Roll-Call of Patriots

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Here is a list of real American Patriots! They are so patriotic they couldn't bring themselves to defend the American flag from desecration. Lieberman is the only shocker. I thought he was better than that. Just thinking about this list brings a tear to my eye. Why, it's a veritable "Who's Who" of patriotism.

Akaka (D-HI)	Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)	Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)	Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)	Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)	Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)	Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)	Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)	Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)	Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)	Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)	Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)	Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)	McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)	Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)	Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)	Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)	Wyden (D-OR)

Stop The Treason & Sedition

I'm angry. I'm angry at The New York Times and at Bill Keller, the Times' executive editor. This is the second time that the NYT has disclosed a secret anti-terror program, and both times they were asked not to publish those stories by senior administration officials. I'm so angry, I wrote a letter to Alberto Gonzales and e-mailed it to... AskDOJ@usdoj.gov ...an address I found at the U.S. Dept. of Justice website.

My letter follows. If you're angry too, please feel free to copy it, change the subject, or modify the text, and send it along to Mr. Gonzales or anyone else you think might be appropriate.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Subject: Stop The Treason & Sedition

Dear Mr. Gonzales,

I recognize that the U.S. Constitution guarantees the Freedom of Speech under the First Amendment. Many of us make use of that freedom every day by posting our opinions on the internet, writing a letter to the editor, joining a protest march, or calling a radio talk show program. However, the Constitution does NOT guarantee the freedom to commit acts of treason and sedition against the United States of America during a time of war. The Constitution does NOT guarantee the right of individuals or organizations to endanger the public welfare. The Constitution DOES in fact, mandate that the government provide for the "common defense".

Therefore, since the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, et. al. have seen fit to ABUSE their Freedom of Speech by committing treasonous and seditious acts through the unwarranted disclosure of classified government information such as the CIA-Treasury Terrorist Financial Tracking Program, the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program, and the NSA Telephone Records Database Program, it is clear that the welfare of American citizens has been threatened, both at home and abroad.

We are fighting a war. Lives are at stake. The enemy must be defeated. In his address to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001 President Bush said...

"We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network."

It should come as no surprise then that the President is doing exactly what he promised. In the same speech President Bush also gave an ultimatum to foreign powers, but it applies no less to domestic organizations...

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

I recognize that you cannot stop a newspaper from printing almost anything. That would be a violation of Free Speech. But you CAN arrest a traitor. You CAN arrest those who authorize the disclosure of classified government information. You CAN prosecute those who reveal classified information.

America must be protected against ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic. Since I have directed this E-mail to "AskDOJ", here are my questions... What are you doing to stop this shameless travesty? What are you doing to provide for the "common defense"?

Sincerely,

My Name
Town & State

Looney Liberal of the Week: Harry Reid

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week's award goes to Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate Minority Leader, for the statements he made and the legislation he introduced on Monday of this week. In an effort to get Congress more involved in U.S. policy toward Iran, Reid introduced a bill called the "Iran Intelligence Oversight Act".

IMNSHO, the words "Harry Reid" and "intelligence" should not be used in the same sentence... that would be a paradox. The fact that Reid is proposing legislation associated with "intelligence" suggests to me that he is trying to downplay his less-than-stellar IQ.

"This legislation will ensure the Congress is fully engaged in the Iran debate, and it will also push the Bush White House to develop and implement the right policy for dealing with Iran," Reid said. As if Harry Reid had any idea what the "right policy" might be about ANYTHING.

The goal of Reid's legislation is to force the Bush administration to answer three questions about intelligence matters related to Iran...

First, what is the judgment of the government's professional intelligence analysts about the threat of Iran, and what tools are most likely to influence the Iranians to change their ways?

Second, what are the president's policy objectives toward Iran, and what is his strategy for achieving those objectives?

Third, what is the process for making sure that senior Administration officials don't publicly mischaracterize the evidence and the challenge of Iran?

Actually, that's FIVE questions (nobody said Reid could count), but we don't need any legislation to answer those questions. Let's take them one at a time...

Question: What is the judgment of the government's professional intelligence analysts about the threat of Iran?

Answer: They think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a "wacko" who wants to "wipe Israel off the map" by building and using "nuclear weapons".

Question: What tools are most likely to influence Iranians to change their ways?

Answer: ICBM's, Cruise missiles, JDAM's, Bunker Busters, MOAB's, JSOW's, JASSM's, Cluster Bombs, Nukes, B-1B's, B-52's, F-117's, F-16's, etc.

Question: What are the President's policy objectives toward Iran?

Answer: Get the madman to give up his nuclear ambitions.

Question: What is his strategy for achieving those objectives?

Answer: Give the madman one last chance before we blow the idiot off the face of the earth.

Question: What is the process for making sure that senior Administration officials don't publicly mischaracterize the evidence and the challenge of Iran?

Answer:
Step 1 -- Stop assuming the administration is lying.
Step 2 -- Stop listening to the MainStream Media.
Step 3 -- Repeat Steps 1 and 2.

Looney Liberal of the Week: Joe Wilson

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week's award goes to former Ambassador Joe Wilson for comments he made on Wednesday at the liberal "Take Back America" conference. According to Wilson, the U.S. needs to bring Iraqi insurgents (that is, "TERRORISTS") and their "foreign patrons" (that is, "STATE SPONSORS OF TERROR") to the conference table for negotiations.

Now here's a guy who just doesn't get it. Just days ago, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi met his fate on the wrong end of a twin set of 500-pound bomb blasts. And what did we find on his laptop? What did we find on a thumb-drive that was removed from his pocket? Convincing evidence that our strategy to win the war against the "al-Qaeda in Iraq" has been working. Proof from the words of the dead terrorist leader himself that time is now on the side of the Americans.

So now that we are winning... now that "al-Qaeda in Iraq" is on the run... what does this moron want to do? Give them a place of honor at the negotiating table. According to Joe, we should take a demoralized, defeated, and powerless enemy, and breathe new life into their cause by setting them up as a power broker, giving them power they do not own. Now that's the ticket!

I remember hearing a phrase once that went something like this: "We will never negotiate with terrorists". Gee... I wonder what was behind that phrase? Why would a U.S. foreign policy statement suggest that we should never negotiate with someone who might want to cut your head off during a coffee break at a negotiating session!!?? Hmmmm. I don't know. Maybe it's just me... but is this guy a looney-toon or what?

Today is Flag Day

Long may it wave, o'er the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Looney Liberal of the Week: Jim McDermott

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week's award goes to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) for his comments on Thursday in New Delhi, India that "Osama bin Laden is being held somewhere already and it's only that they are trying to decide what day they should bring him out."

This is the same man, who in September 2002, as Congress was beginning to consider action in Iraq, expressed his distrust of Bush in a TV interview, and live from Baghdad told Americans, "I think the president would mislead the American people."

At the New Delhi luncheon, McDermott went even further and criticized the President in front of the Indian leaders, predicting that Bush's tax cuts will backfire, and that Americans will pick a new president because of the Iraq war. Actually, I think they will pick a new president because Bush can't run again... but that's just my opinion.

No doubt McDermott is only following the lead of other looney liberals who are suggesting that Musab al-Zarqawi's death this week was a staged event, and that Zarqawi had actually been a prisoner for some time. According to some of the conspiracy theories circulating, Zarqawi was only killed this week in order to bolster President Bush's sagging poll numbers. But why this week was so important, and not the week when Bush's poll ratings fell below, say 30%, is still unclear.

No doubt George Bush is waiting until the week before the 2006 election to bring Osama bin Laden out of his prison cell. That way, very few if any of the Republicans on the ballot will be able ride GWB's coat-tails. Of course, Bush will have to kill bin Laden too, otherwise OBL would blab about his secret incarceration. I'm sure that Bush got these ideas from Jack Kennedy who was not really assassinated in 1963, but was spirited away to a South Pacific island where he and Martin Luther King (also not dead) are now running a secret U.S. shadow government...

I find it utterly amazing that the same people who now seem to believe that GWB could be so devious are the same ones who not that long ago called him an idiot and said he wasn't smart enough to be the President of the Untited States. It's utter nonsense... sheer lunacy!

Garfield Wisdom

Looney Liberal of the Week: Hillary Clinton

BUFFALO, NY -- For the second time in as many months, this week's award goes to Hillary Clinton for comments she made on Wednesday at the Democratic state convention in Buffalo, where her Senate re-election candidacy received the party's nomination.

"Stand with me as we push the Bush administration to take responsibility for the mistakes and misjudgments that they have made around the world," she said. "And stand with me as we put pressure on both the administration and the new Iraqi government to get behind a real plan for the Iraqis to assume a growing responsibility for their own security and safety, so that we can begin to bring our troops home."

OK, so let's get this straight. The voters of New York are supposed to elect Hillary Clinton as their Senator, so that they can stand with her in Bush-bashing? New Yorkers are supposed to elect Hillary so that they can put pressure on the new Iraqi government? Is that really what they want from a Senator? She apparently had lots to say about national politics, but almost nothing to say about state issues. Hillary is already running her 2008 campaign, and if Hillary gets elected, the people of New York will be ignored for the next two years.

In related news, Clinton aides suggest that Hillary will tap John Kerry to assist in the development of "a real plan" for Iraq.