Please scroll down for posts on main page...
|WARNING: THIS SITE FEATURES ORIGINAL THINKING...Jim Croce once sang Don't tug on Superman's cape..., which seems like reasonable advice should we not wish to anger the supreme powers. We do have this duality in our culture: the Superman that is the state collective, the leftist call to a politics of meaning managed by the state, the deification of "we're from the government and we'll take care of you" - versus the Superman that celebrates individual freedom, private property, freedom of conscience, free enterprise, and limited government. We humbly take on the latter's mantle and, eschewing the feeble tug, we dare to PULL, in hope of seeing freedom's rescue from the encroaching nanny state. We invite you, dear reader, to come and pull as well... Additionally, if you assume that means that we are unflinching, unquestioning GOP zombies, that would be incorrect. We reject statism in any form and call on individuals in our country to return to the original, classical liberalism of our founders. (We're also passionate about art, photography, cooking, technology, Judeo/Christian values, and satire as unique, individual pursuits of happiness to celebrate.)|
Superman's product of the century (so far):
This one has been brewing a bit and there's a story and a link through to real, live, actual, not-forged documents linking the Vietcong to the VVAW over at World Net Daily.
IMO, though, this story should be fronted by Troy Jenkins (Huge HT InTheBullpen!), the researcher who actually found the documents at The Vietnam Archive at Texas Tech.
It won't take the left long to trash him - but in this case they'll be trashing an enlisted Crypto Chief and show that they don't care who they trash - as long as he's a military man. I think Troy can hold his own.
The initial two documents released (and the World Net Daily story does a good job of elucidating them) are really worth reading through to really feel the impact of them. And it is apparent that there are more documents to come.
It's really a much larger story than just what it means about John Kerry. Our historians have long denigrated the idea that any communist countries have ever effected policy in the United States. In a resounding wake up call, it is now clear that the linchpin of the Vietnam anti-war movement in the United States was directed by Hanoi.
It has long been apparent to many of us that the agenda of the radical left matches that of our enemies. This is proof.
And what of the consequences? In the early 1970's, the radical left, acting as puppets of the Hanoi regime, convinced a wider range of the American public to resist and protest the Vietnam war - to the extent that we withdrew in defeat. Though John Kerry had suggested at the time that only a few thousand people might be affected by our withdrawal, the resulting pogroms, boat people, and the killing fields of Laos and Cambodia took the lives of millions. The impact on our POWs and veterans is still an unhealed scar.
Take your little red pill America - the left has been excoriating our Commander-In-Chief with "Bush lied, soldiers died" - when the truth is "When Kerry lied, millions died." And we, again, face the crossroads with even greater consequences at stake. The lives of more than fifty million Afghanis and Iraqis are in our hands. And, should we falter, we risk our own lives as well - all of them. Some thirty years ago, America allowed a foreign enemy and the radical left to subvert the cause of freedom. Will we allow it again?
What kind of Kool-aid do you have to drink to support a traitor?
UPDATE (Saturday 10/30): News coverage at the Mississippi Press, major blog coverage thist morning (Oct 30th) at Little Green Footballs. Townhall had an article Wednesday. Powerline alluded to 'other than honorable' discharge for Kerry. Friend Beldar weighs in as well.
There's an email making the rounds that purports to describe the situation with the current flu vaccine shortage and it ends by putting the blame squareley on John Edwards.
Some conservative, as well as left leaning blogs, and article comments have all pointed to the Snopes debunking as the definitive word on this matter. Please go ahead and read the Snopes post as it contains the offending email and the Snopes analysis of it.
As it turns out, Snopes is just parroting the thin "left think" line on this issue and so, at least in this case, the debunker deserves debunking.
In its initial rebuttal, Snopes says: "Two major problems with this political screed..." are: [1)]
Chiron, the corporation mentioned in this piece as an example of a "British company" that has taken over the manufacture of flu vaccine from American companies supposedly driven out of business by liability lawsuits, is not a British company. It is an American company headquartered in Emeryville, California, which last year purchased British vaccine maker Powderject and a flu vaccine plant in Liverpool, England.
This is veiled Kool-aid speak for: Chiron is a multinational, that has manufacturing plants (those are large buildings in which hundreds or thousands of employees make millions or billions of dollars of drugs) in six different countries, has distribution facilities (more large buildings that store and supply millions or billions of dollars of drugs to their customers) in seven countries, research centers (you guessed it) in two countries, and field sales personnel in sixteen countries. This is just the kind of global operator that is in trouble in Kerry-land for outsourcing all those jobs overseas - of course, most of them were over there already if they were units that Chiron acquired - like the one in question: Chiron Vaccines. What does this business unit say of itself? From the Chiron vaccines web site: "Chiron Vaccines, the world's fifth-largest vaccines business, is headquartered in Oxford, United Kingdom..."
Last time we checked, saying that an operating unit of a multinational company "headquartered in Oxford, United Kingdom" is a "British" concern serves as a reasonable description.
Point  in the Snopes post begins with:
It is not the case that American manufacturers stopped producing flu vaccine when liability lawsuits made that market financially untenable for them, and UK and Canadian manufacturers (supposedly not subject to American liability laws) then picked up the business.
and continues with listing a series of technical problems that make it clear that being a vaccine manufacturer is fraught with business peril, and since it is ONLY a $6 billion dollar annual market - not really worth pursuing (My God, what have I been doing these last twenty years pursuing a market that's only $1.5 billion annually?)
All the business issues are summed up in the offending email succinctly as:
The major pharmaceutical companies in the US provided almost 90% of the nations flu vaccine at one time. They did this despite a very low profit margin for the product. Basically, they were doing us a favor.
Which leaves us pretty much in agreement on the technical issues of vaccine manufacture between the email and the Snopes post.
Lastly, for point , Snopes cites the VICP program as the final arbiter of making vaccine lawsuits untenable to Trial Lawyers, Inc. There are number of erudite entries on this subject that say it much better than I can. We learn, for example, that, though the VICP program was initiated in 1986, that "[b]y the end of last year , over 190 thimerosal cases were pending, including at least 12 class actions. One class-action claim demanded $30 billion—that's five times the entire vaccine market itself! The tort tax on vaccines combined with government-imposed price controls makes vaccine manufacturing increasingly unprofitable and underlies the eight vaccine shortages we've seen since 2000.", that 1,700 families have received well over $1 billion in the VICP program itself (I don't know, but don't you think that $1 billion in what amounts to liability insurance built into the price of vaccine as a defense that isn't working against Trial Lawyers, Inc. is a little steep? Or that it might impact the profitability of producing vaccines?), that thimerosal junk science is still alive and well with Trial Lawyers, Inc., and that the trial lawyers blame outsourcing for the vaccine problem. Last week, Dick Cheney argued that liability is part of the issue in the vaccine shortage and rightly pointed out that the Kedwards ticket would thwart medical liability reform. Even the liberal Boston Globe (via Journalnow.com), references liability issues in a recent article about the vaccine crisis.
(Brief aside: Snopes even suggests in their debunking post that new vaccine makers are staying out of the market because new technology being developed will supplant the current method for vaccine manufacture and make it much cheaper to do. Who does Snopes think is going to develop this new technology? Could it be companies for which the business market for vaccine manufacture is potentially lucrative enough to take the entrepreneurial risk to pursue the development of a new technology? Presumably, existing drug manufacturers - maybe even like Wyeth - among them? I'm sorry, but this "out of the market" assertion doesn't pass the business laugh test.)
As to the assertion in the email that John Edwards won a vaccine liability case in the 1980's, Snopes just changed their post on 10/27/04. The previous post ended with: "at this point it's not known if he ever litigated a flu vaccine case, or if so, what the outcome of such a trial was.", it now says pretty much the same thing, except to add that there are only seven cases in 24 years which doesn't constitute a "liability crisis." It also mentions that the report it cites in regard to the seven cases in 24 years was compiled by, you guessed it, Trial Lawyers, Inc. (Ok, Association of Trial Lawyers of America). I don't know, mentioning "standard vaccine" cases, sounds like a bit of legal speak, I smell a thimerosal rat don't you?
The left leaning Goldberg and Guthrie site expounds: "Mighty decent of the Bush campaign not to use this bombshell in the last two weeks of the campaign, don't you think?" (as if that fact that their presidential candidate is guilty of treason is insufficient - also see my earlier post). What, there's no Edwardian bombshell?
Ann Coulter in her "In Desperate Move, Kerry Adopts Puppy" column gave us one back in July about Edwards using junk science to win cerebral palsy cases:
In one of Edwards' silver-tongued arguments to the jury on behalf of a girl born with cerebral palsy, he claimed he was channeling the unborn baby girl, Jennifer Campbell, who was speaking to the jurors through him:
"She said at 3, 'I'm fine.' She said at 4, 'I'm having a little trouble, but I'm doing OK.' Five, she said, 'I'm having problems.' At 5:30, she said, 'I need out.'"
She's saying, "My lawyer needs a new Jaguar ... "
"She speaks to you through me and I have to tell you right now -- I didn't plan to talk about this -- right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me, and she's talking to you."
Well, tell her to pipe down, would you? I'm trying to hear the evidence in a malpractice lawsuit.
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde on the death of Little Nell, one must have a heart of stone to read this without laughing. What is this guy, a tent-show preacher? An off-the-strip Las Vegas lounge psychic couldn't get away with this routine.
Somehow, this is not a good enough bombshell for the fleecing of our medical justice system by John Kerry's poodle?
When Kerry selected John Edwards for his running mate this article, subtitled "Trial Lawyers, Inc. run for president" was published. Copland easily makes the case that:
John Edwards = Trial Lawyers, Inc.
For election purposes, in terms of how executive government leadership will address (or not address) tort reform for the next four years, the Trial Lawyers, Inc. representative is John Edwards. He is the litigious everyman and would be one heartbeat away from the presidency. With him in this position, you can certainly be assured that, among many other things (like - will you have a doctor that is willing to practice medicine on your body?), we will continue to experience shortages in flu vaccines.
Did he participate in the case that the email alleges? Such information, one way or the other, is out of the reach of internet searching. Perhaps some intrepid Lexis-Nexis, or Westlaw researcher or someone with access to North Carolina hard copy trial records will find out.
In the meantime, I met this guy named Dan. He's a rather nice guy. He's doing some consulting about what to say when you have an allegation that doesn't have the support of, say, a transcript or something.
Of this email that is floating around, he says to say this: "It could be fake, but it is accurate."
In the wake of a pair of 'Al Pieda' (their term) terrorists who subverted the security of a public meeting and threw a mixture of chemicals (unknown at the time - turns out it was custard) on Ann Coulter along with destroying University of Arizona property, the Democrats have decided to .... to ... well, to incite further violence against women:
Wednesday October 27, 2004 6:31 PM
SARASOTA, Fla. (AP) - A man was arrested Wednesday after he was accused of trying to run down Rep. Katherine Harris and a group of supporters with his car.
Witnesses said a silver Cadillac sped through an intersection and swerved onto the sidewalk. The car headed straight toward Harris before swerving at the last minute and driving off, according to police.
Harris told police she feared for her life and could not move as the vehicle sped toward her, police records show.
Witnesses gave the car's license plate number to police, and they tracked it to Barry M. Seltzer, 46. He came to the police station early Wednesday and complained to officers that Harris' supporters had impeded traffic.
``I intimidated them with my car,'' Seltzer told police. ``I was exercising my political expression.''
He was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and held without bond. He was scheduled for his first court appearance Thursday.
Calls to Seltzer's home and to Harris' campaign secretary were not immediately returned.
Harris, a Sarasota Republican, is seeking a second congressional term after serving as Florida's secretary of state during the controversial 2000 presidential recount.
She has been a rising star in the GOP and the bane of Democrats since overseeing the recount that gave Florida and the presidency to George W. Bush by 537 votes.
She used momentum from the recount to win the congressional seat in 2002 and is seeking re-election against Sarasota lawyer Jan Schneider, who lost to Harris two years ago.
A Democrat spokesperson said "We deplore the violent acts that men visit upon women, especially in public - unless, of course, they are women who are exercising their right of free speech and embrace Republicanism. They are just getting what they deserve."
Just kidding - but the complete silence from the left on these events is rather like the Islamic communities' silence in the face of beheadings, suicide bombings and the other heinous crimes committed against our citizens. When you don't condemn the contemptible, it is reasonable to conclude that you support it.
Also see my earlier post and note that I and the University of Arizona Police are being 'ridiculous' and having a 'massive overreaction' to the Al Pieda boys - who were really, according to their police report "throwing the pies at her ideas not at her." I guess that means that it doesn't really matter if it was custard or anthrax.
If you are not aware of it - you can see - as well as buy - the Stolen Honor documentary (that our Free Speech hating Democratic 'friends' headed by John Edward's Trial Lawyers, Inc. have squelched) at:
Worth watching, worth your contribution.
Much has been made of the limited value in challenging Kerry's military service. I disagree with that but respect the position.
Make note that Stolen Honor is not about Kerry's four month service in Vietnam. It is about the impact of Kerry's treason as spokesman for the VVAW (Vietnam Veterans Against the War) - committed in the United States and Paris, France - on the experience of real, live POWs held at the Hanoi Hilton and elsewhere during the Vietnam war. Stolen Honor allows many of those heroic men to tell you directly what the impact of John Kerry's treason was to them during their POW captivity. Kerry was still technically in the Naval Reserve while fronting the anti-war movement - but no one would seriously contend that he was in "service" to the military at the time.
Since most of Kerry's "post-Vietnam service" activities are recorded on video or audio or are the subject of FBI 302s no one denies that they occurred. In fact, Kerry is "proud" of giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war.
Watch this film and let the men who were tortured under Kerry's words tell you what they think.
How can you tell that the Democrats are getting desperate? I mean really, really desperate?
They throw pies at Ann Coulter (from AP Friday October 22):
TUCSON, Ariz. - Two men ran onstage and threw custard pies at conservative columnist Ann Coulter as she was giving a speech at the University of Arizona, hitting her in the shoulder, police said.
William Zachary Wolff and Phillip Edgar Smith, both 24-year-old Tucson residents, were booked on misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct and assault and on felony charges of criminal damage, police said Friday.
In her half-hour speech Thursday night, Coulter trashed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) and derided liberals and Democrats while saluting conservative students who attended her speech.
Coulter writes a column for Universal Press Syndicate. Her appearance was sponsored by the UA College Republicans.
Even the AP has to get their digs in I guess. Where'd they get that pic of Ann? Here's one I like:
Look, Ann Coulter is a certified out of the matrix truth teller that has taken her little red pill (apparently) every day her whole life. It may be that most folks take pie tossing as a prank - but it is clearly an intimidating attempt at the suppression of free speech. And where is the public outcry from the Democrats about men physically attacking a woman in public? Oh, must be that even heterosexual Republican women are "fair game" as well.
If you haven't read Ann Coulter please go and get all of her books now and read them. Almost every topic that is being discussed in the blogosphere has already been thought about and written about by Ann - and lucidly, brilliantly, satirically, and truthfully to boot. You can join me, going around spouting off Coulterisms to whomever you want - you will always be fresh and informed because, unfortunately, she doesn't get the MSM coverage that - well, does she deserve MSM coverage? No, that would be like a judge getting a good ABA rating - oh, well, she'll just overwhelm the MSM on her own - just watch.
Note to White House: Assign Secret Service detail to Ann Coulter. She's my candidate for President in 2008 (will she actually be 35 by then?).
Keep on my friend. There are millions of us standing with you.
Heeding Hugh's call ...
Why vote for Bush? George W. Bush stands for American nationalism, democracy, capitalism, and the Bush Doctrine: Go to where the terrorists are and engage and defeat them there - AND (don't forget) - export freedom - freedom is the most effective deterrent to terror. America has stood in the breach for more than 200 years defying the tyrannies of the world. With George W. Bush we will continue with a freshened resolve to let freedom ring.
What's wrong with Kerry? Kerry serves the radical Left who have hijacked the Democratic party. It's obvious that he is not his own man, else he would have readily definable positions. We must look to his associations. They are a coalition that includes the worst of anti-American, anti-democracy, anti-capitalist, world politic appeasers. It is a strange and chilling fact of our current history that the American Left is aligned with the Islamofascist regimes of the world - in fact, it is sad to say, but is the truth: they are outpost sentries for the terrorists - and that could kill you and me and our families. That's wrong enough for me.
The Associated Press reports today that Kofi Annan is still pitching against the Bush Doctrine:
"I cannot say the world is safer when you consider the violence around us, when you look around you and see the terrorist attacks around the world and you see what is going on in Iraq," Annan told the ITV network.
He also can't quite believe that the UN Security Council was subverted by Saddam and his money:
Annan also dismissed any suggestion that France, Russia and China had been prepared to ease sanctions on Saddam Hussein's Iraq in return for oil contracts.
Iraq tried to manipulate foreign governments by awarding contracts — and bribes — to foreign companies and political figures in countries that showed support for ending sanctions, in particular Russia, France and China, the final report by the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group said earlier this month.
But Annan said it was "inconceivable" Saddam's activities could have influenced policy in the countries concerned.
"I don't think the Russian or the French or the Chinese government would allow itself to be bought..." Annan said.
"I think it's inconceivable. These are very serious and important governments. You are not dealing with banana republics."
Mr. Annan said these things on Sunday. It has come more to light today that indeed the Security Council was compromised - and this story will grow.
It is time for you to go Mr. Annan. The UN itself is a banana republic of the worst sort and you have lost all credibility with the people of the world. Go on now.
It is clear from the Duelfer report that big time corruption characterized the UN/Saddam coalition "oil-for-fraud" program.
But, in addition, under the UN's watch even more insidious deeds were afoot. As reported in this FOX news item:
This burst of Iraqi-Syrian commerce was no freelance spree. It came under the auspices of a formal trade protocol, signed in 2000 between the regimes of Saddam and Assad — a flagrant violation of U.N. sanctions. Under this government-to-government agreement, Syria re-opened the Iraq-Syria pipeline, which became Saddam’s prime conduit for smuggling out oil, and over the life of the protocol helped bring Saddam about $2.8 billion in illicit income.
So, this is OUTSIDE the Oil-for-fraud program - a weapons deal between Syria and Saddam - and it is clear that the UN while administering Oil-for-fraud - did nothing to police the Syria/Iraq border. Hmmm ... wonder where those WMD's could have gone?
The UN Security Council was in part subverted by this collusion between Syria and Saddam. From the same FOX news article:
All this was part of a deliberate strategy by Saddam to corrupt the United Nations debates, erode sanctions, and re-arm his regime. The multi-billion-dollar bonanza of sanctions-busting business Saddam lavished on Syria was just one slice of such stuff, but it’s enough to give a pretty good idea of the realities behind the U.N. debates over peace and political will in dealing with Saddam.
Can anyone suggest that the UN - or for that matter any country critical of the US in regard to Iraq and Saddam - has any credibility left. I think not.
See my previous post on Kofi Annan and the UN.