The left is the left, wherever you find them

Diana West posts this on Burssels Journal:

I am posting (below) a letter from the Danish Free Press Society, the parent organization of the International Free Press Society, of which I am vice president. It is of urgent importance. It tells of the terrible turn of events in Denmark, which for years now has bravely spearheaded the West's fights to save free speech, now and seemingly in perpetuity under assault from both the Marxian Left and the press of sharia (Islamic law) -- and with zero support from diplomatic, governmental, or professional institutions in the United States, home and caretaker of the First Amendment. This appalling lack of support, which translates into a lack of courage and vision, is the main reason the assault of free speech continues to be successful. But et tu, Denmark?

There have been signs: for example, former Prime MInister Anders Fogh Rasmussen's gratuitous slap at Pastor Terry Jones' stated intention to burn Korans to mark the jihad attacks of 9/11 in September of this year; and the Danish paper Politiken's February 2010 apology for reprinting Kurt Westergaard's Mohammed cartoon, which Westergaard, wonderful man, one month past the nearest-miss assassination attempt yet that sent him and his five-year-old granddaughter into his "safe" room (a reinforced bathroom with an alarm button), declared the newspaper's apology a "setback for free speech."

And so it was. But such events are more than "setbacks." They fit into a terrible and even totalitarian climate of assault in which the Danish government, via its public prosecutor, as the letter states, is "waging a lawfare offensive against outspoken critics of Islam and Muslim practices."

Last month, Danish MP Jesper Langballe was convicted of "hate speech" -- "racial discrimination," for having highlighted the pattern of "honor killings" in Muslim families. (Here is his "confession.") Now in the crosshairs is my very dear friend and colleague, Lars Hedegaard, President of the Danish Free Press Society and the International Free Press Society. (A historian as well as a journalist and author, Lars took me on a special tour of Copenhagen, which I wrote about here.) On January 24 he goes on trial. His crime? Discussing the high incidence of family rape within Islamic cultures, which the prosecutor is attempting to outlaw as "racism."

In fact, the Danish prosecutor is attempting to enforce Islamic "blasphemy" laws, which outlaw all criticism of Islam.

Jesper Langballe and now Lars Hedegaard have been targeted because they are Danes of courage and principle who refuse to lie down and shut up and let the "multicultural" Big Lies wash in and inundate their mental and moral capacities to that endpoint of totalitarian triumph where citizens become subjects, minions who no longer articulate or even recognize truth and morality. In a world where mandarins of Left and mullahs of sharia so conspire, we risk a kind of double-dhimmification in acquiesence, rendering civilization incapable of self-defense.

Please read the Danish Free Press Soctety's letter and realize it is in fact an SOS. Save Our Speech. If you are so moved, there is an email address below to which you may address comments in support of Lars Hedegaard's freedom of speech, which will be reprinted in the DFPS newsletter.

From the Danish Free Press Society:

Free speech is under attack in Denmark. Please help us preserve it.

Those who have been following the Danish cartoon crisis and several subsequent attempts by radical Muslims to kill and bomb Danes and Danish institutions may be excused for believing that Denmark is in the forefront of the battle for free speech. And indeed it used to be that way.

No longer. For the past year the Danish public prosecutor has been waging a lawfare offensive against outspoken critics of Islam and Muslim practices.

On December 3, 2010, Member of Parliament Jesper Langballe was convicted of "hate speech" – or as the judge in the lower court of Randers put it: "racial discrimination" – for having called attention to honour killings in Muslim families.

Next in line is Lars Hedegaard, President of the Danish Free Press Society and The International Free Press Society, who will stand trial in the lower court of Frederiksberg on January 24, 2011.

His crime has been to point to the great number of family rapes in areas dominated by Muslim culture. This well documented fact has brought him an indictment under the Danish penal code's "racism" clause: Article 266b.

Both MP Langballe and Lars Hedegaard have long ago emphasised that they did not intend to accuse all Muslims or even the majority of Muslims of such crimes. This has made no impression on the public prosecutor.

We fear that the public prosecutor intends to stifle open debate on Islam and Muslim culture. And we fear that he is doing so with the tacit approval of the governing parties, which first signalled their intention to remove the racism clause from the penal code but have recently recanted.

If the authorities succeed in silencing such critics as Jesper Langballe and Lars Hedegaard, who will dare speak out?

We must put a stop to these attempts to undermine free speech if we wish to preserve Denmark as a free country. And where Denmark – that former beacon of free speech – goes, the rest of the West may follow.

You can help us.

Please send a few words to katrinewinkelholm@gmail.com in defence of Lars Hedegaard's freedom of expression. We will then publish them in The Free Press Magazine, Sappho.dk.

Please do what you can to spread the word about the trial of Lars Hedegaard.

Kinds regards

Ahmed Mohamud
Vice President, The Danish Free Press Society

Katrine Winkel Holm
Chief Editor, Sappho.dk

I bring this to your attention for two reasons.  One is that what is going on in Europe is of great long-term importance to the United States.  Most of Europe is sitting under a demographic sword of Damocles which will see it become majority Muslim by the middle of this century.

As can be seen here Islamists and the political left in Denmark have entered into an alliance and are using the law to silence speech which they find unacceptable - in this case criticism of Islam.

Why the left would enter into such an alliance has long puzzled me.  After all when and if Islamists come to power in a nation homosexuals will be subject to execution and women's rights will be restricted to the "right" to wear a burka, marry whomever she is ordered to marry and never leave the home without being escorted by her husband or a male relative.

Then it occurred to me.  What the left worships is power.  Total power concentrated in a central government and that is exactly what Islamofascism offers.  A unitary state where all meaningful power is vested in the central government.  What would it be to this public prosecutor if he had to change his name to Mohammad and wear robes as long as he could wield the power of a Yuri Andropov or Heinrich Himmler?

Watch for this unholy alliance between the Euro left and Islam to grow stronger and deeper in the coming years.  It will most likely give Muslims a political majority to begin transforming European society years before they have gained a demographic majority.

The second reason that I reposted this here is that I want you to contemplate the similarity between how the Islamofascist/political left alliance is operating in Denmark and how the "progressive" left is behaving in the USA.

Before the blood had even had a chance to dry on the Tucson sidewalk the American left was already flooding the airwaves and Internet with accusations that he killer had been practically forced to pull the trigger by Sarah Palin and conservative talk radio.  The point of all this hysterical bloviating (all without one shred of evidence to back it up) was to try to quickly set the narrative that the right, simply by telling the truth about the left and organizing an effective opposition to their policies and political candidates was somehow guilty of a hate crime and had the blood of the Tucson victims on their collective hands.

Denied - for the time being - the legal power to drag Republicans and conservatives into court and prosecute them for their beliefs and their political opposition and their damned truth-telling the Democrats are forced to settle for demonization as the means to shut up their opponents.

But in both circumstances, Europe and the US, the ultimate goal is the same.  To silence any opposition and completely control the public discourse.

Tonight's Music

This is Public Image Ltd.  a project band started by John Lydon after his gig as Johnny Rotten with the Sex Pistols.  John, along with Siouxsie Sioux (Susan Janet Ballion) and a few others who had created the music genre of "punk rock" were running from it as fast as they could and attempting to create a "post-punk" sound. 

Thus were born groups like Public Image Ltd., Siouxsie and the Banshees and Joy Division.

Howard Stern is smarter than this

Howard on Sarah Palin:

“We know you didn’t tell the shooter to go out and shoot people but it isn’t great that you have people in the crosshairs. It’s a bad image. I wouldn’t do that to my worst enemy. It’s like telling people, ‘Gee, I think someone ought to take this person out.’ And then, when she’s laying there in the hospital and you’re making this speech to defend yourself, it just all comes off horribly wrong. It’s like don’t talk about yourself right now. This isn’t about you. This is about a woman, who is a Congresswoman, who’s been shot in the head. A lot of people got taken out that day.”


As I said, Howard is smarter than this.

Let's say it one more time for the dim witted. 

NOTHING that Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh or Daily Kos or that left-wing conspiracy film that Loughner was so deeply moved by had anything whatsoever to do with decision to shoot innocent people.  Loughner is insane and he acted in an insane manner.

End of story.

By the way, let Stern get accused - unfairly - by an entire political party of being an accessory before the fact to first degree murder because of comments he uttered on his radio show and see how fast he is to react.

There was a time when I had some respect for Stern but no more.  He has obviously become nothing more than an extension of the abject losers who make up the vast majority of his audience.

Tonight's Music

Altan - Stór, A Stór, a Ghrá

A simple question for the left

To all of those who insist that opposition to president Obama's agenda is rooted in racism.

To believe this you must sincerely believe than Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, the participants in the Tea Party and GOP politicians like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are really and truly neo-Marxists who want to see all power concentrated in the central government.  They must believe that government should control or even outright own all the means of production and that politicians should decide how much of their earnings each citizen should be allowed to keep.  They must believe that government should be the sole provider of health care and should have the power to relegate citizens who the health care bureaucrats (death panels) do not believe that it would be cost effective to treat to a painless death by overdose of pain killers.  They must not only believe in the rightness of abortion on demand but that the taxpayers should be forced to pay for said abortions.

BUT they must be such committed racists that they are willing to work against the implementation of all their totalitarian fantasies for the sole reason that the one president in the history of the Republic who has come closest to implementing their collectivist vision of a Stalinist America is a negro.

How much sense does that make?

Tonight's Music

This is Lissie and the song is little Lovin'. This song is featured in the season 2 trailer for Justified, see below.

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

LIBERALS SEEK BAN ON METAPHORS IN WAKE OF ARIZONA SHOOTING

by Ann Coulter
January 12, 2011

After the monstrous shooting in Arizona last week, surely we can all agree that we've got to pass Obama's agenda immediately and stop using metaphors.


At least I think that's what the mainstream media are trying to tell me.


Liberals instantly leapt on the sickening massacre at a Tucson political event over the weekend to accuse tea partiers, Sarah Palin and all conservatives who talk out loud of being complicit in murder by inspiring the shooter, Jared Loughner.


Of course, to make their case, they first must demonstrate:


(a) Right-wingers have called for violence against anyone, especially conservative, pro-Second Amendment Democratic congresswomen;
(b) Loughner was listening to them; and
(c) Loughner was influenced by them.


They've proved none of this. In fact, it's nearly the opposite.


Needless to say, no conservative has called for violence against anyone. Nor has any conservative engaged in any "rhetoric" that was likely to lead to violence. Every putative example of "violent rhetoric" these squeamish liberals produce keeps being matched by an identical example from the Democrats.


Sarah Palin, for example, had a chart of congressional districts being targeted by Republicans. So did the Democratic Leadership Committee. Indeed, Democratic consultant Bob Beckel went on Fox News and said he invented the bull's-eye maps.


Similarly, every time liberals produce an example of military lingo from a Republican -- "we're going to target this district" -- Republicans produce five more from the Democrats.


President "whose asses to kick" Obama predicted "hand-to-hand combat" with his political opponents and has made such remarks as "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" -- making Obama the first American president to advocate gun fights since Andrew Jackson.


These are figures of speech known as "metaphors." (Do liberals know where we got the word "campaign"?)


It's not that both sides did something wrong; neither side did anything wrong. The drama queens need to settle down.


The winner of the most cretinous statement of 2011 -- and the list is now closed, so please hold your submissions -- is MSNBC's Chris Matthews, who on Monday night recalled Palin's statement, "We're not retreating, we're reloading," and said, I quote, "THAT'S not a metaphor."


Really, Chris? If that's not a metaphor, who did she shoot?


By blaming a mass killing on figures of speech, liberals sound as crazy as Loughner with his complaints about people's grammar. Maybe in lieu of dropping all metaphors, liberals should demand we ban metonyms so that tragedies like this will never happen again.


As for Loughner being influenced by tea partiers, Fox News and talk radio -- oops, another dead-end. According to all available evidence, Loughner is a liberal.


Every friend of Loughner who has characterized his politics has described him as liberal. Not one called him a conservative.


One friend says Loughner never listened to talk radio or watched the TV news. Throw in "never read books" and you have the dictionary definition of a liberal. Being completely uninformed is precisely how most liberals stay liberal.


According to voluminous Twitter postings on Saturday by one of Loughner's friends since high school, Caitie Parker, he was "left wing," "a political radical" "quite liberal" and "a pot head."


If any public figure influenced this guy, my money's on Bill Maher.


But liberals have been so determined to exploit this tragedy to geld conservatives, they have told calculated lies about Loughner's politics.


In the most bald-faced lie I have ever read in The New York Times -- which is saying something -- that paper implied Loughner is a pro-life zealot. This is the precise opposite of the truth.


Only because numerous other news outlets, including ABC News and The Associated Press, reported the exact same shocking incident in much greater detail -- and with direct quotes -- do we know that the Times' rendition was complete bunk.


ABC News reported: "One Pima Community College student, who had a poetry class with Loughner later in his college career, said he would often act 'wildly inappropriate.'


"'One day (Loughner) started making comments about terrorism and laughing about killing the baby,' classmate Don Coorough told ABC News, referring to a discussion about abortions. 'The rest of us were looking at him in shock ... I thought this young man was troubled.'


"Another classmate, Lydian Ali, recalled the incident as well.


"'A girl had written a poem about an abortion. It was very emotional and she was teary eyed and he said something about strapping a bomb to the fetus and making a baby bomber,' Ali said."


Here's the Times' version: "After another student read a poem about getting an abortion, Mr. Loughner compared the young woman to a 'terrorist for killing the baby.'"


So that's how the Times transformed Loughner from a sicko laughing about a dead fetus to a deadly earnest pro-life fanatic. (Never believe a news story written by Eric Lipton, Charlie Savage or Scott Shane of The New York Times -- or for simplicity, anything in the Times.)


I wouldn't have mentioned Loughner's far-left world view immediately after a tragedy like this, but now that liberals have opened the door by blaming Loughner's politics, they better brace themselves.


And when I say "brace themselves," I don't mean they need to actually strap themselves into a brace. That's a metaphor, Chris.

COPYRIGHT 2010 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

When I heard the first reports about a shooting of a congresswoman I knew that the left would try to twist the event into a political weapon - that is if she were a Democrat.  If she had been a Republican and had been shot by a left-wing activist or an Islamofascist then the media would have stood around scratching their heads and wondering loudly what on earth could have motivated the killer.

Sort of like they did with the Ft. Hood jihadist.

But the injured congresswoman had a "D" by her name so it was easy to overlook the fact that she was a pro-border security, pro-Second Amendment, anti-abortion conservative Democrat who voted against Nancy Pelosi in her recent run for minority leader.

And even though the killer turned out to be a "left-wing pothead" and 9/11 truther who believed that the government was using mind control through the manipulation of grammar and who listed the Communist Manifesto as of of his favorite books (automatically giving him more in common with Barack Obama than with Sarah Palin) the left just couldn't resist trying to link the nutjob murderer with Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.

The attempt not only failed but backfired thanks to the new media and only made the left-wing media, Hollywood celebrities and Democrat politicians look even more batshit crazy than they already looked (and believe me most sane people would have not thought that possible).

The reality is that Jared Loughner was insane.  He lived in a different reality than the rest of us and responded to motivations which are no more accessible to sane people than any events which might be transpiring on the far side of Pluto.  Mr. Loughner is a very sick man who lives, and unless medical science makes some astounding breakthrough, will die in his own world.

In the meanwhile lefties will continue destroying what microscopic bits of credibility they have left by continuing to advance the theory that the murders were somehow motivated by "right-wing hate speech" (which simply means people telling the truth about Democrats and their agenda).

Of course it's an ill wind that blows no good and we do have our 2011 winner for the Charles Moose Award for Magnificently Incompetent Law Enforcement.  Remember Chief Moose?  He was the Montgomery County (VA) police chief who was so fixated on the Beltway Sniper being a lone white man that he forced his investigators to ignore evidence that might have caught the two African-American Muslim men who were the actual snipers much earlier and saved lives.

This year the prize must go to Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik who even though his department knew that Loughner was crazy, potentially violent and obsessed with Congresswoman Giffords did nothing to keep him away from the event in which he was able to approach her and shoot her in the head at near contact distance.  Then the good sheriff compounded his mistake by running to the nearest microphone to both aid the shooter's defense team in constructing an insanity defense and attempt to tar (without the slightest bit of evidence) innocent people with whom he happens to disagree with guilt for the crime.

Now Dupnik's department is in full CYA mode refusing requests by the media to release records of their encounters with Loughner in the time before the shooting.  What will those records show?  We can't know with certainty but I very much doubt that if they revealed that Sheriff Dupnik had been doing his duty that there would have been any hesitation to put them before the public as quickly as possible.  In fact given Dupnik's behavior to date if the records showed him in anything like a good light he would be handing out copies of them on street corners in Tucson.

I could go on and talk about Obama's "bring a gun to a knife fight" comment or Rahm Emanuel's reading a list of political opponents and punctuating each one by slamming his fist on the table and shouting the word "dead", but why bother.  It has been done elsewhere and it misses the point.

The point is that an insane man did an insane thing and people were killed an injured.  The only "lesson" to draw from the event is that our society made a serious error when we allowed liberal activist lawyers and judges to change the laws which used to allow us to lock people like Jared Loughner away in institutions where they could be cared for and prevented from doing harm to themselves and others.

Sarah and Barack talk violence

looking out my backdoor

Ignore her and she'll go away

There is a post on Big Hollywood about how has-been never-was "comedian" Kathy Griffin has decided that in 2011 it will be her mission to "take down" 16-year-old Willow Palin (I assume that 2012 will be Piper's turn and that in 2013 Trig will be mocked). 

Griffin has admitted that her motivation for this kind of behavior is attention seeking.  She hopes that by launching yet another hateful personal attack on a member of the Palin family that she will be invited on shows like The View and O'Reilly Factor to discuss/defend her comments.

I would submit that since the best way of dealing with this kind of behavior (dueling to the death) is currently against the law that the next best alternative would be to simply ignore her.

Just ignore her and eventually she will try to gain attention by even more outrageous means like acting in a porn video.  When this doesn't garner her the expected attention (after all, who wants to look at her sagging 50-year-old body) she will go the drug-fueled public nervous breakdown route followed by the obligatory trip to rehab.

She will emerge from rehab clean and sober and with a new politically correct cause to support and a determination to rebuild her career.

When this fails to make her an "A" or even "B"or "C" list celebrity she will disappear from view and not be heard of again until her dead body is found in a gutter or dumpster in Hollywood.

Thus will end the sad life of someone who, but for a few bad choices (like trying to work in the entertainment industry and being a Democrat), might have lived a happy and productive life as a legal secretary, dental hygienist or housewife.

I'm back

Sorry for not posting for so long.  Back in Dec. I was both loaded down with work and caught the new virus that's going around here in Western NC (the one that hangs on in some people for more than two months) and just had no energy for posting.

I'm still fighting the virus but the workload has returned to normal for this time of the year so I'll be posting again.

Christmas comes a little early

From American Thinker:

The Tea Parties have had their first major victory, as Harry Reid pulled the pork-laden omnibus spending bill from Senate consideration, in the face of Republican opposition capable of winning at least 41 votes to sustain a filibuster. GOP senators like McConnell who had helped put pork into the bill woke up and realized the electorate was serious when it rejected earmarks. McConnell, aware of the changed mood of the country, worked hard to persuade GOP senators. Robert Costa and Andrew Stiles of NPR report:


[. . .]

The Democrats had planned to cram the bill down the nation's fiscal throat using the threat of a government shutdown. Now, facing serious opposition to this trick, they will have to settle for a simple continuing resolution, keeping spending at current levels instead of nearly 2000 pages of complexity with no time for scrutiny. The new Congress, where the GOP controls the House of Representatives, where spending bills must originate, will craft next year's budget.


Good news indeed.  It is possible to change the way things are done in Washington as long as the public is willing to stay engaged.

And that will be the challenge, to keep a public that mostly doesn't enjoy involving itself in politics deeply and on a daily basis (the way bloggers and talk radio listeners do) engaged.

The reason for the season

Hollywood can learn from this

The coming cool down?

From American Thinker:

Guess who wrote this.

"The Sun is the primary forcing of Earth's climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our world's climate system and makes possible life as we know it.


"... According to scientists' models of Earth's orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling -- perhaps the next ice age...


"Other important forcings of Earth's climate system include such "variables" as clouds, airborne particulate matter, and surface brightness. Each of these varying features of Earth's environment has the capacity to exceed the warming influence of greenhouse gases and cause our world to cool. " [Emphases added.]

Lord Monckton didn't write that. Neither did physicist Richard Lindzen, physicist William Happer, or physicist Hal Lewis. Nor was it Steve McIntyre who blew the whistle on the "hockey stick." It was none of the usual suspects among the "skeptic" community.


It was NASA, home of our space program, the currently unmuzzled James Hansen and one of the major centers for collecting climate data and analyzing it. (HT: Ace.)


The NASA statement is simply astounding to me. It says, quite unambiguously, that our climate is dominated by the sun and our orientation to it. It also credits non-carbon sources as "important forcings" of our climate: clouds, particulate matter and surface brightness. Finally, it warns of coming global cooling!

Of course, the NASA statement still says there is human-caused warming. But, it will be swamped by these other forces to yield net cooling. In short, whatever man is doing to the climate, it is insignificant in the face of natural forcings.

The science "consensus" has not only collapsed, it has raised the white flag and confessed that the skeptics were right all along. I think we can stick a fork in the climate change agenda. A few nuts will continue to wander the streets, mumbling to themselves and each other. But as a significant political agenda, I think it's over. I sure hope it is.

It is all very amusing to see the left's favorite hobgoblin having the wind knocked out of its sails but the far more serious point is that the earth might very well be headed into the next ice age.

We are due for one and some scientists think we may already be in it but won't know for sure for a couple more decades.

This is a big deal.  While an increase in global temperatures would be a good thing overall (longer growing seasons, more land becoming productive for agriculture, less disease, less hunger, lower heating bills and so on) an ice age would be a global catastrophe of massive proportions.

Here is a map of what North America looked like during the last ice age:

Everything north of the heavy black line was covered with glaciers up to a mile thick.

That's all of Canada and Alaska and New England and the upper Midwest.  Tundra would extend south of the line of glaciation for more than one hundred miles in some areas.  The territory south of the tundra would have a much colder climate as far south as Florida and Northern Mexico.

Here is what Europe would look like:

While no one would miss Russia very much Great Britain and Ireland would be a different matter.

Growing seasons would be shorter.  World food production would drop and large numbers of displaced people would begin migrating south looking for warmer weather.

Some say that it would be the end of civilization as we know it.  I personally doubt that as I think that the human race is more resilient that that but it would unquestionably be the greatest disaster to ever befall the human race.

Our guys aren't dunces

Want to know the difference between the left's celebrites like Sean Penn and Woopi Goldberg and conservative celebraties like Adam Baldwin and Gary Graham? 

The left-wing actors, singers, producers and such spout mindless liberal talking points.  For an example just surf over to the Huffington Post.

Celebrites on the right however have enough sense not to open their mouths unless they can actuall back up what they are saying.  For an example check out this essay by Adam Baldwin.

Want a good laugh?

Then check out this post on Big Journalism.

Washington Times – Off-the-record exchanges and thousands of confidential e-mails dating back almost four years reveal that high-profile journalists have been aiding and advising President Obama since he announced his candidacy in early 2007.

 Provided by WikiLeaks to the Washington Times, the material was originally discovered by a cleaning lady at CNN. Surfing on Wolf Blitzer’s computer during her 4:00 a.m. break, Emalina Ortiz inadvertently opened a window to “BO-WeServe”–a private forum for journalists supporting Obama’s campaign and, later, his administration’s agenda.


[. . .]

A sampling of the e-mails:

From: BKeller@TheTimesSheIsaChanging.com
To: OhMama08@IMD1.net
Date: September 19, 2007



Stop waffling on Iraq, Senator. Raise the ante. Pledge to airlift out the entire American presence to Okinawa within two days after your oath. It’ll be the Berlin Blockade in reverse, a shining example of American ingenuity. How does ”Operation Iraq Excursion” sound?


From: kcouric@seebs.com
To: OhMama08@IMD1.net
Date: May 1, 2008

 Subject: Hillary

 Hillary’s a pit bull, Senator; you’re a poodle. You schmooze with a glass of Zinfandel; she throws down a shot and a beer. Change perceptions, sir. Go to a bar in Trenton, play setback with the locals, get falling-down drunk. And if you order a bitters, don’t cling to it.

 Also, Bill’s been quiet. Get under his skin so he pops. How about a 3:00 a.m. Oval Office ad with a Hillary lookalike yelling at someone just off camera, ”I warned you! Starting Monday, all the interns will be male.”Stop waffling on Iraq, Senator. Raise the ante. Pledge to airlift out the entire American presence to Okinawa within two days after your oath. It’ll be the Berlin Blockade in reverse, a shining example of American ingenuity. How does ”Operation Iraq Excursion” sound?Subject: Iraq

Random act of culture

I saw this video on American Thinker:



The saddest thing was from the commentary:

Drawing on the genius and power of the best of our civilization, this kind of demonstration can't be easily savaged by judicial tyrants. The Messiah is, after all, a cultural touchstone. Unfortunately for the miserable zealots who can't tolerate religious expression, it also unabashedly praises the Christian God.


Is there a clearer sign of our slide into barbarism than the idea that a public performance of one of the greatest works of our culture borders on sedition? Yet it's impossible to watch the video and not wonder how the organizers got away with it.

How indeed?

This is happening all over the Northern Hemisphere in Canada and the US. How much longer will it be tolerated?

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL, DON'T CALL OUR TROOPS HOMOPHOBES
by Ann Coulter
December 8, 2010


The Pentagon's poll on "don't ask, don't tell" is beyond idiotic. Instead of asking whether the troops support repeal of DADT, the Pentagon asked only if they can learn to play nice with the gays.


Even more absurdly, the Pentagon polled all military "personnel" -- and their spouses! Only a small portion of what is known as "the military" actually does the fighting. The rest is a vast bureaucracy along the lines of the DMV.


Today's military features "victim advocates" and sensitivity training facilitators, the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services personnel and a million other goo-goo positions. How did we ever take the shores of Normandy without a phalanx of "sensitivity training" counselors?


No one has any need to be reassured that the military's "social action" staff will enjoy working with gays. Whatever a career in "social action" entails, it better be gay-friendly. Frankly, it's appalling the Pentagon's poll of all military personnel and their families didn't produce better numbers for the gays.


We're interested in what the men who fight think. As the Pentagon study itself reports: "A higher percentage of service members in war-fighting units predicted negative effects."


So gays openly serving in the military will harm the "war-fighting" part of the military, but the "social action" part will thrive!


Naturally, Marines are the most resistant to overturning "don't ask, don't tell," with 58 percent of those in combat opposed.


Who cares if the Pentagon's sexual harassment task force supports gays in the military? The combat units don't, and they're the ones who do the job. The rest of us shouldn't get to vote on gays in the military any more than we get to vote on the choreography of "Chicago."


Military combat is a very specialized field comparable to nothing in civilian life. There has to be a special bond among warriors -- and only one kind of bond. The soldierly bond gets confused if some guys think their comrades are hot or if they suspect their superior is having a relationship with a fellow soldier.


It's the same confusion that results from putting girls in the military. When an officer makes a decision, nothing should enter into it except his views on the best military strategy.


The military part of the military has valid reasons for wanting to separate the idea of martial ardor and sexual attraction. Combat units can't have anything that interferes with unit cohesion, such as, for example, platoon members who are dating one another. Racial prejudice is not the same thing as sexual attraction, so please stop telling us this is just like integrating blacks in the military.


A Military Times survey in 2005 found that nearly half of all women in the military claim to have been the victim of sexual harassment -- ludicrously more than women in civilian life. By contrast, two-thirds of minorities said they were treated better in the military than in society at large.


The Pentagon's report found that service members "repeatedly" said that allowing gays to serve openly would "lead to widespread and overt displays of effeminacy," as well as "harassment" and unwelcome advances. (To which I would add, "and the occasional leak of massive amounts of classified documents.")


Gays in the military understand this better than heterosexuals in civilian life. According to the Pentagon's survey, only 15 percent of gays currently serving said they would want their units to know they're gay. (Also, 2 percent of gays currently serving giggled when asked about their "unit," which is down from 5 percent from last year.)


There are far more discharges for pregnancy and "parenthood" than for homosexuality. In the past five years, less than 1 percent of all unplanned military discharges (i.e. not due to retirement or completion of service) were for homosexuality.


Here's a record of the discharges for 2008, according to the Defense Department:
-- Drugs: 5,627
-- Serious offenses: 3,817
-- Weight standards: 4,555
-- Pregnancy: 2,353
-- Parenthood: 2,574
-- Homosexuality: 634


The main lesson from these figures isn't that we should have gays openly serving in the military, but that we need to get girls out of the military, inasmuch as they are constantly being discharged for pregnancy, parenthood and weight issues.


According to a 1998 Department of Defense report, most discharges based on homosexuality involved "junior personnel with very little time in the military" and "the great majority of discharges for homosexual conduct are uncontested and processed administratively." More than 98 percent of discharges for homosexuality were honorable.


So gays and girls can join the military, get taxpayers to foot the bill for their education and then, when it comes time to serve, announce that they're gay or pregnant and receive an honorable discharge. Indeed, there's no proof that all the discharges for homosexuality involve actual homosexuals.


Why can't the Army and Marines have their own rules? Why does everything have to be the same? Whatever happened to "diversity"?


Maybe we could have an all-gay service! They'd be allowed to wear camouflage neckerchiefs (a la Paul Lynde) and camo capri pants. To avoid any sexual harassment claims, they'd have to have their own barrack, which we could outfit with a dance club, a cosmo bar and a counseling center called "The Awkward Place." Their band would mostly play show tunes, and soldiers captured by the enemy would be taught to reveal only their name, rank and seasonal color analysis ("I am Private First Class Jeffrey Smith and I'm a 'winter.'")


They wouldn't be allowed in combat, however, for the same reason women aren't –- it takes them too long to get ready.


Most people have no clue what military life is like, least of all the opinion makers in New York, Los Angeles and the nation's capital. The military is not representative of the country at large. It is disproportionately rural, small-town, Southern and Hispanic.


We ask our troops to do a lot for very little money. Sometimes they die for us. The least Democrats could do is not pass grandstanding bills while self-righteously denouncing our servicemen as homophobes.


COPYRIGHT 2010 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

Ann's last paragraph sums the entire issue up completely. We ask our troops to sacrifice a great deal, sometimes their very lives, for not much pay. The very least we owe them is to not use them for politically correct social experimentation.

All this amounts to is the fact that homosexual activists see an area in which they are excluded and throw a tantrum. Their goal is not that society should tolerate homosexuality but that it should be celebrated.

The Army and the other services should be delighted to have as many homosexuals as possible in their ranks. They should aggressively seek them out and it should be decreed as their official policy that homosexuals serving openly make the armed services better able to perform their mission (regardless of how the presence of open homosexuals actually affects the military's war fighting ability).

This is the true reason for the push to legalize homosexual "marriage". Gay activists see an institution from which they are excluded and demand that the doors be flung wide open for them regardless of the effect which their inclusion would have on the institution.

As I said in a previous post homosexuality is a mental disorder (this is equally true whether its causes are genetic or environmental). There is a scale of how badly homosexuality impairs a person's ability to function within society just as there is a scale of how badly autism affects an individual’s ability to live a normal life.

Think of a San Francisco gay pride parade. The gay firefighters and police who are marching in uniform represent the "high function" end of the scale. The float done up to look like the Sistine Chapel with men dressed as Jesus and the apostles having oral sex with each other represent the "low function" end of the scale.

There are more than a few of the "high function" homosexuals who wish to serve in the military. And they are serving. They are the 85% of gays currently serving who do not want their units to know that they are gay.

I say let them continue serving under those conditions. The purpose of the military is to keep the nation safe by defeating our enemies on the battlefield or by being so good at their jobs that no enemy attempts to challenge us on the battlefield. The military is not an agent of social change (unless you mean that changes that occur in a society that we have defeated on the battlefield like Germany or Japan) and it should not try to be.

Correcting racial injustice is a completely different matter. The basis of treating blacks differently from whites was a stereotype of black inferiority which had no connection to reality. The behavioral differences manifested by homosexuals are very real and impact upon parts of our psychology which are not socially constructed but are hard wired.

This is why ancient Rome which was very accepting of homosexuality in civilian life punished homosexual acts in the legions with death. They understood the damage that would be done by open homosexuality in a combat unit.

Modern America needs to realize that the accumulated experience of all of human history and all of the wisdom that experience teaches us cannot be made moot by a diktat from Washington.

It just wouldn't be Christmas

Without the Sinterklaas song!

Hollywood castrato sings a bitter song

Aaron Sorkin (creator of television series The West Wing - what else do you really need to know) has a problem with Sarah Palin going hunting with her father:

"Unless you've never worn leather shoes, sat upon a leather chair or eaten meat, save your condemnation."


You're right, Sarah, we'll all just go fuck ourselves now.


The snotty quote was posted by Sarah Palin on (like all the great frontier women who've come before her) her Facebook page to respond to the criticism she knew and hoped would be coming after she hunted, killed and carved up a Caribou during a segment of her truly awful reality show, "Sarah Palin's Alaska", broadcast on The-Now-Hilariously-Titled Living Channel.


I eat meat, chicken and fish, have shoes and furniture made of leather, and PETA is not ever going to put me on the cover of their brochure and for these reasons Palin thinks it's hypocritical of me to find what she did heart-stoppingly disgusting. I don't think it is, and here's why.


Like 95% of the people I know, I don't have a visceral (look it up) problem eating meat or wearing a belt. But like absolutely everybody I know, I don't relish the idea of torturing animals. I don't enjoy the fact that they're dead and I certainly don't want to volunteer to be the one to kill them and if I were picked to be the one to kill them in some kind of Lottery-from-Hell, I wouldn't do a little dance of joy while I was slicing the animal apart.


I'm able to make a distinction between you and me without feeling the least bit hypocritical. I don't watch snuff films and you make them. You weren't killing that animal for food or shelter or even fashion, you were killing it for fun. You enjoy killing animals. I can make the distinction between the two of us but I've tried and tried and for the life of me, I can't make a distinction between what you get paid to do and what Michael Vick went to prison for doing. I'm able to make the distinction with no pangs of hypocrisy even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho shitheads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face.


So I don't think I will save my condemnation, you phony pioneer girl. (I'm in film and television, Cruella, and there was an insert close-up of your manicure while you were roughing it in God's country. I know exactly how many feet off camera your hair and make-up trailer was.)


And you didn't just do it for fun and you didn't just do it for money. That was the first moose ever murdered for political gain. You knew there'd be a protest from PETA and you knew that would be an opportunity to hate on some people, you witless bully. What a uniter you'd be--bringing the right together with the far right.


(Let me be the first to say that I abused cocaine and was arrested for it in April 2001. I want to be the first to say it so that when Palin's Army of Arrogant Assholes, bereft of any reasonable rebuttal, write it all over the internet tomorrow they will at best be the second.)


I eat meat, there are leather chairs in my office, Sarah Palin is deranged and The Living Channel should be ashamed of itself.

Mr. Sorkin if you are willing to eat the meat or wear the skin but unwilling to kill the animal then you ARE a hypocrite.  And furthermore you seem to be too stupid to know it.

You think that shooting an animal with a high powered rifle is "torturing" it?  Would you prefer that humans do what other apex predators (look it up you dunce) do and eat our prey alive?

You think that what someone who hunts for the table does and what Michael Vick did are exactly the same?  So trying to kill an animal with one shot and finishing it off as quickly as possible if it is still alive then feeding your family with the meat is EXACTLY THE SAME as pitting dogs against each other in an illegal dogfight then killing those who fail to win in a slow and agonizing way for the amusement of yourself and your friends?

Mr. Sorkin if you truly believe this you are not only a hypocrite but an abject fool and a moral leper (look up what Hanson's Disease does to the nerves - this is what moral leprosy does to the conscience).

You are not only a fool and a hypocrite you are a pathetic and contemptible weakling.  You are happy enough to have the steak sizzling on your plate but you lack the balls to put it there.  Not only do you lack the guts to kill the animal yourself but you actually imagine yourself to be better than the people who do have the courage to face up to what eating meat involves (the death of the meat animal). 

Just look at the little dweeb

Mr. Sorkin you are a weak and wretched little gelding.  You should get down on your knees every day and thank God that there are plenty of people in the world like Sarah Palin, who are ready and willing to do the heavy lifting so that you can live the comfortable life of a Hollywood screenwriter and producer.  Because you are utterly incapable of surviving in a world in which all of life's necessities are not handed to you on a silver platter by anonymous but hardworking people - the least of who's ass you are not worthy to wipe.  You miserable mincing little metrosexual capon.

Tradition!

Let us do all we can to keep these wonderful holiday traditions alive in an increasingly secular and cynical world.

Krampus:

Krampus is a mythical creature. In various regions of the world – especially Austria and Hungary – it is believed that Krampus accompanies St. Nicholas during the Christmas season, warning and punishing bad children, in contrast to St. Nicholas, who gives gifts to good children.

The word Krampus originates from the Old High German word for claw (Krampen). In the Alpine regions, Krampus is represented by a demon-like creature. Traditionally, young men dress up as the Krampus in the first two weeks of December, particularly on the evening of 5 December, and roam the streets frightening children with rusty chains and bells.[1] In some rural areas the tradition also includes birching – corporal punishment with a birch rod – by Krampus, especially of young girls. Images of Krampus usually show him with a basket on his back used to carry away bad children and dump them into the pits of Hell.

From Wiki

Merry Christmas, Welcome Home (The Fa, La, La, La, La Song)

One of Sean Hannity's producers thought we needed some new Christmas music so she wrote this then sang it and made the music video.  All by herself.

He began every day with a naked woman

Andrew Klavan has a new short story in the current City Journal which is posted on their website.

For those of you who are unacquanted with Mr. Klavan he is a sucessful novelist and screenwriter (works include Don't Say A Word and True Crime) and is one of the small, but growing, number of Hollywood personalities willing to publically admit to being a conservative.

It is said that conservatives in TV, the radio and internet do not do enough to support the work of conservatives in the arts.  There is much truth in this.  When, for example, was the last time you saw Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck invite a conservative writer, director or actor on their television show to discuss their latest project?

Conservatives need to do more than just complain about how left-wing the entertainment industry is.  They need to aggressively support other conservatives when they venture into the arts.

To that end I highly recomend that you pop over to City Journal and read The Windows.  Here is a taste:

He began every day with a naked woman. FemArt.com had a new one each week. He didn’t subscribe to the site. The free 30-second sample video was enough. Explicit, even exploratory, without being overtly sexual or pornographic. Just a nude girl or sometimes two posing or laughing or running on a beach or through the grass or by a lake or near a railroad track. Not the likeliest scenarios, admittedly—he sometimes pitied the women for the harsh stones or gritty sand against their bare flesh—but their images beguiled his imagination and brought him to life.



Then there was e-mail. Notes from the Fever Swamp. Fears; conspiracies; dire predictions. I hear my upstairs neighbors whispering at night. . . . The president is one of them. . . . It’s all foretold in Revelation. . . . They have the materials they need for the Times Square attack. . . .



Sometimes there was a personal threat as well. There was one today, in fact. We’re getting closer, Stein. You can count your days on a single hand. A single finger maybe. . . .

Merry Christmas

The sour and humorless left-wing usual suspencts' heads are exploding over this :)

H/T KisP

That terrible lost Senate seat

Misha has a post up that's just too good not to spread around:

We are getting quite a bit more than just “weary” of listening to Establishment GOP “Pragmatists” whining about O’Donnell and how she “cost us” a Senate seat by letting the primary voters decide who their nominee should be rather than leaving it to the Establishment as they did with ScuzzyFlavah. And what a roaring success that turned out to be, we might add.


But never you mind, you silly peasants who believe that voters should choose their candidates, ousting that outstanding “centrist” Castle meant that we wouldn’t have an “R” in that seat, his actual positions be damned.

He is a forty year career politician who happens to call himself a Republican, as once did Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter and Jim Jeffords. Mr. Castle is a habitual tax raiser. He is unwaveringly pro abortion and he has earned an F- rating from The NRA. He voted for TARP, Porkulus, the auto and banking industry takeovers, Cash for Clunkers as well as Cap and Trade. Most recently, he co-sponsored the disclose act which is nothing more than an assault on the first amendment designed to muzzle his political opposition.


While on the topic of opposition; Mr. Castle has made it clear that were he elected senator, regardless of his political affiliation, he has no intention of opposing current Democrat policies.

What a tremendous loss to the cause of conservatism. How we missed out on never-ending repeats of having to pander to his every whim in order to at least get him to vote with his (allegedly) own party.


We weep, weep we tell you for the future of conservatism now that we have been cruelly robbed of having to tongue-bathe that cretin every time something was up for a vote in the Senate!


Which leads us to the bonus feature of this post. It’s so deceptively simple that we can only feel ashamed that we didn’t see it before. It was right there in front of our bloody eyes!


The solution to Ogabe’s woes is right there. All he needs to do in order to avoid being a lame duck for the next two years and even give him a decent shot at re-election in 2012 is to, wait for it, switch parties!


As soon as the “pragmatists” of the GOP see that “R” after his name, all of his previous actions as well as all of his future proposals with get the full backing and endorsement of the “pragmatist” wing.


He’ll be, nominally, a Republican, and that’s all that matters to those spineless milquetoasts.


There is not enough daylight between Ogabe and Mike Castle’s agenda to register on a thermal sight, yet they’re all tearing their hair out over the horror, the HORROR of the Delaware primary voters ignoring that magnificent “R” after his name. Principles and agendas be damned. To the Rove wing of the GOP, all that matters is party affiliation and whether you can plop a fake “R” in a seat.


If Josef Stalin was still around and chose to run as a “Republican”, they’d have a lip lock on his butt so tight it would take surgery to detach them.


Thatisall.

I coundn't agree more.  The GOP needs to wake up fast to the fact that our own party establishment RINO leadership is our enemy just as much as the Democrats.

I'm kind of with Hitler on this one

CCP NEVER grants that kind of petition.

They just say that the game is functioning as intended.

The best decription of the game I've ever heard was in the YouTube comments to this video:

The point of EVE online is that CCP gave 50 thousand sociopaths WMD's and said "Go play!"

If you're interested in playing respond in the comments and I can get you an extra week of free play.

Remember the left is only one of our enemies

From our friends at Red Planet.

Global Warming DOA

Wes Pruden has a nice post mortem of the global warming hoax in today's Washington Times:

Scams die hard, but eventually they die, and when they do, nobody wants to get close to the corpse. You can get all the hotel rooms you want this week in Cancun.


The global-warming caravan has moved on, bound for a destination in oblivion. The United Nations is hanging the usual lamb chop in the window this week in Mexico for the U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, but the Washington guests are staying home. Nobody wants to get the smell of the corpse on their clothes.


Everybody who imagined himself anybody raced to Copenhagen last year for the global-warming summit, renamed "climate change" when the globe began to cool, as it does from time to time. Some 45,000 delegates, "activists," business representatives and the usual retinue of journalists registered for the party in Copenhagen. This year, only 1,234 journalists registered for the Cancun beach party. The only story there is that there's no story there. The U.N. organizers glumly concede that Cancun won't amount to anything, even by U.N. standards.


Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, who wrote and sponsored the cap-and-trade legislation last year, says he'll be too busy with congressional business (buying stamps for the Christmas cards and getting a haircut and a shoeshine) even to think about going to Cancun. Last year, he joined Speaker Nancy Pelosi and dozens of other congressmen in taking staffers and spouses to the party in Copenhagen. The junket cost taxpayers $400,000, but Copenhagen is a friendly town and a good time was had by all. This year, they're all staying home, learning to live like lame ducks.


The Senate's California ladies, cheerleaders for the global-warming scam only yesterday, can't get far enough away from Cancun this year. Dianne Feinstein says she's not even thinking about the weather. "I haven't really thought about [Cancun], to be honest with you," she tells Politico, the Capitol Hill daily. She still loves the scam, but "no - no, no, no, it's just that I'm not on a committee related to it." She's grateful for small blessings.


Barbara Boxer, who was proud to make global warming her "signature" issue only last year, obviously regards that signature now to be a forgery. She would like to be in Cancun, but she has to stay home to wash her hair. She's not even sending anyone from her staff, willing as congressional staffers always are to party on the taxpayer dime. "I'm sending a statement to Cancun." (Stop the press for that.)


This is another lesson that Washington's swamp fevers inevitably subside. Who now remembers Smoot-Hawley, Quemoy and Matsu, and the Teapot Dome? But these were once issues on which the survival of the known world rested. The only global-warming news of this week was the announcement that the House Select Committee on Global Warming would die with the 111th Congress. Mrs. Pelosi established the committee three years ago to beat the eardrums of one and all, a platform for endless argle-bargle about the causes and effects of climate change. The result was the proposed job-killing national energy tax, but with the Republican sweep, there's no longer an appetite for killing jobs.


Rep. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, the chairman of the doomed committee, organized one final event this week, a splashy daylong exercise in gasbaggery starring the usual suspects assigned to drone on for most of the day about the coming global-warming disasters, the melting of the North Pole and the rising of the seas that would make Denver, Omaha and Kansas City seaside resorts. Wesley Clark was the only former presidential candidate to accept an invitation, and he was a no-show. The star witness of the afternoon session was Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an "environmental attorney" who talked about how "clean energy" is nicer than the other kind. Mr. Markey himself, as bored as everyone else, didn't bother to return after lunch.


The members of the committee can now retire with their scrapbooks of clippings to recall the happy days of hearings about global warming (some of them before "global warming" became "climate change" and "liberals" became "progressives"), about how clean energy could replace smelly oil wells and provide Democrats with the means to enact sweeping climate-change legislation. Who could have foreseen that the only "sweeping" would be the sweeping out of so many Democrats?


When the thrill is gone, the thrill is gone, as star-crossed lovers have learned through the ages, and when a scam collapses, it stays collapsed. The thought is enough to warm hearts all across the globe.

The lie does have a little bit of life left within it but the handwriting is on the wall.

The question now is what shape the boogie man the global left will bring forward to replace it will take.  After all they will not allow themselves to go long without some kind of hobgoblin designed to frighten the masses into surrendering their wealth and liberty.

From now on ask

That means that YOU are listening!

BRADLEY MANNING: POSTER BOY FOR 'DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL'
by Ann Coulter
December 1, 2010


The two biggest stories this week are WikiLeaks' continued publication of classified government documents, which did untold damage to America's national security interests, and the Democrats' fanatical determination to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and allow gays to serve openly in the military.


The mole who allegedly gave WikiLeaks the mountains of secret documents is Pfc. Bradley Manning, Army intelligence analyst and angry gay.


We've heard 1 billion times about the Army translator who just wanted to serve his country, but was cashiered because of whom he loved.


I'll see your Army translator and raise you one Bradley Manning.


According to Bradley's online chats, he was in "an awkward place" both "emotionally and psychologically." So in a snit, he betrayed his country by orchestrating the greatest leak of classified intelligence in U.S. history.


Isn't that in the Army Code of Conduct? You must follow orders at all times. Exceptions will be made for servicemen in an awkward place. Now, who wants a hug? Waitress! Three more apple-tinis!"


According to The New York Times, Bradley sought "moral support" from his "self-described drag queen" boyfriend. Alas, he still felt out of sorts. So why not sell out his country?


In an online chat with a computer hacker, Bradley said he lifted the hundreds of thousands of classified documents by pretending to be listening to a CD labeled "Lady Gaga." Then he acted as if he were singing along with her hit song "Telephone" while frantically downloading classified documents.


I'm not a military man, but I think singing along to Lady Gaga would constitute "telling" under "don't ask, don't tell."


Do you have to actually wear a dress to be captured by the Army's "don't ask, don't tell" dragnet?


What constitutes being "openly" gay now? Bringing a spice rack to basic training? Attending morning drills decked out as a Cher impersonator? Following Anderson Cooper on Twitter?


Also, U.S. military, have you seen a picture of Bradley Manning? The photo I've seen is only from the waist up, but you get the feeling that he's wearing butt-less chaps underneath. He looks like a guy in a soldier costume at the Greenwich Village Halloween parade.


With any luck, Bradley's court-martial will be gayer than a Liza Minelli wedding. It could be the first court-martial in U.S. history to feature ice sculptures and a "Wizard of Oz"-themed gazebo. "Are you going to Bradley's court-martial? I hear Patti LaBelle is going to sing!"


Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail. Gays have always been suspicious of that rationale and perhaps they're right.


The most damaging spies in British history were the Cambridge Five, also called "the "Magnificent Five": Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean and John Cairncross. They were highly placed members of British intelligence, all secretly working for the KGB.


The only one who wasn't gay was Philby. Burgess and Blunt were flamboyantly gay. Indeed, the Russians set Burgess up with a boyfriend as soon as he defected to the Soviet Union.


The Magnificent Five's American compatriot Michael Straight was -- ironically -- bisexual, as was Whittaker Chambers, at least during the period that he was a spy. And of course, there's David Brock.


So many Soviet spies were gay that, according to intelligence reporter Phillip Knightley, the Comintern was referred to as "the Homintern." (I would have called it the "Gay G.B.")


Bradley's friends told the Times they suspected "his desperation for acceptance -- or delusions of grandeur" may have prompted his document dump.


Let's check our "Gay Profile at a Glance" and ... let's see ... desperate for acceptance ... delusions of grandeur ... yep, they're both on the gay subset list!


Obviously, the vast majority of gays are loyal Americans -- and witty and stylish to boot! But a small percentage of gays are going to be narcissistic hothouse flowers like Bradley Manning.


Couldn't they just work for JetBlue? America would be a lot safer right now if gays in an "awkward place" psychologically could do no more damage than grabbing a couple of beers and sliding down the emergency chute.


Look at the disaster one gay created under our punishing "don't ask, don't tell" policy. What else awaits America with the overturning of a policy that was probably put there for a reason (apart from being the only thing Bill Clinton ever did that I agreed with)?


Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations without asking if they serve any purpose.


Why do we have immigration laws? What's with these borders? Why do we have the institution of marriage, anyway? What do we need standardized tests for? Hey, I like Keith Richards -- why not make heroin legal? Let's take a sledgehammer to all these load-bearing walls and just see what happens!


For liberals, gays in the military is a win-win proposition. Either gays in the military works, or it wrecks the military, both of which outcomes they enthusiastically support.


But since you brought up gays in the military, liberals, let's talk about Bradley Manning. He apparently released hundreds of thousands of classified government documents as a result of being a gay man in "an awkward place."


Any discussion of "don't ask, don't tell" should begin with Bradley Manning. Live by the sad anecdote, die by the sad anecdote.


COPYRIGHT 2010 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

Miss Ann is correct that allowing gays to serve openly in the military would be a mistake, however the handwriting is on the wall.  With a Pentagon report that the disruptions would be small and temporary congress will cave and end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in favor of open acceptance.

I'm sorry but in the majority of cases homosexuality is only one of the abnormal characteristics of most homosexuals.  Ask any police officer in a large city with a large gay population and they will tell you the same thing.  Of course there are some who are relentlessly average in everything other than their sexual preference, but they are the minority.

I happen to know a gay couple who moved into my neck of the woods from San Francisco in order to escape the soul destroying toxic weirdness of the San Francisco gay community.  There are similar refugees from San Fran' and Greenwich Village and other gay Meccas living in the suburbs and small towns all across America.

Homosexuality is a mental disorder like autism or schizophrenia.  It may have a genetic basis like Down's Syndrome or it may be the kind of condition that can strike anyone given the right kind of environmental factors early in life.  Or it may be a combination of genetic predisposition that requires environmental factors to activate.  I don't know and as long as the mental health profession continues to bow to political pressure from the homosexual lobby and refuses to classify homosexuality as a mental illness no one else will either.

Bringing people who are inherently unstable into positions where they have access to classified information (not to mention weapons of mass destruction) is a bad idea.