Saturday, June 07, 2003

 
A LITTLE SOMETHING FOR THE "BUSH LIED ABOUT WMD" CROWD
Instapundit links to a couple of articles detailing how desparate these charges are. Follow the link so that you're not just reading a clip of a clip, but here's a taste:

The Iraqi government in the 1990s admitted to U.N. weapons inspectors that it had produced 8,500 liters of anthrax, as well as a few tons of the nerve agent VX. Where are they? U.N. weapons inspectors have been trying to answer that question for a decade. Because Hussein's regime refused to answer, the logical presumption was that they had to be somewhere still in Iraq. That, at least, has been the presumption of Hans Blix. Go back and take a look at the report Blix delivered to the U.N. Security Council on Jan. 27. On the question of Iraq's stocks of anthrax, Blix reported there existed "no convincing evidence" they had ever been destroyed. On the contrary, he said, there was "strong evidence" that Iraq had produced even more anthrax than it had declared "and that at least some of this was retained."

And another...

Finally, we get to Bill Clinton. In a speech delivered at the Pentagon in February 1998, Clinton described what he called Iraq's "offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs." Clinton accurately reported the view of U.N. weapons inspectors at the time "that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons."

posted by Stephen. 10:45 PM

 
LUDICROUS RACE-BAITING HITS BASEBALL
In case you haven't heard, Chicago Cub Sammy Sosa got hit with an 8 game suspension for getting caught with a corked bat, a big no-no in baseball. It's been a big story the last few days because one of the game's premier power hitters (he reached the 500 home run plateau earlier this season) got caught cheating in a way that gives him more power. Of course, there are alternate theories on why Sosa, who has been one of the most loved players in the game, is taking such a beating in the press. ESPN.com reports that "[Pedro] Martinez said if Mark McGwire got caught using a corked bat, 'it would still be a big deal but not like this.... We may be Latin, a minority, but we're not dumb,' Martinez told the Courant." What a joke. What an absolute joke. I wish I could say that I'm surprised that people would try to play the race card, but I'm not. And it's not just Martinez who's said it, either. Gary Sheffield and Jose Canseco are both on record as saying Sosa's race is the reason for the negative press. Wishful thinking.

Martinez, Canseco, and Sheffield have selective memories, or at least very very short ones. They don't seem to remember the "controversy" when it was revealed that Mark McGwire used the supplement androstenedione ("andro"). He was run through the shredder by the press for that! Slate has a collection of political cartoons, most attacking McGwire. Note that despite what the cartoons in the link imply, McGwire never admitted to, or was seriously accused of, using steroids. The supplement he was taking, Andro, was completely legal! The race-baiters think McGwire would get a pass if he was caught cheating like Sosa was? He got hammered in the press when what he was doing was perfectly legal! Of course Mark would have gotten attacked by the press if he got caught corking his bat, probably more so than Sosa is. Sosa isn't getting extra attention because of his skin color. He's a famous player, and he's primarily famous for power hitting. He's universally liked in the game. When somebody like that gets caught cheating, it presents a number of problems. It's devastating to the kids who idolize him, and it casts doubt on his previous records. How many of his 500 home runs were with an illegal bat? He's admitted to using corked bats in batting practice and exhibitions, like home run derby. I wonder how the runners-up in those derbies feel right about now. Sammy Sosa got caught cheating, plain and simple. And when somebody of his stature gets caught cheating, of course it's going to be a big deal. His skin color has nothing to do with it, no matter how the race-baiters try to spin it.
posted by Stephen. 12:47 AM

Friday, June 06, 2003

 
IN OTHER NEWS, THE AP REPORTS THAT WATER IS FOUND TO BE WET
CNN reports, "Hillary Clinton poised to grab political spotlight again." Imagine a Clinton making a grab for the spotlight!
posted by Stephen. 8:33 PM

 
NOW I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF ON A RANT HERE...
I received the following e-mail this morning:

Subject: ohh , gee, another right wing religious, dennis miller wanna be

your web-log entries make me laugh!
i can tell you why..but do you REALLy want to know?

My response? Of COURSE I want to know! I'm drawing comparisons to Dennis Miller, so I want to know what I'm doing right. I want to thank the e-mailer for brightening my morning.
posted by Stephen. 5:55 PM

Thursday, June 05, 2003

 
ALLELUIA!
The fight isn't over by a long shot, but this is an important first step. Moving the restriction a crucial step closer to President Bush's signature, the House voted 282-139 Wednesday to ban a procedure that abortion foes call "partial birth" abortion.
posted by Stephen. 9:02 AM

 
BOORTZ NAILS IT
"Democrats are continuing to push their plan to send $400 for every dependent child of certain low income Americans. These Americans don't pay income taxes, yet the Democrats continue to call it a 'tax cut.' There is only one major news outlet that routinely tells people that the people who are to be the beneficiaries of this Democratic welfare bill don't actually pay income taxes. This, I guess, is but one of the reasons Democrats and leftists hate the Fox News Channel so." --Nealz Nuze, June 5th--

posted by Stephen. 8:51 AM

Wednesday, June 04, 2003

 
NO, WE JUST WANTED YOU TO SEND US MONEY
This is too much work for us, and makes it seem like we're responsible for our own well-being, when everybody knows it's the fault of the rich imperialists.
posted by Stephen. 8:55 AM

Tuesday, June 03, 2003

 
QUOTE OF THE DAY
From OpinionJournal.com's Best of the Web: Democrats abandon the gun issue at their peril, said Blaine Rummel, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. . . . "The Democrats ran away from gun safety in the 2002 elections, and look where it got them," Mr. Rummel said. "Whoever is advising them on gun control should be shot."
posted by Stephen. 10:55 AM

Monday, June 02, 2003

 
A: WHITE, B: BLACK, C: NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS
More and more college applicants are choosing C, according to a WaPo article (link via NRO's The Corner). In the past few years, many college officials say they've seen a striking surge in the number of applications from students such as Schoen who conspicuously decline to state their race. Good for them. The article gives several reasons for students doing this, be it that they're multi-ethnic and don't fall into the broad categories listed, or they're offended that such a question be asked in the first place, or they're a minority who doesn't want to give the impression that they only got into college because of their skin color. I suspect that most, though, do it for the same reason that I left my ethnicity blank on my college application: they're whites or asians who don't want to be stung by reverse discrimination. "I just feel like being a white, middle-class girl from the suburbs is a huge strike against me, and I don't want to further that effect," one of the girls quoted in the article said. Since the race question by law is optional, more and more students are opting out of it. And why shouldn't they? A good next step to improving race relations in this country would be to take race out of as many equations as possible. We don't need to be balkanizing our country into white, black, hispanic, indian native American, etc. America, which used to be a melting pot, is turning into a tossed salad. The only people who benefit from identifying people by group rather than as individuals are those who make their careers of race-baiting (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and any number of Democratic politicians). Affirmative action supporters are upset that race is made an issue of the Jayson Blair/NY Times scandal, but it is. I'm not saying that Jayson Blair is screwed up because he's black; he's screwed up as an individual. But he was hired and promoted because he was black. As a result of the racial discrimination diversity at the paper, they ended up with what they got. Seeing that and the myriad other examples of discrimination diversity gone awry, can you blame a student who knows his skin color will work against him to not answer the question? College officials insist that the empty check boxes do not affect their admissions decisions, even as most strive to recruit ethnically diverse classes. That's the whole point. If the check boxes WEREN'T blank, it would certainly affect the admissions decision if the wrong box was checked. Hopefully the Supreme Court will strike down the unconstitutional practice of colleges basing admissions criteria on color of skin rather than content of character.
posted by Stephen. 1:32 PM

Sunday, June 01, 2003

 
TAX CUTS FOR (GASP!) THE TAX PAYERS
What would a liberal be without cheap class warfare rhetoric whenever the subject of a tax cut comes up? Cynthia Tucker, writing in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, is no exception. She writes "Now Congress has excluded millions of families earning just above minimum wage from the increased child tax credit in the new $350 billion tax-cut bill." I sent her a response via e-mail, which is as follows:

In you article, you write that "After denouncing critics of his tax cuts for engaging in "class warfare," President Bush passed a huge tax-cut bill that will, indeed, benefit mostly the affluent." I'm not quite sure I understand this. You seem surprised that a tax cut bill would... benefit taxpayers?

You along with the rest of the left are complaining about child tax credits not being given to those lowest on the pay scale (a move, incidentally, done to meet the $350 billion limit insisted on by Democrats, not Republicans). Now I'll admit that I haven't read the finer points of the tax cut bill, or read transcripts of the final negotiations, but if I had to guess why those making under $27,000 aren't receiving a check back from the tax cut bill, I'd say it's probably because THEY PAY LITTLE OR NO TAXES TO BEGIN WITH!!! If you want to lobby your congressman to send $400 checks to families making $10,500 a year, then at least have the honesty to call it what it is: welfare. Tax cuts, by definition, directly help those who have taxes to be cut in the first place. They help everyone indirectly because the less of MY money that's taken out of my paycheck, the more of MY money I'm going to spend (not simply stick under a mattress, as you seem to believe).

Not that I won't compliment the left on your shrewd political gamesmanship. The tax system is set up for the sort of class warfare games you base your entire claim to power on. Check the 2000 IRS income tax statistics. Why do top wage earners receive the bulk of a tax cut? Because they pay the bulk of the taxes! The top 5% of wage earners pay 56.5% of the taxes. The top 50% of wage earners pay a whopping 96.1% of federal taxes! In 1999, the top 50% accounted for couples earning $26,000 or more, according to the IRS. Those who you claim deserve a "refund" equal to higher wage earners account for a whole 3.9% of federal income taxes paid in 2000.

Please drop the class warfare rhetoric. Sending a $400 (or more, for multiple children) check to someone that doesn't pay $400 worth of income tax isn't a tax cut, it's welfare. It's income redistribution, which is antithetical to cutting taxes. I earn my money, I should be allowed to spend it. The fruits of my labor are not for the government to redistribute to buy votes.

One more point: before I get the "nobless oblige" speech, why not give it to (former) Atlantian Ted Turner? Seems Mr. Turner wasn't the only one sick of paying high taxes simply because he managed to earn a large amount of money, so he moved his residency to the great (and income tax free) state of Florida. Funny how not even a rich liberal wants to have his own money taken from him by the government, even though liberals have no trouble taking money from the working class.

posted by Stephen. 6:49 PM

 
JUST IMAGINE HOW MUCH PRESS "THE PASSION" WILL GET WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY RELEASED!
Mark Shea linked to this story about Mel Gibson's upcoming movie on the crucifixion of Christ. The article cites "an 18-page report of an ad hoc committee of the U.S. bishops' Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs" condemning the movie. The most disturbing statement (of many in the article that bothered me) in the article was its claim that "the report furthermore disapproves of the film's treatment of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' passion as historical facts." If the article is accurate, then a committee with representatives from the US Catholic Bishops is criticizing someone for taking the gospels as truth! I find this hard to believe, yet considering this was the same committee that earlier claimed that the old covenant is salvific for the Jews, entirely plausible. The response from the NCCB was the same in both cases, that the statements don't reflect authentic Catholic teaching, but are merely unofficial writings of a committee. What I want to know, though, is why the Bishops are allowing a committee (official or otherwise) to teach rank heresy in their names. I understand that they're not official, but I'll wager that 95% of Catholics, and 99% of the rest of the population, don't understand that. When a statement comes out from "The Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs," most people would understandably assume that a Bishops committee speaks for the Bishops. And the bishops certainly aren't making strong denunciations on these items. Can we get someone on this committee who understands Catholic teaching, and is willing to teach as such? Please?
posted by Stephen. 12:55 AM

 
SOMETHING FOR THOSE ASKING "WHERE ARE THE WMD'S?" TO CONSIDER
Lots of leftists are starting to get antsy and are jumping on the president for not finding a "smoking gun" of a WMD cache yet in Iraq. Just remember, though, that Inspector Clouseau Blix had already verified that Iraq had them, and that they weren't cooperating to get rid of them. What happened to them, I suspect we'll find out soon enough. But all these people claiming that the president made up the WMD story to justify war are dreaming; the whole world knew that Iraq had them, and knew that they weren't living up to the terms of the cease-fire from the 1991 Gulf War.
posted by Stephen. 12:40 AM

 
I'M BACK
I know, a long while in between posts. A busy time at work, a couple of dental procedures, and really a severe case of writer's block kept me from posting. Sorry 'bout that.
posted by Stephen. 12:34 AM