US Rep gets in argument with Capital Police

Hey guys I just read the Rep Christopher Shays (R) CT got into a shouting match and apparently grabbed a Capital Police officer while trying to bring visitors in through a restricted entrance.

Of course Rep Shays lost his temper and acted like an idiot and embarassed himself.

Predictably, the Dems and Libs have popped up comparing this to Cynthia McKinney. Is the right wing going to demand that Shays resign? And so on.

Here's the thing, on the surface these two incidents are very similar. One thing is that McKinney actually struck the officer and Shays did not; I don't need to tell you that in the left wing mind Republicans should be rounded up for any infraction. But the real difference is in how the situation was handled.

Did Shays blame the officer afterward? Did Shays cite some kind of prejudice? No, he said I'm sorry, I was wrong and I am to blame. These are things we never heard from Cynthia McKinney, that is the biggest difference.

Iranian missles aimed at US base in Iraq.

The United States military has found 50 Iranian "penetrator" missile launchers aimed at a US base in Iraq. The began after two of the same type of missiles were used in an attack the killed two American soldiers.

They have been sending people and weapons into Iraq to be used against our soldiers. What is it going to take for our government to strike back against Iran? Fearing just that Mahmoud has denied the evidence and at the same time threatened Israel.

I have to ask, what the hell are Iranian missiles doing in Iraq. It doesn't take General Patton to tell you close off the border between Iraq and Iran (of course Patton would what level Iran for its interference). But this should not come as a surprise since the government isn't even willing secure our own border.

I guess we can always offer the Iranians a "guest combatant permit".

U.S. House approves surrender to Muslim terrorists.

The House of Representatives approved a measure today to begin the withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq. The plan specifies that the withdrawal begin within 120 days and be completed by April 1, 2008. April Fool's Day, wow is that fitting.

This measure also dictates that some US military personnel be left in Iraq to "train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and fight al-Qaida and other terrorists."

So let me get this straight, the Democrats say that we are losing the war so their solution is to pull most everyone out and leave a skeleton crew? Now that is strategy. The Dems said we are losing the war, I guess now they want to prove it. Maybe al Qaeda in Iraq won't let us surrender unless we let them win a few battles for their propaganda videos.

Here's what really pisses me off. If the Dems want us out, why don't they just vote to pull us out? Why do they have to chip away at every resource our military men and women have? Why do the Dems feel this need to demoralize and disarm the military in a time of war?

The Dems just don't have the guts to stand up for ending the war and they sure as hell don't have the guts to win it. We all know that the Dems are cowards when it comes to fighting islamofacists, but they are even too cowardly to say they just want to give up? The other reason they don't just vote to pull out, each flag draped coffin has the potential for propaganda, the more the better.

Either way the Dems are surrendering to an enemy that will follow our soldiers home.

Looks like Nancy has already been practicing for her role as "Speaker of the Dhimmis".

Battle of the Moonbats

Ladies and gentlemen, Cindy Sheehan has once again taken her self-importance to a new level. Only weeks after vowing that she was leaving the game Cindy Sheehan is headed to Washington D.C. and if Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has not impeached George W. Bush Cindy is going to challenge Pelosi for her House seat!

Cindy Sheehan has made quite a career for herself exploiting her heroic son's death and now she hopes to parlay that into a political career.

It will be the battle of battles. Mother Moonbat vs. Nancy PeLousy.

Here the possible outcomes all of which I find to be pleasing in various degrees:

1. Sheehan and Pelosi effectively split the kook vote enough to where a Republican wins. Pelosi is out, new Speaker is named, Sheehan loses too.

2. Sheehan wins, Pelosi is out, new speaker, Sheehan becomes an embarrassment on center stage.

3. Pelosi wins (least desireable), Sheehan is tossed out.

Of course the only way the scenario 1. happens is if someone spike the San Francisco drinking water with anti-psychotic medication.

Libs lash out with talk of "Fairness Doctrine"

Since the public spoke up, refused to be bullied and shut down the Senate's attempt to give illegal immigrants superior rights and protections the liberal have been been looking for a scapegoat. Talk radio is set to take the blame for the downfall of the bill.

The stage is now set for the government to impose the so called "fairness doctrine" on us. The premise is simple and it goes like this:

Radio companies are part of a vast right-wing conspiracy to indoctrinate the masses of this country by forcing "Svengalis" like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram down our throats and we are essentially a captive audience. No one really *wants* to listen to these shows but we have no alternative, we can't even turn off the radio to avoid indoctrination. It's not that there is a demand for Limbaugh and others, there just isn't enough liberal programming out there to equally "put the whammy" on the American public. The radio companies are perfectly willing to piss off their listeners by playing programming the public doesn't want and the collective American public has enough doodoo butter substituting for there brains that we just can't help but take it all in and just mindlessly accept it. Obviously, the government needs to step in and make it "fair".

This so-called fairness is not about fairness, it is about control.

Let's start with the liberal definition of fair. Liberals define fair by the outcome or results. In order for anything to be fair the results have to be the same. If liberals ran the Olympics everyone would get a gold medal (except for the American athletes). In the liberal mind the results should all be the same and they will change and govern the proverbial playing field until they get the results they want. The liberals think that it is not fair that Air America doesn't get the same ratings as Rush Limbaugh.

This fairness doctrine, like much of liberalism, assumes that the people are too stupid to decide what they want to listen to and even what their opinion is about the issues. Every American is a blank sheet of paper waiting for either Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken to fill in the blanks. In a nutshell, we are all morons.

The fairness doctrine also attempts to go against one of the very tenants of the Constitution. The congress is attempting to pass a law to control free speech.

Now let's get to the heart of this issue. What is this really about? The government wants to punish the talk radio folks. In their minds talk radio soured us against this great and wonderful immigration bill.

All talk radio did was tell us what was in it when our government representatives would not. Without Paul Revere the British Army would have surprised American revolutionaries, likewise without talk radio the Senate would have slid this bill under our noses.

Talk radio is accused of "whipping the public into a frenzy" but ask yourself do you need Rush Limbaugh to tell you to get mad about any of the following?:

-All illegal immigrants would benefit and get legal status, including known felons
-All back, unpaid income taxes would be forgiven
-No provisions for border enforcement

I didn't think so. Call your congressman and kill the fairness doctrine.