Free In Idaho!

It has become more and more apparent that Barack Hussein Obama and the people who run him will go to great lengths to scrub the media to keep his image squeeky clean.  And if you really needed any more proof that the mainstream press is in the tank for the guy, check this one out.  A few days back I posted about Obama’s Militia, about his call during a speech in Colorado for a national civilian security force.  The internet has been abuzz about it since.  Well, that isn’t the kind of buzz the Obama handlers want.  After all, they’ve got a rookie on their hands, and sometimes he runs off at the mouth.  So, scrub the media.

The stunning comments from Democrat Sen. Barack Obama that the United States needs a “civilian national security force” that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the half-trillion dollar United States Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force have mysteriously disappeared from published transcripts of the speech.

In the comments, Obama confirmed the U.S. “cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set.”

Campaign officials have declined to return any of a series of WND telephone calls over several days requesting a comment on the situation. Nor have they posted a transcript of the speech on their website.

But transcripts posted at both the Wall Street Journal and Denver Post do not have the critical comment that has raised such concern.

I just checked the link in my post, and the Chicago Tribune article I originally linked to has been changed to a text that doesn’t include any reference to the “national security force” language.  Blatant.  Can you imagine what the answer would be if George Bush went to the media and said “hey look, I got a little carried away in my speech the other day, so would you mind removing the embarrassing part, and let’s just pretend I didn’t say it”?  Yeah, like that’d ever happen.

Here’s the YouTube video of the speech.  Check it out before they take it down.  He really did say it, at 16:50 into the speech.

Day two of the Congress beating up on the oil execs… too bad we don’t get enough good reporting of the execs calling out those bozos for the “obscene regulations” they’ve imposed.  From Power Line, this transcript of Shell exec Hofmeister answering back

While all oil-importing nations buy oil at global prices, some, notably India and China, subsidize the cost of oil products to their nation’s consumers, feeding the demand for more oil despite record prices. They do this to speed economic growth and to ensure a competitive advantage relative to other nations.
Meanwhile, in the United States, access to our own oil and gas resources has been limited for the last 30 years, prohibiting companies such as Shell from exploring and developing resources for the benefit of the American people.

Senator Sessions, I agree, it is not a free market.

According to the Department of the Interior, 62 percent of all on-shore federal lands are off limits to oil and gas developments, with restrictions applying to 92 percent of all federal lands. We have an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Atlantic Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Pacific Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the eastern Gulf of Mexico, congressional bans on on-shore oil and gas activities in specific areas of the Rockies and Alaska, and even a congressional ban on doing an analysis of the resource potential for oil and gas in the Atlantic, Pacific and eastern Gulf of Mexico.

The Argonne National Laboratory did a report in 2004 that identified 40 specific federal policy areas that halt, limit, delay or restrict natural gas projects. I urge you to review it. It is a long list. If I may, I offer it today if you would like to include it in the record.

When many of these policies were implemented, oil was selling in the single digits, not the triple digits we see now. The cumulative effect of these policies has been to discourage U.S. investment and send U.S. companies outside the United States to produce new supplies.

As a result, U.S. production has declined so much that nearly 60 percent of daily consumption comes from foreign sources.

The problem of access can be solved in this country by the same government that has prohibited it. Congress could have chosen to lift some or all of the current restrictions on exportation and production of oil and gas. Congress could provide national policy to reverse the persistent decline of domestically secure natural resource development.

And instead, we get Democrat promises to bring a “plan” to Washington in 2006 that was going to fix the energy problem.  What did we get?  Nothing.  Oh, wait, we got $132 a barrel oil in just under three years.  Good job Dems.  And you Republicans aren’t any better.  You’ve done nothing either.  Gutless, pork addicted Congress.  And I want someone to try to tell me again why John McCain is the right choice here.  What does he offer me?  Does he point out that government makes three time more from a gallon of gas than the oil companies do, and he’s going to fix that?  Nope.  What does he offer me?  More of the same “windfall profits tax” bullcrap, and complaining about companies “distorting the market”.  Is that leadership?  Is that government enabling free markets and capitalism?  Is that conservative?  Give me a break.

John McCain is no better than Leahy.  Senator Leahy accuses Bush and his buddies in the oil industry of the 400% runup in oil prices.  The man is a complete tinfoil hatted lunatic, if he really believes that.  George Bush doesn’t have that kind of power.  Neither do the group of oil execs the Judiciary Committee is pounding on right now.  Maybe 40 or 50 years ago that was true, when American international oil companies controlled the industry, but it is no longer the case.  Foreign countries own and control their own oil, a fact these Senators don’t seem to understand.  Nor do they seem to understand that regulating and taxing the oil companies in America into submission is NOT going to solve the world energy crisis.

We need calm, intelligent reasoning on this issue, because it might be the biggest threat to our economy that we face.  It is something that will not be solved by partisanship, environuttery, or political grandstanding.  It isn’t going to be solved by socialist style regulation and control of an industry and a resource, as proposed by the Democrats and way too many Republicans.  And it certainly isn’t going to be solved by browbeating a couple of oil execs on the tv during an election year.  Been there, done that.  That isn’t leadership. 

But then, there are no leaders.  Whiners and finger pointers, pork specialists and empty suits.  No leaders… just a pack of losers, hell bent on failing.

And the people are too busy watching dancing and idols, and being fooled by a candidate who needs a free rock concert to draw a big crowd.

We are so screwed.

There’s that rumor again, popping up this time in the Jerusalem Post

US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran in the upcoming months, before the end of his term, Army Radio quoted a senior official in Jerusalem as saying Tuesday.

The official claimed that a senior member of the president’s entourage, which concluded a trip to Israel last week, said during a closed meeting that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action was called for.

Rice and Defense Secretary Gates are “hesitant”, however.  How many more times are we going to hear this before…?   And the “before” I’m talking about is not what we do, but what that little wacko in Iran does.  I’m of the opinion that he’ll do something before the U.S. does.  Watch the price of oil then, if you think $128 a barrel is high.

If you don’t don’t vote, nobody can tell where you stand, right?

This ought to tell you a little something about John McCain.  Strategic oil reserves.  Time of war.  Filling the reserves for a national emergency (we have, since 9/11)… got the picture?

WASHINGTON, May 13 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate Tuesday voted to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help reduce the retail price of gasoline.

The Hill reported that the measure passed 97-1, with Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., opposing the bill.

Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., did not vote, the Hill said.

Good job Johnny boy.  You’ve missed a lot of votes since you started running.  But then, it’s tough to convince anybody you’re “a real conservative” when you actually have to record a vote, eh?

By the way, if we can’t drill for our own oil, we’d better be sticking some aside for a rainy day, don’t you think?  After all, as a nation we use a ton of oil, and filling the reserves takes a little time. 

For his part, U.S. President George Bush has resisted calls to suspend the delivery of about 70,000 barrels a day to the emergency stockpile. He said doing so would have little impact on prices in a nation that uses about 21 million barrels a day.

This is more election year, “we’re really doing something about gas prices” smoke and mirrors for the home folks. Thanks for showing up Maverick.

I used to go to Vancouver Canada frequently to go to hockey games, hike, etc.  That was a long time ago.  They’ve always been, uh, different, politically.  But they’re certifiable these days.  I’m sure you’ve followed Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant’s trials and tribulations with the Canadian human Rights Commission.  Now check out this story at Mr Completely’s Blog. 

If you are planning a trip to Canada, and particularly to any of their larger cities, be sure to keep your mouths closed, or you might end up in the same situation.

I can see the same thing happening in a couple of our large Left Coast cities… seems we’re not too far off sometimes.

Speaking of the war Islam is raging against the West, have you been paying attention to the uproar over pigs and pork, and what some communities are doing about it?  If this doesn’t get your blood up, you’re dead, or worse…

The practice of political correctness may soon be tallying another casualty: the pig. Increasingly, as America and the rest of the Western world continue accommodating Muslim religious demands, pork food products are being singled out for removal from dining tables and pig-related trinkets banished from the desks of office workers.
If this continues, good ol’ American food, such as barbeque replete with hot dogs and ribs and the typical American breakfast of eggs, bacon and sausage, might be seen as the equivalent of political poison. Could outright censorship of pig depictions in drawings, pig references in literary works and pig portrayals in movies be far behind? Could the well-known, cartoon figure Porky Pig become a cultural embarrassment of our unenlightened past as we fear to utter the “P” word?

Political correctness taken to absurd lengths. The abolishment of free practice of religion. Surrendering the public square to the invaders. Do you think I’m exaggerating? Consider this

In October of 2005, the United Kingdom, clearly further along on the road to dhimmitude due to its proportionally large and more radical Muslim population, banned piggybanks as promotional gifts from its banks. At about the same time, government social welfare offices called for the removal of all pig paraphernalia, including pig calendars, toys and accessories from employee desks.

Oh, you say, that’s in Europe, that’s in Britain. They’re hopeless, but it’ll never happen here. I’ll bet you a pork chop sandwich we’ve got the same problem here in America. Don’t believe me? Try these on for size

Meanwhile, in the United States in 2007, several school districts removed pork products from their cafeteria offerings. Dearborn, Mich., schools banned pork completely to avoid the possibility that Muslims students might unknowingly eat it. The district later added special halal foods to its menu to cater to the demands of its Muslim population. An elementary school in San Diego that offers Arabic, single-gender classes and Muslim-only organized prayer, no longer offers pork to any of its students. And in Oak Lawn, Ill., where the administration is debating elimination of Christmas holiday celebrations, pork has already been banished from the school lunchroom.

That’s only the schools, you say? You just bought me another sandwich

Last year, Somali Muslim employees at a St. Louis Park, Minn. Target store refused to handle pork products, citing religious reasons. Target made special allowances for Muslim employees, who now scrutinize customer purchases and can call for assistance when a pork product appears at their check stand. Presumably, the Muslim employees knew they would be encountering bacon and pepperoni pizza when they signed on for their jobs and have no problem collecting a salary paid out of profits from pork sales.

Cabbies refusing patrons with alcohol or service dogs fit into this story too. The West has got to grow a spine here real soon, because this is not about being tolerant of someone else’s beliefs, it’s about handing over liberty and giving up. Pay attention here folks… “first, it was only in Michigan, and we laughed. Then it happened in Minneapolis, but I didn’t know anyone there, and I thought they were kinda wimpy, so hey, that’s their problem. Then it started happening in Seattle. It’s a little late to do anything about it now, isn’t it? But you know, my sister looks kinda good in that berka.”

I heard Rush interview Andy McCarthy yesterday about his new book “Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad”.  It was an interesting inteview, and they touched on a lot of important things about the war against the jihadis, or more correctly, their war against us.  Rush noted the book has three main themes

There are three themes in Andy’s book, folks.  The first theme is that a foreign threat to national security is fundamentally a political issue of self-defense that would involve military. It’s not a legal issue involving lawyers and criminal law.  The second theme is that we have been at war with these people — declared by them — since the late eighties, early nineties, and it wasn’t taken seriously until 9/11.  The third one is what’s fascinating to me.  I can’t wait ’til we get to that portion. It’s “You Can’t Take the Islam Out of Islamic terrorism.” 

These things are all swirling around right now because of the election coming up. The Democrats as a whole, and many Republicans (Bush included) seem to want to continue believing that it isn’t about religion, we’re not at war with them, and we’d be better off dealing with them in the courts. In other words, more of the same head in the sand approach that has worked so well for us up to now.

RUSH:  All right. So what are the numbers?  Through the Clinton years and even prior to that, we sought to deal with this threat via the courts, indictments.  How successful have we been?

MCCARTHY:  Well, if your point of reference is national security, it’s an abysmal failure.  Most of the time when I talked about this it turns out to be at law schools, where what they’re interested in is due process, and they look at it and say, “But look, you convicted everyone. You know, you batted a thousand,” which obviously you can’t do better than that. But in point of fact in eight years we took out 29 people, which, when you consider the fact that, you know, between the time the trade center was bombed in ‘93 — which I think is the declaration of war — and the time it was destroyed on 9/11, we had an enemy that was growing bigger and bolder, attacking us about once a year, and our response to it — even as the attacks became more ferocious — was essentially to add more counts to the indictment, which is really not impressive to people who are willing to immolate themselves in terrorist attacks.

Great interview, and the full transcript is up at Rush’s. McCarthy was real interesting to listen to, and when the pile of books by my bedside shrinks enough for me to add another one (without the fear of the whole thing toppling over on my head in the middle of the night) I think I’ll look to buy this one.

Leave it to Jonah Goldberg to set the record straight, after Jeremiah Wright’s notorious assertion that the U.S. government purposely injected black men with syphilis.  It DID NOT!

So what did happen? In 1932, public health researchers set out to study syphilis, particularly among African Americans, who had higher infection rates than whites. They recruited 399 black men who already had syphilis. The doctors infected no one. In fact, the patients were selected in the first place because they were tertiary-stage syphilitics who were no longer contagious.

This article ought to be required reading for most of the Left, and at least half of the Right, who let these allegations go unchallenged (thinking of O’Reilly and Hannity in particular).  I’m certain there is enough darkness in American history to satisfy anyone whose agenda is to tear it down, to damage it, to find reasons to justify their hate for it.  There is no need to rewrite history in the way that Reverend Wright and much of the liberal media seem wont to do.  By all means, take a moment to hit the link and read the full article.  And don’t fall into the rewrite history trap.  We can all detect major BS when confonted with it… I’m thinking of the latest pathetic holocaust accusation by Hamas.  Most of us would be quick to denounce this kind of historical rewrite.

Jewish leaders concocted the mass murder of handicapped Jews in order to keep from having to support them, and this murder is what the Jews term “the Holocaust,” according to a documentary special that aired on April 18 on Hamas’s Al Aqsa television station.

We should all be as quick to denounce the poisonous crap coming out of the mouths of people like Wright.  This kind of stuff goes way beyond the “dodging snipers” kind of story re-telling, this is wholesale rewritting of history to promote a political agenda.  And the truly sad thing is that most folks don’t know enough history, or just don’t care, to be able to put the liars down.

According to the Jerusalem Post

An upcoming joint US-Israel report on the September 6 IAF strike on a Syrian facility will claim that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein transferred weapons of mass destruction to the country, Channel 2 stated Monday.

Maybe that’ll help Mrs Bill Clinton? She can say “I said I believed it before I said I didn’t believe it.”  Don’t remember that?  I’ll bet she doesn’t either.  But just to refresh your memory, try this out, from 2003.

PRESIDENT BUSH has a surprising defender of his contention that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction–Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. “The intelligence from Bush 1 to Clinton to Bush 2 was consistent” in concluding Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and was trying to develop a nuclear capability, Clinton said this morning. And Saddam’s expulsion of weapons inspectors and “the behavior” of his regime “pointed to a continuing effort” to produce WMD, she added.

The senator said she did her own “due diligence” by attending classified briefings on Capitol Hill and at the White House and Pentagon and also by consulting national security officials from the Clinton administration whom she trusts. “To a person, they all agreed with the consensus of the intelligence” that Saddam had WMD.

I did not expect to wake up and read anything like this today, although I’m wondering why I am surprised.

BOSTON — Harvard University has banned men from one of its gyms for a few hours a week, a move to accomodate Muslim women who, for religious and cultural reasons, cannot exercise comfortably in their presence.

We’ve seen this in Europe, Canada, and in Michigan.  But Harvard?  There is a line here, but I’m not quite certain where it is yet, and I’m not sure this is it. 

Student Ola Aljawhary, who is Muslim and works out elsewhere on campus but is not one of the women who requested the change, rejected that argument.

“The majority should be willing to compromise,” she said. “I think that’s just basic courtesy. We must show tolerance and respect for all others.”

I agree, as far as that goes.  But I think the question most of us are asking now is, does this go both ways?  The university is trying to spin it as a commonplace arrangement.

The trial policy went into effect Feb. 4, about a month after a group of six Muslim women, with the support of the Harvard College Women’s Center, asked the university for the special hours, spokesman Robert Mitchell said.

“We get special requests from religious groups all the time and we try to honor them whenever possible,” he said, noting that the school has designated spaces for Muslim and Hindu students to pray.

I wonder if it is permissible for women of any faith to work out during those hours?  I wonder if a group of Campus Crusade for Christ men asked Harvard for special gym hours, would they be accomodated as well?  And I’m deeply suspicious when an article like this goes to Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR, which has only a few more members than the women’s workout group at Harvard, in order to obtain a quote, and giving him another opportunity to point out to us all how evil, bigoted, and stupid we all are.

Harvard’s policy is no different from commercial gyms that cater partially or even exclusively to women, said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations.

“The Muslim bashers portray it as the world coming to end, but if women have a couple hours a week to work out in private, I don’t see it as a major issue,” he said.

If one of our local Boise Muslim teachers had said this, I might be inclined to accept that statement on its face, and wish the Muslim coeds a hearty “you go girl”.   But we’ve all watched Ibrahim and CAIR for years, and his determination of what is and is not a “major issue” is itself a major issue.  Just the fact that he has a hand on this leads me to believe this story is more closely similar to the flying imams type of situation than it is to a few Muslim college girls worried about staying in shape.  Ibrahim Hooper’s goals are not about defending poor misunderstood Muslims from being mistreated by ignorant American bigots. The goal of CAIR is to change American society, always pointing it towards Islam. Pay attention America… you will never go far wrong being suspicious of anything Ibrahim Hooper and CAIR get involved in.  Wake up Harvard, and don’t be conned.