Annie Coulter

Still a Gay Straight Shooter

Her Snarkiness posted a great essay at HumanEvents.com yesterday focusing on the root causes of conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center:

...the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility... If the general "in charge" can't fire the people not doing their jobs, I don't know why he is being held responsible for them not doing their jobs... This was, you will recall, the precise issue that led to a partisan battle over the Homeland Security bill a few years ago: Whether employees at an emergency terrorist response agency could be fired -- as Republicans wanted -- or if they would be subject to civil service rules and unfireable -- as the Democrats wanted.

You can read the rest HERE. She doesn't even mention John Edwards.

Plan 11 from Outer Space

From American Thinker on March 12 (excerpts):

In a recent interview ...Canada's former defense minister Paul Hellyer... informed the Ottawa Citizen that highly classified information on extraterrestrials may hold the key to solving the earth's Global Warming crisis and could help us save the planet before it is too late. He went on to demand that World governments declassify all of these Alien Technology secrets so we can get on with addressing this pressing issue as soon as possible.Mr. Hellyer's rather unorthodox scheme is based on the premise that, since Alien visitors may have had to travel vast distances in search of intelligent life in our universe, they must possess extraordinary propulsion systems and incredibly efficient fuel technologies to be able to achieve such a feat. These technologies would go a long way towards stemming the tide of human extinction posed by Global Warming, if only the world governments (especially the U.S.) [natch] would share them with the scientific community.... In a Toronto conference on November 2005 Mr. Hellyer accused the U.S. military of "preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens" and the Bush administration of trying to "get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning".

So does this mean we may learn those critical technical solutions from Gorebots from beyond that Crab nebula? Uh-Oh --- do you suppose [queue Twilight Zone theme] --- naw, couldn't be.

UPDATE Notice

A second UPDATE to THIS post.

UPDATE Notice

Yet another UPDATE to THIS February 10 post.

Who's on First?

Here's CNN coverage of The Master Plan. First, the TRANSCRIPT (you'll need it):

REP. DAVID R. OBEY: Troops must be out of a combat role by October — I mean, by August of 19 — 2007.
REP. NANCY PELOSI: 2008. If they meet (inaudible).
OBEY: I’m sorry, that’s right.
PELOSI: OK. But if they haven’t made any progress by July, we begin the 180 days. If they haven’t made any. If they haven’t made — if the president cannot demonstrate progress by July, we begin the 180 days.
UNKNOWN: July 1st or 31st?
PELOSI: Is it July 1st or 31st? July 1st?

Now, if you can bear it, the visual:



"They were convoluted, to say the least" is an understatement, CNN.
Seriously, do these morons expect us to take their plan(s) seriously? George doesn't look like such a bumbling idiot/dufus/dolt at times, does he?
Thanks to the TexasRainmaker for the "heads-up".

Pop the Hatch, Dude!

"Now, what's cooler than being cool?".
This video -- well-choreographed by VAW-116 Hawkeye Squadron to Outkast's infectious "Hey Ya" -- has supposedly received far more hits than the Navy recruiting videos, according to Navy Times. Well duh! Obviously, a popular ditty. Hey, I like it. Thanks, Bob!

Bulletin---Bulletin---Bulletin

The Boss just announced she saw one of these a few minutes ago.

An Inconvenient Documentary

TWO UPDATES BELOW

Philip Stott -- Emeritus Professor at the University of London -- penned an essay last Friday that began:

From the Babylon of Gilgamesh to the post-Eden of Noah, every age has viewed climate change cataclysmically, as retribution for human greed and sinfulness.
In the 1970s, the fear was global cooling. The Christian Science Monitor then declaimed, "Warning: Earth's climate is changing faster than even experts expect," while The New York Times announced, "A major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable." Sound familiar? Global warming represents the latest doom-laden "crisis," one demanding sacrifice to Gaia for our wicked fossil-fuel-driven ways.
But neither history nor science bolsters such an apocalyptic faith.

You can read the rest HERE.
Also, I just stumbled on a 76-minute video of "The Great Global Warming Swindle". According to a group of scientists brought together by documentary-maker Martin Durkin, if the planet is heating up it isn't your fault -- and there's little you can do about it. Just as Big Al thinks he has our attention, a group of naysayers have emerged to slay the premise of controllable, human-caused global warming. Good.

UPDATE -- March 12, 2007 -- 3:58 PM

From the UK's Telegraph newspaper:

Scientists who questioned mankind's impact on climate change have received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the scientific community.
They say the debate on global warming has been "hijacked" by a powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions.
Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.
One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming.
"Western governments have pumped billions of dollars into careers and institutes and they feel threatened," said the professor.
"I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should be sceptics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got really nasty and personal."
Last week, Professor Ball appeared in The Great Global Warming Swindle, a Channel 4 documentary in which several scientists claimed the theory of man-made global warming had become a "religion", forcing alternative explanations to be ignored.
Richard Lindzen, the professor of Atmospheric Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology -- who also appeared on the documentary -- recently claimed: "Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves labelled as industry stooges.
"Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science."
Dr Myles Allen, from Oxford University, agreed. He said: "The Green movement has hijacked the issue of climate change. It is ludicrous to suggest the only way to deal with the problem is to start micro managing everyone, which is what environmentalists seem to want to do."

If left unchecked, this climate insanity will bring the economies of the developed world to a serious stall -- or as Alannah Myles sang in the great "Black Velvet" in 1989, it's "A new religion that'll bring you to your knees." Only she was referring to Rock music -- and Elvis.
Thanks to Charles for the link.

UPDATE -- March 14, 2007 -- 2:04 PM

The Calgary Sun has a timely column on the documentary today.

--WARNING--

UPDATED BELOW

There's been considerable coverage on the 'Net recently regarding the "netroots" campaign from the Left-end of town to badger Democratic prez candidates into boycotting a presidential debate scheduled for Aug. 14 in Reno and co-hosted by The Evil Fox News. (The Nevada State Democratic Party already announced they won't participate.)
Although I've had truly minimal exposure to the issue, my intitial thought is that they don't want Democratic-leaning voters watching Fox News under any circumstance. Now why might that be? Reckon they fear "the people" might actually see for themselves that there really is balance on FNC, rather than their imagined 24/7 exclusion of all things "progressive"? We sure can't have that, now, can we?

UPDATE -- March 13, 2007 -- 2:38 PM

Thanks to the Bookworm for the following link.
Robert J. Avrech:
So let me get this straight. According to the Democrats, Israel is supposed to sit down and chat with Hamas, a terrorist gang dedicated to Israel’s annihilation... sit down and "dialogue with Iran," a country that denies the Holocaust, even as it promises a new Holocaust... shmooze with the North Koreans, a country that has systematically murdered over 3 million of its own citizens.
Why? Well, because you "talk to your enemies."

But the Democrats refuse to take part in a debate sponsored by Fox Cable Network because, y’know, Fox is too right wing.
Got that?
I’d like to thank the Democratic Presidential candidates: Edwards, Obama, & Clinton for being so publicly willing to reveal their cowardice. They’re terrified of Fox journalists armed with Mont Blanc pens.
Imagine how they’d stand up to the surging jihadist threat.

Thrust and Parry -- 1993 v 2007

From Yahoo! News today:

The Senate's No. 3 Democrat said Sunday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign because he is putting politics above the law. Sen. Charles Schumer cited the FBI's illegal snooping into people's private lives and the Justice Department's firing of federal prosecutors... on "Late Edition" on CNN, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del... said Gonzales would be "better off" if he resigned."There is very little credibility in the Justice Department right now," Biden said... "I think Gonzales has lost the confidence of the vast majority of the American people," he said.

And what scientifically-designed/conducted poll might you be citing, Joey?

On the LATimes' "Opinion LA" page this past February 8 we find this bit of history:

....the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday [2/6] delved into allegations that the Bush administration might be trying to cover up wrongdoing by replacing several U.S. attorneys, including San Diego's Carol Lam, who presided over the prosecution of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.... [Senator] Schumer sounded a... note of suspicion, but Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty parried pretty effectively, saying that "U.S. attorneys are never -- repeat, never -- removed, or asked or encouraged to resign, in an effort to retaliate against them, or interfere with, or inappropriately influence a particular investigation, criminal prosecution, or civil case." ...The critics are right about one thing: Politics plays a part in the appointment of U.S. attorneys -- as it seems to have done in the temporary replacement of a U.S. attorney in Arkansas with a lawyer who once worked for Karl Rove. But there’s nothing unprecedented about presidents using U.S. attorneys’ positions as political plums. Nor is it unusual for changes in U.S. attorneys to give rise to conspiracy theories.

In 1993 The New York Times published a story with this provocative lead: "Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States attorneys, leading the federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton." Rostenkowski was indicted in 1994 under the aegis of a Democratic U.S. attorney, and later pleaded guilty to corruption charges. Sometimes, where there’s smoke -- there’s smoke.

Indeed some numbers were put on that Reno Purge on this morning's "FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace" by C.W. himself during the discussion. Reno sacked 93 (no, I didn't transpose "39") U.S. attorneys. The only one spared was none other than Michael Chertoff, who was kept on at the request of Sen. Bill Bradley (D-NJ).