's a sort of writer's block, but not really, because you have a MILLION and one ideas running through your mind but can't think of which one you want to lead out with.

The trick is to pick ONE thing, then let the others just sort of flow until you finish, depending of course on what your subject matter is. Fortunately, this particular piece has no singular subject matter OTHER THAN the randomness of ones own mind, and I gotta tell ya, sometimes, THIS mind can be fairly random.

Some say it's a symptom of genius, others that it's a sure sign of insanity.

Perhaps it's some sort of strange conglomeration of both.

History will be the judge.

Raoul, Dracula, whatever you're calling yourself tonight, my offer still stands, btw. Bring it on, amigo. I'm waiting. :)


I don't often "toot my own horn," soneone recently pointed out on this site my qualifications and experience, commenting that I was being FAR too modest about myself. What follows is, I suppose, something that goes along those lines, and I say what I'm about to say not to take any credit for myself, but rather to, hopefully, inspire thought and action from others. I met a man this week through my work, he was one of my customers, who is a Vietnam veteran (for those of you who don't KNOW exactly what it is that I do, right now I'm a communications contractor, at this customer's home I was installing a digital satellite television system). I arrived at his home to meet him as he and his brother were heading to the hospital some 60 miles away for his weekly radiation therapy. He has cancer. Cancer caused by Agent Orange. His mother was staying at the house as I did my work. During the course of my doing my thing, doing what I do, I learned this from her, about the Agent Orange and his fight the past few years with cancer that had been caused by it. There are many days when he is too ill to do much other than to lay in bed and watch television. His one satellite receiver was located in the living room. Typically, running a second line, called a mirror line, from one location to another so that both television sets are showing the same thing gets an extra charge. I pondered this as I was working, pondering the fact that this man served our nation in an unpopular war, that he has, according to his mother, difficult nights many times because of the things that he experienced, and the fact that while I served at a time when we weren't actively engaged in hostilities (officially, anyway) that I have my own difficult nights from let's just leave it at that I have difficult nights as well. I don't want to dwell and tonight be one of them. Anyway, I decided that I would run the second line for this man, this brother veteran, at no charge. It was the least I could do as a gesture of thanks for his service, and hopefully a little something to ease him a bit in what he and his family know are his last days.

Little things.

I share this illustration not to praise myself, not by any means. I share this illustration to hopefully show how SIMPLE it is to do little things to say "thank you" to our veterans.

Random acts of kindness.

It's an amazing thing how twisted things SUCH as kindness can be twisted around, as well. A few of us from time to time refer to Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. What an incredible visionary this woman was. A child of Russia, she had seen first hand the trappings of socialism and the way that it can take the ordinary and the most basic of human nature and virtue and TWIST it into something surreal, something vulgar, something...else. Another magnificent work by Rand is The Fountainhead, which I am reading now for, unfortunately, the first time. One of the main characters IS a Socialist, and she shows, through her writing, how skillfully and artfully, how INNOCENTLY, people can be manipulated into absolute ruin and self doubt, allowing themselves to be controlled by others. This work was written almost a CENTURY ago, and yet both works are so highly relevant to our society today.

Prophetically so.

A few lines from The Fountainhead, because I HIGHLY, HIGHLY recommend this book to be read, as well as Atlas Shrugged:

"One Small Voice" never seemed to say anything dangerously revolutionary, and seldom anything political. It merely preached sentiments with which most people felt in agreement: unselfishness, brotherhood, equality. "I'd rather be kind than right." "Mercy is superior to justice, the shallow-hearted to the contrary notwithstanding." "Speaking anatomically - and perhaps otherwise - the heart is the most valuable organ. The brain is a superstition." "In spiritual matters there is a simple, infallible test: everything that proceeds from the ego is evil; everything that proceeds from love for others good." "Service is the only badge of nobility. I see nothing offensive in the conception of fertilizer as the highest symbol of man's destiny: it is fertilizer that produces wheat and roses." "the worst folk song is superior to the best symphony." "A man braver than his brothers insults them by implication. Let us aspire to no virtue which cannot be shared." "I have yet to see a genius or a hero who, if stuck with a burning match, would feel less pain than his undistinguished average brother." "Genius is an exaggeration of dimension. So is elephantiasis. Both may be only a disease." "We are all broghers under the skin - and I, for one, would be willing to skin humanity to prove it."

How much of that sounds familiar, if one steps back and takes a look at the world around them? How MUCH of that diseased mindset has settled itself into our society today? How much of it do we see so subtly delivered to us from the pulpit of the modern Democratic party? Worse, how much of it is seeping over to the Republicans?

Something to think about, methinks.

I'm amazed at the work ethic of so many of our younger generation, as well. I can tell a major difference in the quality of work done by some of the young twenty-somethings that do the same sorts of work that I do. I'm amazed at the quality of work in other places, as well. My mother was commenting today about my brother's car having to go back into the shop this week after being serviced just last week, because he has a problem that was caused, likely, BY the routine service work.

I suppose it's always been that way, though, but I'm not sure.

I do remain hopeful, or at least I try to. I know others who have magnificent work ethics and excel at what they do.

We have let our guard down as a nation. We have allowed Nikita Khrushchev's prophecy of "taking us from the inside" almost to come true. Almost. But not quite.

We can take the words that make the title for this blogsite and make them a mantra. We can take them into our hearts, and into our MINDS, and live them, breath them, use them.

Wake Up America can be our rally cry, and this, from Atlas Shrugged, our oath of our character and a testiment of our determination: "I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

Random thoughts, from

An American Fighting Man


Sunday, September 9, 2007 calls Petraeus a traitor, earns an RC award

[Updates below as well as a link to part #2 of this thread]

I don't know...

When I can remember...

Being quite...



Do you ever reach a point of anger where your blood just chills inside of you and you have the most calm, collected, cold rational thought processes running despite the rage? That's where I am now.

Why, you ask? I'm glad you asked that.

The LEFT have taken a whole new slant (as if they weren't slanted enough already) in their efforts to make us look like a nation of damned fools. I am so sick and tired and fed up with and groups like them...

They're playing right into the hands of our enemies around the world, especially with this, their latest stunt: Calls Petraeus a Traitor
Do Democrats in Congress agree?
by Pete Hegseth
09/09/2007 5:28:00 PM

Tomorrow--as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Let's be clear: is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is "cooking the books," then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, 'betray[ing] us.' has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership --as an article in today's Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday's Politico: "'No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,' noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. 'The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for


Sunday, September 09, 2007

Don't Question His Patriotism! [Cliff May], it seems, is questioning the patriotism of Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq. Tomorrow, the anti-war group is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us?"

Folks, this is about as original as "Elvis the Pelvis" was. What makes it SO MUCH WORSE is that the world is watching us to see how we, as a nation, and our government, will react to the report. And what are they seeing? Such divisive tripe as this.


Is it going to take an escalation of things into violence, again, within this nation for us to unite AS a nation? Let me warn you of this, those of you who are BUCKING for a second "Civil War" in the United States: the MINUTE lines are draw and ranks are formed for us to do battle against one another, do you HONESTLY THINK that the rest of the world is going to stand idly by and let us duke it out amongst ourselves may the best side win? HELL NO! Russia and China are watching this with baited breath, mark my words. The Taliban and al-Queda are CHEERING us on to continue to pull apart internally. Our ALLIES are watching us to see what happens. And we have planning to run this add calling the top general in Iraq a traitor because they don't like the war.


No one in their RIGHT MIND likes war. But sometimes things have to be done to protect our way of life.

IF WE CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH THAT WE ARE TAKING, one very, VERY similar to the path we took prior to 1860 in this nation, and find ourselves fighting each other, you can BET YOUR SWEET ASS that there will be foreign factions who will be MORE THAN WILLING to jump into the fray to make sure that we are finally and ultimately destroyed as a nation.

To those American citizens supporting if you seek traitors, take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask yourself, honestly, is the organization that you are supporting working in the best interests of your country?

To the Congress and the Senate: How much longer will you continue to work at odds and allow our nation to become more divided? How much longer will you allow leadership within the House and the Senate who blatantly seek the division of the American people? How much longer will you continue to make political partisan play out of something that is so literally life and death, NOT JUST for our troops, but for our citizenry as well? HOW MUCH LONGER will a political party have WEEKLY CONFERENCES with a group SUCH AS, paying credence to them RATHER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO PUT THEM IN OFFICE? We the people are watching you, and we will remember what you do, and how you respond.

To the American People in general: how much longer will you allow yourselves to listen to the rantings of a sick and deranged old man HIDING IN A CAVE and telling you what to believe? How much longer will you listen to those who would see our nation discredited LIE to you by telling you that we are fighting an illegal war? How much longer will you continue to support leaders who clearly have their own political survival in mind rather than doing what is right for our nation, and what best protects our nation. How much longer will you IGNORE the threat of radical Islam that calls for our destruction by focusing on lines drawn on a map rather than the VERY REAL problem that this ideology CROSSES national boundaries and involves a multinational group that may or may NOT have the support of any particular government or governments.

To the New York Times: disgraceful.

This war, the war on terrorist groups, the war that John Edwards has called a "bumper sticker war," has long lasting implications for more than a handful of reasons.

Our world changed on 9/11. We cannot forget that, no matter how much we would like to do so.

Traitor my leathery ass.

You know, I have personally not said anything untowards in regards to the generals who dissented in conducting operations in Iraq. As a soldier (once a soldier, always a soldier), I understand that there is a difference between peace time leadership and war time leadership. I could understand the dissenting opinions of the peace time general staff. No way would I call them traitors. They served our nation, they did their duty, and they voiced their opinions. General Petraeus has served our nation, as well, and he has done so IN THE CAPACITY of a war time general. has gone TOO FAR with this one. Too far.

I call on Congress, and I call on the American people, to hold them accountable for their sedition. wins the Rubber Chicken Award for this week, hands down.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

(NOTE: Instead of leaving you with the advertisements I usually have at the bottom of each post, I will leave you with one of the videos from Freedoms Watch) [30 second video.]

Wounded Veteran:


[Update] Despite the Democrats and Move On Org. doing everything in their power to discredit General Petraeus, or perhaps because of those attempts, the NYT/CBS poll, with obvious bias in how they asked questions, STILL showed one little gem. 68% percent of the American population trust the militray more than anyone else on the war.

I think they have overplayed their hand and the public sees this.

[Update #2] Pete has another piece out asking whether Democrats will denounce Move On for this ad, or whether they will be complicit in Move On's actions by staying silent. If they do not speak out against Move On because of the fear of the orgination, then they will, rightly so, continue to be associated in everyones mind with this group.



The First Presidential Spanish Debate...Yo hablo what did you say?

In the spirit of pandering to illegal immigrants crossing into our country from the southern border, in the spirit of rejecting the insistence of a growing number of Americans demanding that we have a national language of English, the Democrats set forth tonight to sponsor the first ever United States Presidential candidates debate done in English AND Spanish.

Dems' bilingual debate 'a historic moment'

In the first TV debate of its kind, questions and answers will be translated as Democratic candidates face off on Univisión.


Would that 1984 presidential debate have been as memorable, or as decisive, if Walter Mondale had fixed Gary Hart with an exasperated glare and demanded: Dónde está el bistec? We could find out tonight when eight Democratic candidates square off in Miami in the first nationally televised debate en español.

In an acknowledgment of the explosive growth of Hispanic voters -- more than 16 million will be eligible to cast ballots in next year's election -- all the declared contenders for the Democratic nomination are joining in a debate sponsored by and televised on the Spanish-language network Univisión.

The candidates won't actually be speaking Spanish, a language most of them don't understand. Instead, questions and answers will be simultaneously translated.

''It's a great moment, a historic moment,'' says Maria Elena Salinas, who along with her fellow Univisión anchor, Jorge Ramos, will moderate the debate. ``The candidates will be speaking to the fastest-growing segment of American society. It's a sign of respect.''

It's also uncharted territory on the maps of both politics and television. Will the debate's novelty draw a bigger audience than the two million viewers who usually watch Univisión's Sunday-night reality shows? Or does boredom with public-affairs programming cross cultural lines?


Will the candidates engage in a lively, thoughtful exchange on issues like U.S. relations with Latin America that are rarely discussed in mainstream political forums? Or will they crack up on stereotypical assumptions that Los Angeles Chicanos and Miami Cubanos all think the same way about the issues?

Nobody knows. Which, a lot of people think, is a good thing.

''I'll certainly be watching with a good deal of curiosity,'' said David Bohrman, CNN's Washington bureau chief. ``It's been an interesting year of experimentation in debates. We've all recognized that the old rules are really rules, and we can reinvent debates. . . . A fresh look at the debate process, that's a good thing. It was a pretty stuffy old process.''

As the presidential campaign trail lengthens and debates multiply -- tonight's will be the 10th one televised this year -- organizers have gone to some exotic lengths to make each one stand out. There've been debates themed at black, gay and labor forums and even one built around videos submitted to the YouTube Internet site in which questions were asked by characters dressed as Vikings and snowmen.

''The more debates, the more creative the outlets,'' said Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution think tank and a former speechwriter for California Gov. Pete Wilson. ``God forbid, there could even be an MTV debate at some point.''

Wouldn't that be LOVELY? A Presidential debate hosted by MTV. I wonder if they could book Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake for some sort of intermission halfway through? HMMMMMMMMMM.

So how did the debate go? Let's take a look at what the Washington Times has to say about how it went, shall we?
Panic in the press room
Christina Bellantoni

"Are we going to have audio?"
"Vamos a tener audio?"

Reporters who didn't speak Spanish were already anxious about the translation devices that didn't quite fit in our ears. (Porque soy de California, yo hablo un poquito Espanol.)

But 90 seconds before the forum began tonight, the Media Room had no sound - not in Spanish, English or French. Nada.

Spanish- and English-speaking reporters in the room erupted in a panic, sending University of Miami staff scrambling to try and fix the feed. What most reporters heard for the first 16 minutes of the debate was static - both from the closed television feed and from the translation device.

Even Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) seemed to have trouble, yanking the earpiece from his ear mid-way through his answer to a question on Iraq.

Isn't that just LOVELY? A HISTORIC moment. A complete and utter disaster. Barack Hussein Obama even got frustrated. I'm sure Hillary Clinton was cool as a cucumber. I don't know of much, other than Bill, that can perturb that ice queen...

Is this what we, the American people, want or deserve as our current and rising leadership? Do we want candidates and leaders who are interested in dividing our nation further by PANDERING to those divisions?

How is this something that unifies us as a nation? Can anyone answer that one for me? I would TRULY love to know.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Thursday, September 6, 2007

Fred Thompson: the Water is Fine!

You've heard the news by now. You've read it in the papers, online, in spree's posting earlier today. Or you've been under a rock.

Fred Thompson is officially in the race for the office of President of the United States of America.

Talk radio has been abuzz with discussions about his entry into the Republican race Why did he wait so long? Will it affect his race that he waited so long? Why did he not come into the race sooner?

I hate to toot my own horn, I really do, but I'm going to take credit for being one of the FIRST to mention Fred Thompson as a possible Presidential candidate, and I did so on this site WAY BACK on 9JAN07 in the comments section of spree's posting Deja vu, where I said this:


Has anyone approached Fred Thompson?

I know I tend to be partial to Tennesseans because I am one (we don't talk about Al Gore though, other than with dismay and amazement...) but I have heard his name mentioned a couple of times recently on talk radio.

Might be worth looking into.

It wasn't just because of talk radio that I mentioned Fred Thompson. Everything I've seen of the man, I'm impressed with his integrity, his forthrightness, and his calm, confident demeanor. To criticize Thompson for waiting until September to announce his candidacy is to criticize our entire process up until this year. Traditionally, candidates haven't formally announced until after Labor Day. Fred Thompson is merely staying in step with tradition in doing so.

By now you've had time to read the commentaries, to watch the youtube clips, and to see Thompson's own announcement clip on his site. Listen to Leno's audience. That was no canned applause, that was the audience. They were excited. Look at Thompson himself. Does he seem anxious? Does he seem tense? Quite the opposite. The man is the picture of calm and cool. Listen to what he says. Does he deride the other Republican candidates? He doesn't. In my own mind, he's already taking the stance that he's the man. That his announcement was more widely watched than the Republican debates FEATURING the other candidates speaks volumes in and of itself; candidates who, when asked ABOUT Thompson, had snide comments to make about him, by and large.

As I said, I first forwarded my opinion about Fred Thompson entering the race back in January. In the months that have passed, nothing has changed my mind that Fred Thompson should be the Republican candidate for President in the 2008 election. If anything, I'm more convinced than ever, having watched the other candidates through the passing months from then to now.

I suppose it goes without saying, my personal support goes to Fred Thompson.

Will it be a difficult campaign? What Presidential campaign isn't? Thompson has a few things in his favor that the others don't have. He's the fresh face in the crowd, the new voice, and since he hasn't been doing the active "hot" campaigning that the others have been doing this year, he's coming into the race fresh. The other candidates have had time to make their pleas, begin repeating themselves, in some cases redirecting their "spin" on things (McCain and his stand on illegal immigration, just as a case in point).

I DO see a man who WILL NOT apologize for our war, who will not apologize for America, backing down from anything he says. To my knowledge, he never has, in the political realm.

The primaries are drawing near.

Hang on to your hats, folks, it's going to be an interesting ride from here on out...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Monday, September 3, 2007

Superhighway? WHAT superhighway?

Hell must have frozen over again, because I'm including something from CNN on my posting. You will recall the first time Hell froze over was some years back when the Eagles toured together again...

More typical shifting and slithering from Washington. It's very easy to deny something if you call it something else, obviously.

From WorldNetDaily:

Name changed to hide 'Superhighway'?
WND obtains secret document revealing original moniker of 'SuperCorridor'

Posted: September 2, 2007
8:14 p.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007

A 1998 document which WND has obtained shows the North American SuperCorridor Coalition, or NASCO, was originally named the North American Superhighway Coalition.

The document plays into an emerging debate in which a number of critics, including President Bush, want to deny that a NAFTA "Superhighway" exists.

Christopher Hayes, writing in the Aug. 27 edition of the Nation claimed that, "There is no such thing as a proposed NAFTA Superhighway."

President Bush at the third summit meeting of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America in Montebello, Quebec, on Aug. 21, answered a question from a reporter at Fox News that NAFTA Superhighways were part of a "conspiracy theory..."

Someone better inform Mel Gibson. How is it that so many people KNOW about something, have information and maps regarding something, that the government is denying the existance of? This isn't something like Area 51, people, we have the maps and the details on how it's supposed to come into play laid out for us to delve into like a Sunday morning brunch buffet. And more information is coming to light daily. Is it going to take convoys of Mexican trucks rolling up through Texas before people WAKE UP?


Kansas City SmartPort Uncovered!
Pieces of the NAFTA Superhighway are falling into place, behind the scenes.

The Winners:
China & Corporate CEO's
The Losers:
US Citizens & Mexican Citizens

Since the passage of NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Act) there has been talk of a “superhighway”, or a series of “superhighways” that allow the efficient movement of cargo and laborers within North America.

Although there have been denials of such a highway, the North American Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO) exists to promote just such a system of highways. One piece of it is in progress in Kansas City, Missouri. The Kansas City SmartPort is an “inland port” that is proposed to handle Mexican customs and inspections. It is to be the link between seaports in Mexico and major truck, air and rail lines in the United States, all the way to Manitoba, Canada. (Another piece of the NASCO super corridor, is the Trans-Texas Corridor-the TTC)

Here’s the troubling part. After cargo arrives at Mexican seaports (mostly from Asia), it is to be shipped to Kansas City, and from there to the rest of the US and Canada. The cargo will be approved and screened for security in a Mexican port. Trucks and rail are to be inspected for safety in Mexico. According to press reports, there will be a US “border inspection" when the cargo reaches the Mexican border.

However as we now know, a very small percentage of cargo is inspected by Homeland Security. They will rely primarily on the port personnel in Mexico. The vast majority of cargo will pass through the border unimpeded and will not be inspected. We will be relying on other countries to keep us safe from terrorism, nuclear waste and semi-trucks full of illegal immigrants, guns, drugs or other illegal cargo...

Illegal cargo. Doesn't that just sound LOVELY?

I can't say that I agree with Ron Paul on a great many things. On THIS issue, however, we see eye to eye, regarding this as an up and coming fiasco for our nation.

The NAFTA Superhighway

by Ron Paul

By now many Texans have heard about the proposed “NAFTA Superhighway,” which is also referred to as the trans-Texas corridor. What you may not know is the extent to which plans for such a superhighway are moving forward without congressional oversight or media attention.

This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside.

This will require coordinated federal and state eminent domain actions on an unprecedented scale, as literally millions of people and businesses could be displaced. The loss of whole communities is almost certain, as planners cannot wind the highway around every quaint town, historic building, or senior citizen apartment for thousands of miles.

Governor Perry is a supporter of the superhighway project, and Congress has provided small amounts of money to study the proposal. Since this money was just one item in an enormous transportation appropriations bill, however, most members of Congress were not aware of it.

The proposed highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization called the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” or SPP.

The SPP was first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco.

The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But don’t be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests.

The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution – which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade.

The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union – complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.

A new resolution, introduced by Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway, or enter into any agreement that advances the concept of a North American Union. I wholeheartedly support this legislation, and predict that the superhighway will become a sleeper issue in the 2008 election...

Contact your legislators, people. Let them know that YOU KNOW that this is going on, and demand that they take action to stop it.

We are on the verge of handing our nation over to others.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

(NOTE: One of the videos from Freedoms Watch) [30 second video.]

Another Wounded Veteran speaks about anger at Congress and Victory


Sunday, September 2, 2007

Snow on the Mexican Trucking Situation

Tony Snow has weighed in on Mexican big rigs rolling across our southernmost border into our country.

I suppose it should come as no surprise that the outgoing White House press secretary would be in support of this "experiment" sponsored by the President.

From WorldNetDaily:

Snow not buying Hoffa's 'disaster' description
Teamsters want Bush administration's Mexico truck program stopped

Posted: September 1, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2007

The outgoing spokesman for President Bush says the U.S. Department of Transportation is trying to make sure that any trucks and truckers on U.S. highways are safe.

Tony Snow, who announced his plans to leave the White House post in two weeks, added that he doesn't believe what the president of the Teamsters Union has to say about the issue actually would be impartial.

He was responding to a press briefing question from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House. Kinsolving asked: "Teamsters President Hoffa has called the Bush administration's test program to allow Mexican trucks unrestricted access to U.S. highways, in his words, 'a disaster; all we're asking is that Mexican trucks and truckers meet the same standards as American trucks and drivers.' My question: Why do the Teamsters have to go to court to try to make Mexican truck drivers meet the same drug screening, physical evaluations and hazmat certifications as U.S. truckers?"

The Teamsters and other organizations went to court this week to try to obtain an order halting the program, and the Bush administration has responded with a request that it be allowed to move forward.

"There are a number of things that the Department of Transportation is involved in, in trying to maintain and ascertain and guarantee the safety of any trucks that are on U.S. highways," Snow said. "I don't think that I will buy lock, stock and barrel what the president of the Teamsters Union has to say about possibly competing trucking operations."

The Bush administration's court response to the request by the Sierra Club and Teamsters to block the program, scheduled to begin this weekend, was that the two organizations didn't have standing to ask for the halt, since they cannot prove the pilot program will harm them.

The two groups opposed the program, to involve 100 Mexican trucking companies with the possibility of bringing thousands of Mexican trucks onto U.S. highways, citing safety concerns and competition with U.S. truckers.

Mexican trucks and truckers already are allowed into the U.S., and the administration said 4.5 million trips are made each year. They are, however, limited to a short zone along the border, while the new program would erase that limit and give them virtually unrestricted access nationwide...

On an upnote, however, there ARE SOME laws that have been on the books for some time that are FINALLY going to be they say:

Truck drivers will be required to read, speak English
The Associated Press

HARLINGEN -- Interstate truck and bus drivers across America may find themselves pulled off the highway if state troopers or vehicle inspectors find they can't speak English.

The requirement has been on the books for decades, but enforcement has begun before Mexican trucks are allowed in the U.S. interior as of Thursday.

"We have found people in violation of this for a number of years, and we're working feverishly to correct it," said John Hill, head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Since 1971, federal law has said that commercial drivers must read and speak English "sufficiently to understand highway traffic signs and signals and directions given in English and to respond to official inquiries."

Hill said the language deficiency was found mostly in the commercial zone that varies from 25 miles to 75 miles north of the Mexican border, but since inspectors there are bilingual and Mexican truckers are not allowed past that zone, it hasn't been an issue.

But after more than a decade of legal wrangling, U.S. highways are opening up.

The North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 called for Mexican and U.S. trucks to travel freely throughout one another's nations, but the provision was stalled by labor unions and environmental groups' arguments that the trucks are unsafe...
NAFTA has been around for a number of years, but has it been a good thing? How many U.S. factories have moved their operations to Mexico, costing American workers their jobs? Has that benefited the families of those workers? I don't think so.
North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA
by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted: 05/30/2006

In March 2005 at their summit meeting in Waco, Tex., President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin issued a joint statement announced the creation of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The creation of this new agreement was never submitted to Congress for debate and decision. Instead, the U.S. Department of Commerce merely created a new division under the same title to implement working groups to advance a North American Union working agenda in a wide range of areas, including: manufactured goods, movement of goods, energy, environment, e-commerce, financial services, business facilitation, food and agriculture, transportation, and health.

SPP is headed by three top cabinet level officers of each country. Representing the United States are Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Representing Mexico are Secretario de Economía Fernando Canales, Secretario de Gobernación Carlos Abascal, and Secretario de Relaciones Exteriores, Luis Ernesto Derbéz. Representing Canada are Minister of Industry David L. Emerson, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety, Anne McLellan, and Minister of Foreign Affairs Pierre Stewart Pettigrew.

Reporting in June 2005 to the heads of state of the three countries, the trilateral SPP emphasized the extensive working group structure that had been established to pursue an ambitious agenda:

In carrying out your instructions, we established working groups under both agendas of the Partnership – Security and Prosperity. We held roundtables with stakeholders, meetings with business groups and briefing sessions with Legislatures, as well as with other relevant political jurisdictions. The result is a detailed series of actions and recommendations designed to increase the competitiveness of North America and the security of our people.

This is not a theoretical exercise being prepared so it can be submitted for review. Instead, SPP is producing an action agreement to be implemented directly by regulations, without any envisioned direct Congressional oversight.

Upon your review and approval, we will once again meet with stakeholders and work with them to implement the workplans that we have developed.

And again, the June 2005 SPP report stresses:

The success of our efforts will be defined less by the contents of the work plans than by the actual implementation of initiatives and strategies that will make North America more prosperous and more secure.

Reviewing the specific working agenda initiatives, the goal to implement directly is apparent. Nearly every work plan is characterized by action steps described variously as “our three countries signed a Framework of Common Principles …” or “we have signed a Memorandum of Understanding …,” or “we have signed a declaration of intent …” etc. Once again, none of the 30 or so working agendas makes any mention of submitting decisions to the U.S. Congress for review and approval. No new U.S. laws are contemplated for the Bush administration to submit to Congress. Instead, the plan is obviously to knit together the North American Union completely under the radar, through a process of regulations and directives issued by various U.S. government agencies.

What we have here is an executive branch plan being implemented by the Bush administration to construct a new super-regional structure completely by fiat. Yet, we can find no single speech in which President Bush has ever openly expressed to the American people his intention to create a North American Union by evolving NAFTA into this NAFTA-Plus as a first, implementing step...

And we wonder why our borders are not more secure?

More updates as things develop.

Previous postings in this continuing series:

18 wheels and a dozen...Jose's?

Pig Pen this here's the Gringo Duck...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


Presenting the Rubber Chicken Award

The Rubber Chicken Award

The rubber chicken has been a standard prop in many situations throughout the years. Vaudevillian comics used them extensively, they are seen in movies, there is even a site for sending rubber chicken cards.

One of the best uses of the rubber chicken is to bonk someone over the head with it. The media is FILLED with people who deserve to be smacked about the head and shoulders with a rubber chicken from time to time, some of them need it on a daily basis.

The process for choosing the Rubber Chicken Award is a very simple one. The headlines are perused for the week and the person who is deemed as the most ridiculous and does the most to undermine the integrity of United States is chosen for nomination. There are plenty to choose from.

Our first award of the Rubber Chicken will be George Soros, major funder of and several other organizations whose goal is the undoing of the United States, the foundation of the North American Union, and general doer of mischief that leads to the undermining of our National Interests. This man could be Lex Luthor.


Do we have to listen when the billionaire speaks?
George Soros Addresses a Jewish Audience

George Soros, a Hungarian-born Jew who escaped the Holocaust by fleeing to London as a child, is ranked the 28th richest person in the United States (with a fortune valued at $7 billion) by Forbes magazine.

In November 2003, for the first time ever, the billionaire spoke to a Jewish audience at the conference of the Jewish Funders Network. Many people were dismayed by his call for “regime change” in the United States, his talk of funding projects in “Palestine" and the Geneva Accord, and his ideas about the cause of anti-Semitism.

Soros said European anti-Semitism is the result of the policies of Israel and the United States. “There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that,” Soros said. “If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish,” he said. “I can’t see how one could confront it directly.”


“Let’s understand things clearly: Anti-Semitism is not caused by Jews; it’s caused by anti-Semites,” said Elan Steinberg, senior advisor at the World Jewish Congress. “One can certainly be critical of Bush policy or Sharon policy, but any deviation from the understanding of the real cause of anti-Semitism is not merely a disservice, but a historic lie.”

In addition to his unhelpful ideas, Soros has given scant money to Jewish causes. Soros said he has not given much to Jewish or Israel-related causes because Jews take care of their own, so that his financial clout is better directed elsewhere...

Not quite the rosy picture his own authorized bio suggests:

George Soros is Chairman of Soros Fund Management, LLC and founder of The Open Society Institute. He was born in Budapest in 1930. He survived the Nazi occupation and then fled communist Hungary for England, where he graduated from the London School of Economics. He then settled in the United States, where he accumulated a large fortune through the investment advisory firm he founded and managed. Mr. Soros has been active as a philanthropist since 1979. He has established a network of philanthropic organizations that are now active in more than 50 countries. These organizations are dedicated to promoting the values of democracy and an open society. The foundation network spends about $400 million annually...

From The Traditional Values Coalition:

Atheist George Soros Funds

August 27, 2004 – Capital Research Center "Foundation Watch" has published a two-part series on atheist and one-worlder George Soros and his financial support of, a leftist web site dedicated to the election of John Kerry as the next president.

The CRC notes that is actually three different organizations: a nonprofit educational group; a lobbying organization; and a political action committee. Soros and other millionaire liberals have poured as much as $15 million into this group. also gets money from the Iraq Peace Fund and other left-leaning foundations...

From American Patriot Journal:

George Soros, Postmodern Villain

The following article was written by Srdja Trifkovic about how George Soros has influenced Eastern Europe after the demise of the Soviet Union.

The reason I find this article interesting is that it is hard not to draw a parallel between what Soros’ Open Society agenda has done in Eastern Europe and what Soros and his Secular Progressive soldiers are trying to, and in some cases succeded, in the United States of America.

George Soros, Postmodern Villain
by Srdja Trifkovic

George Soros was born in Budapest in 1930 but, today, spends most of his time in New York City. Not much is known about his early years. He is the only eminent “holocaust survivor” who has been accused of collaboration with the Nazis. In 1947, he managed to sneak through the Iron Curtain, and, the official story goes, “he landed penniless in London, but by hard work and sheer genius, he rose to become one of the planet’s most successful investors and richest men.”

Mr. Soros’ peculiar moral values, political views, and ideological preferences would be immaterial without the money that he can spend promoting and imposing them. The bulk of that money-currently estimated at not less than seven billion dollars-was earned in the minus-sum game of currency and stock speculation, contributing nothing to the creation of wealth and making millions of ordinary people poorer in the process. His offshore Quantum Fund-legally headquartered in Curacao, beyond U.S.-government supervision-specializes in speculative investments to take advantage of deliberately induced political and economic weaknesses of different countries and regions. In an interview with the Swiss weekly L’hebdo (May 1993), Soros outlined his strategy: “I speculate on discrepancy between the reality and the public image of this reality, until a correctional mechanism occurs, which approaches these two.”

His profits are staggering. On September 16, 1992, he famously made a billion dollars in one day by betting against the Bank of England and the pound sterling. In July 1997, he contributed to the Southeast Asian financial crisis by shorting the Thai bath. In early 2000, he supposedly suffered losses on tech stocks, but some analysts now suggest that the burn of the NASDAQ was controlled and that Soros helped to start the fire. By last November, he was betting the U.S. dollar would plummet. As the London Independent reported (November 28, 2003), his activities were contributing to a growing belief on Wall Street that the dollar would slide even further.

There is nothing new in Soros’ approach to making money or in the ability of such a person to make an impact, invariably detrimental, on his host society’s morals and culture. What is new with Mr. Soros-in addition to the implausible claim that a private speculator could get as far as he has unaided by any established financial interests-is his systematic, concerted effort to use a large part of his fortune to promote his peculiar social and political views. He does so through a global network of “nongovernmental organizations” named after himself and active primarily in Eastern Europe but also in Africa, Latin America, and the United States. At age 75, money is not his object but his tool. He has used it to develop a well-coordinated global operation centered on the Open Society Institute (OSI) in New York, which funds a network of subsidiaries in over 50 countries.

George Soros, ladies and gentlemen. Financier of the erasure of international borders in favor of a singular centralized global government. Winner of the Wake Up America's first presentation of the Rubber Chicken Award.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

Another Wounded Veteran speaks about anger at Congress and Victory:


Saturday, September 1, 2007

Pig Pen this here's the Gringo Duck...

C.W. McCall may have my hide for that one. The original lyrics from the song "Convoy" are "Pig Pen this here's the Rubber Duck and I'm about to put the hammer down."

Like a high school drama queen arriving late to the prom so that everyone will see her, the dinosaur media has finally decided to report on what I've brought to your attention back in January.

From ABC news:

Mexico trucks to roll on U.S. highways

By John Crawley
Sep 1, 2007

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration can proceed with a plan to open the U.S. border to long haul Mexican trucks as early as next week after an appeals court rejected a bid by labor, consumer and environmental interests to block the initiative.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco late on Friday denied an emergency petition sought by the Teamsters union, the Sierra Club and consumer group Public Citizen to halt the start of a one-year pilot program that was approved by Congress after years of legal and political wrangling.

The Transportation Department welcomed the decision and said in a statement that allowing more direct shipments from Mexico will benefit U.S. consumers.

The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement approved broader access for ground shipments from both countries but the Clinton administration never complied with the trucking provision. A special tribunal ordered the Bush administration to do so in 2001.

"This is the wrong decision for working men and women," Jim Hoffa, president of the Teamsters, said in a statement after the court ruling. "We believe this program clearly breaks the law." The Teamsters represents truckers that would be affected by the change.

And so do I.

More as it develops.

That it has been pushed back to the 6th rather than having started today as originally slated is a good sign, however, in my mind. It gives more time for this insanity to be fought.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

[Update] More at Reuters.