If ever the book was better than the movie...

Please, I urge you not to spend your money, not to rush out and purchase a ticket to see the latest Hollywood has to offer. Instead spend your money, probably considerably less if you get it used, on the book that inspired the movie. This movie of which I speak is, "Shooter". The book by the way is, "Point of Impact" by Stephen Hunter. I cannot properly express to you my disappointment in this waste of film. I WANT MY MONEY BACK! Every "America is a big, nasty, horrible country" cliche' is used. From conspiracies that lead to the upper reaches of the government, to third world countries feeling the wrath of our military all to secure, that's right you guessed it OIL. Give me a break. It is such a shame because the book is great. I highly recommend it. But, if you have any question as to the anti-American leanings of this movie just read the N.Y. Times review of this seemingly, otherwise, full-tilt action flick. Trust me on this, when was the last time the Times actually recommended an action movie that was not foreign? Even the leftist relic rag Rolling Stone gives it a positive review. I should have read the cast list before hand. Any movie with Danny Glover playing a CIA-type character should be avoided. And what a neat little trick to have Ned Beatty playing a dirty Senator from Montana. Wait... I might not get the link. Oh yeah, wait a minute I know a former Senator from Wyoming (close enough) that the left absolutely despises. Coincidence, I think so. Hey Ned, I still cannot forget "Deliverance", SQUEEEK! Also, you cannot have a good, "America is bad" movie without the mention of Abu Ghraib, evil military contractors, and a Secretary of Defense that lies to the people, right? This movie is a joke. I did a little digging and figured out how the author of an otherwise worthy book could give up his work to be twisted and turned into this trash. Well it turns out Stephen Hunter writes for the Washington Post. That is not the surprising part, the surprising part is how he wrote such a commendable book in the first place. Bottom line...buy the book enjoy it, do not buy a ticket to this movie. Instead go see "300" again it is better the second time.

God Bless The U. S. Military...GOE

I love this country, I surely do. Yesterday just furthered that love. You would never know it by reading or listening to the press, but thousands and thousands of vets, active duty, friends, parents, supporters, wives and children gathered together on Mar. 17, 2007 in Washington D.C. to let their faces be seen and their voices be heard by all the traitors and terrorist supporters that could stand the cold. Yep, Cindy "the shame" Sheehan was on hand on their side (Casey is probably doing somersaults in his grave, God rest him). But I still could not have been prouder. There were Army vets, Navy vets, former devil dogs, Coasties, and Air force vets. And man, were there bikers. Who says America is a shadow of its former self. Bunk. Thousand of strong, patriotic folks braved the cold for hours to stand watch on our beloved memorials, and to let the despicable, cowardice, leftists know they do not have everyone fooled. America is not dead or dying. It is vibrant and vigorous. A quick aside, I have one quick way to get a hand on the Anbhar Province. Gather up all those mustered on Saturday in and around the "Wall", and drop them in there. All those jihadists would have to find a new pair of trousers. Those gathered were a formidable presence.

I lost my temper and told a silly looking anti-America type dressed up with fake-bloodied BDU's and grotesque makeup to, "F&$* Off". Can't remember when I have last used the "F" word in public, it was very therapeutic. My brother-in-law found time to confront any protester that came by with a sign and tell them that they were wrong; especially the one carrying a sign that read, "No nukes for U.S.A. and Israel". Big M, asked, "What about the rest of the world?"

The silly looking protester lady said, "Yeah them too.."

Big M replied, "Well you need to fix your sign then."

My Pop seemed to be just happy. Happy in a way a man is who is surrounded by friends. I was cursing, Big M was making the protester look silly, and Pop was just happy to warm his old heart. It was great.

You'll never read about this, but I was there to verify. Trust me. Just when Cindy "the shame" was introduced and began spouting on about impeachment, surrender, and the like, there were a cacophony of Bronx cheers from our side. I would not be telling lies when I tell you our crowd was so loud that that nasty wench's voice could not be easily made out, even with her friggin' megaphone. It was something to be heard.

There was not much violence. I repeat not much. I watched a ridiculous looking man (picture a community college sociology professor) carrying a rainbow peace flag try and push his way, quickly, through our crowd. The filthy flag bearer was bumped. He turned and pushed back. He pushed the wrong person. One of the widest bikers in our crowd immediately launched the silly protester and his flag easily five feet...in the air. The less-than-intelligent America-hater landed right on his ear. I watched the whole thing and had to laugh at the silly fellow and his flag. Who did he think he was dealing with? The cops had to escort the soiled traitor on his way. I will not exaggerate, the big biker received handshakes, one of them mine.

One of the most poignant moments was when a rather large group of hope-the-terrorists-win types tried to march too close to our crowd while carrying a sign which read, "Pittsburghers for Peace". They were met with a virtual wall of Biker Vets. Who would not let them pass while carrying their surrender flag. There is an image of the beginning of the encounter to the left. Long story short, the crowd of protesters did not pass easily by. In fact they had to leave the path and take the grass, and they did not carry their flags with them.

There were so many bikers I would not dare to venture a guess as to how many were present. There were probably just as many other vets who would not be considered bikers. There were young looking new recruit types. There were older looking WWII vets, even one old fellow in dress blues bearing a boatswain's mate second class badge. There were purple heart vets, and those still wearing their green berets. It was uplifting to say the least.

One thing that makes me feel better about the youth of America was something that happened just before we left the mall. As we were about leave the lawn, on the edge of the memorial area were two men carrying a sign. It read, "stop the war on troop morale". It was carried on one side by a salt and pepper haired gentleman and a punkish looking kid. The two turned out to be father and son. It took a while for most passersby to realize the sign was in support of the troops. A person would not have known it by looking at the two odd looking guys. To further prove his point, the older of the two showed a smaller sign he also had. It read, "Besides Fascism, Socialism, Communism, and Tyranny, war never solved anything". The sign definitely beat the tiresome Bush impeachment signs the terrorist supporters carried.

It really is a shame thinking about the lack of coverage given our gathering yesterday. If one thing was accomplished at least I realize that my own and my family's ideals are shared by others, a lot of others. It seems rather selfish of the powers that be in the MSM to only give coverage of one side of the political argument in Washington. Your average simple, hardworking shlub who gets his news in little nuggets provided by T.V. and radio will never know about the men and women countering the America haters who always have their voices heard by the welcoming ears of the network media controllers.

America lives. Tell your friends. Tell your family. Tell your co-workers. America lives and will live because of the people I saw and stood proudly with yesterday. Those people who are proud to have worn the uniform, and those who are proud of them. And all these people in turn are proud of all those in uniform now and in the future. I hope they know and everyone knows.

To view more pictures and quick footage of the "Gathering of Eagles" click here.

A Famous, Stupid Person is Never Confronted...

It appears to be en vogue for celebrities and wanna-be's to tell their interviewers how they think the current President of the United States is the worst president ever. I have just one little question for these stalwarts of intellectual integrity. "If you suppose that President George W. Bush is the worst president ever, then who in your opinion is the second worst?" I, being somewhat logical, would wait while my interviewee stammered and "uh"-ed their way to a circuitous answer that probably would be no more than quickly ending the interview. For you see if one is actually versed in the histories of our other 42 presidents, one could not honestly say that President Bush is our worst ever. Jimmy Carter presided over the double whammy of a recession and high inflation, we have neither now. James Buchanan did little to prevent southern states from seceding from the union which immediately led to the Civil War. Perhaps that is just a bit worse than our current situation. But what do I know? I am not famous. This is the only forum I have. Last time I checked I was not being called for my opinion by a big media outlet, like Donald Trump. It is easy for these celebrities to take this route. No one in the MSM will question a statement that serves to further their own anti-Bush agenda. It is pathetic, dishonest, and lacking in any identifiable backbone. President Bush may not be the best president ever (that remains to be seen). One thing that these gutless statements fail to take into account is the possibility of a positive outcome in Iraq. What these statements simply do is allow these celebrities to appear complicant to the radical fringe of left-wing society. How would their ideas stand against a free, Democratic, non-islamonazi Iraq in the future. Hey, at least President Bush was never impeached like Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.

I take offense to...

1)I take offense to politicians making decisions because they think the political wind will blow in their favor.
2)I take offense to the media and politicians telling me what they think is most important for me. They do not know me.
3)I take offense to the left wing making mountains out of molehills, i.e. Valerie Plame, the Gonzalez firings, terrorist videos, individual military members complaining (we complain, if we did not then I would start worrying.), George Allen using the word "mukaka", etc.
4)I take offense to the media championing causes that do not favor our country, period.
5)I take offense to media members claiming they are objective journalists, and then show our enemies in a positive light.
6)I take offense to the left saying the military, of which I am a member, cannot accomplish our mission.
7)I take offense to the media and politicians thinking that the American people are stupid.
8)I take offense to people calling my Commander in Chief a buffoon, a political stooge, a Nazi, etc. What does that say about the new recruits and the current military men and women?
9)I take offense to the democratically led congress thinking they can weaken our military.
10)I take offense to God being taken offense to. (That's for you Mom.)
11)I take offense to the emasculation of the American Male.
12)I take offense to Homosexuals comparing their "struggle" to that of African-Americans, women, and other formerly downtrodden minorities' struggles.
13)I take offense to the 21st Century creation of new rights, somehow found in "new" readings of the U.S. Constitution.
14)I take offense to someone creating greeting cards to send to a woman to make her feel better about a decision to have an abortion.
15)I take offense to self-proclaimed, foreign, strongmen declaring our country, our President, our people, and our American way of life are bad, immoral, unjust, etc.
16)I take offense to pseudointellectuals rewriting history to further their political agenda.
17)I take offense to illogical, silly, and just plain waste-of time litigation.
18)I take offense to the weakening of American interests worldwide by Democrats.
19)I take offense to pointless congressional hearings.
20)I take offense to our American holidays being attacked.
21)I take offense to Rep John Murtha (PA).
22)I take offense to Moveon.org.
23)I take offense to feeling sorry for one's self.
24)I take offense to Europeans believing Americans are a force for evil.
25)I take offense to teachers with a liberal agenda.
26)I take offense to attacks on the Second Amendment.
27)I take offense to Judges legislating from the bench.
28)I take offense to athletes taking steroids.
29)I take offense to people suing to take down crosses.
30)I take offense to celebrities' self-perceived ideas of entitlement.
31)I take offense to illegal immigration.
32)I take offense to intellectual close-mindedness.
33)I take offense to Mumia-Abu-Jamal.
34)I take offense to people who fight against the death penalty but yet support abortion.
35)I take offense to Michael Moore, Al Franken, Cindy Sheehan, et al.
36)I take offense to Communists, Socialists, Dictators, islamo-fascists, terrorists, and all who support them.
37)I take offense to handouts.
38)I take offense to the deliberate killing of innocents.
39)I take offense to those who believe Global Warming is the fault of mankind.
40)I take offense to McCain-Feingold.
41)I take offense to unions using dues to support specific political causes.
42)I take offense to Jimmy Carter.
43)I take offense to people calling middle America, "fly-over-country".
44)I take offense to the French.
45)I take offense to the lack of profiling during airport screenings.
46)I take offense to so-called Americans taking offense to the American flag.
47)I take offense to political correctness.
48)I take offense to affirmative action.
49)I take offense to Internationalism, and the U.N.
50)I take offense and will respond with vigorous fury to all those who threaten America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God...

to be continued...

A Real Test For Our Allies

Jacque Chirac, that stalwart of capitalistic, democratic, western power, has recently expressed to the world press that the U.S.'s goal of creating a missile defense shield, which would also protect its allies in Europe, is only more of a reason for Russia to bark and complain about U.S. aggression. The U. S. has reiterated its goals for the defense sytstem and that it is to protect itself against rogue states, e.g. N. Korea, Iran, etc. I have searched my conscious and I have come up with only one reason that a world leader would make himself a significant roadblock to U.S. defense. That reason is money. France has aided Iraq for years while Iraq was under the internationally accepted non locos parentes doctrine set forth through U.N. legislation. Money seems to be a more powerful motive for the frogs. No surprise. France thinks that a complex anti-missile, defense systems that would protect a country from nuclear attack would only give an enemy further reason to attack. Logic does not support that argument. But, fiduciary reasoning does. France helped build Iraq's first nuclear power plant that was conveniantly crushed by Israeli airstrikes. If Europe is fully protected by U.S. weapons sytems, then where does France have to go to find defense contract monies? In lies the French conundrum. The funny thing is that short term memory does not support the French reasoning. Our young men gave more than anyone can give to save the frogs sixty years ago and they spit on us as unlearned western Yankees.

I do not know much but how would France respond when we cut off all ties with their weak-kneed, easily swayed, pathetic excuse for a democracy. Let's give it a shot.

Current Middle East Redux Iron Curtain?

Christopher Orlet, writing in today's American Spectator, espouses an interesting way to view the current socio-political climate in the Middle East. He compares it to the dreaded Iron Curtain of Eastern Europe circa the 1980's. His article does ring true when he compares popular euro-leftist opinion of Communism then and popular euro-leftist opinion of Islamic culture now. Those opinions are comparable. One can easily recognize their sentimental feelings being stirred, for the big, bad U.S. is still seen the instigator. Orlet fails to mention that point although it feels implied. The article compares the two ideologies-one actually being an economic system the other being a religion-rather superficially and shows the European idea of dealing with the burgeoning, Muslim quasi-state by revisiting apartheid. My first question for the Europeans is, how well have separate but equal societies fared, hmm? Orlet's article does give plenty of food for thought, but fails to look close enough at current and past Islamic culture. He writes of the similarities between Eastern Europe and the Middle East, the closed culture, lack of political freedoms, oppression of women, etc. And briefly, he writes of the disparities, chiefly being that dissidents in the past Iron Curtain did fear nasty visits from cultural police and possibly incarceration, while dissidents in today's Islamic culture fear...well...death. But, there is one glaring factor as well as a disparity that Orlet fails to mention. That being OIL. Which leads to an idea which has been put up by Western leaders on both sides of the political aisle. Lessen or extinguish the West's demand for said oil. For you see although comparisons can easily be made between 20th Century Communism and 21st Century Islam, Communism did not have the financial clout or backing. It did not have that supportive commodity as the Imams do today. Reagan, Thatcher, and the other stalwarts of Western Capitalism and strength slowly squeezed and starved the political machine behind that Iron Curtain. Reagan, et al spent the Russkies and their neighbors into submission. I do not believe we presently could outspend these current Islamic leaders, nor do I think that they would even care.

Personally I have recently spent time in the Middle East. I have trouble truly seeing similarities. I do not believe that the local populace of Eastern Europe looked down their noses at Americans that happened to visit. I do not believe that the female portion of the population were considered such second-class as they are in and around the Persian Gulf. Lastly, and to further a point made above, I do not believe that the influx of western monies was even close to what is now flowing into the region through commerce and investment. Double-edged sword, I think so. Western companies being capitalists make profit from their investments and presence in the region, while at the same time propping up Islamo-Fascists.

Finally, an article here at MC just would not be the same if this writer did not strongly disagree with another writer's assertion. Orlet writes in his last paragraph that Islamists today are just like "Medieval Christianity" of the past. No, Mr. Orlet the Islamists today are just like the Medieval Islamists of the past. What you fail to assert is that while we have evolved, or became enlightened, or-give it a name-Islamists are still theoretically repelling the Crusaders, albeit with Western petro-dollars/euros.

Hey George Will...You're Wrong Again!

George Will is not what we would call a favorite here at MC. This will approximately be the third time in which this author has taken umbrage with an article ol' George has written. His specific point in his article today {click here} is that conservatives and Republicans et al should look closer at and further embrace the current leading GOP candidates for the '08 presidential nomination. Basically he is saying this is what we are presented with and this is who we should support, end of story. He drives his point home in his final paragraph by writing that Guiliani's, Romney's, and McCain's brands of conservativism, "should be satisfactory to most conservatives". My question is why should we have to settle? And why should a candidate just be satisfactory? By my calculations it is at least 600 days until the election. And I, being on the periphary of political discourse, can easily come up with three better, more conservative candidates that are personally and exceedingly more suitable than the three aforementioned gentlemen. George mentions first in his article the darling of the independents, Arizona Senator John McCain. He points out that McCain opposed Bush's first tax cuts and the liberal media described it as pandering. Pandering or not he was wrong. McCain OPPOSED the tax cuts! If he opposes tax cuts i.e. he is not conservative. Tax cuts are almost always necessary. Has the Senator seen federal tax revenues lately? And let us not even mention McCain/Feingold, which stands for itself as a complete afront to the first amendment. The other two candidates are at least a bit more pleasing to the conservative palette than Sen. McCain. Romney for his political prowess and speech-giving abilities, and Guiliani for his tough demeanor and strong stand on terrorism. But are either the best candidates for our party? At the present it is still early, and somehow drafting a new more conservative, Reaganesque candidate is not outside the realm of possibility. Anyone heard of Fred Thompson?

In case you missed it...

The USA Today featured an article last fall (Sept. 6) which touted the news of the discovery of a vast oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. The article reported that already a test area in what is called “Jack Field”, is yielding 6,000 barrels of oil per day. It also reported the estimates that at least 3 billion barrels and as much as 15 billion barrels may be contained there in. As any normal driving American can see from the past news like this has propelled oil prices and likewise prices at the pump fluctuate sharply downward and upward seemingly without sound, physical reasoning. The surprising things about the article (besides it being such positive news) were that on the same page was a graph, which the USA Today calls Snapshots, showing that a poll of Americans suggested that most people think high gas prices were here to stay and that they will even go higher in the future. Also in the article is a prediction, by the author I suppose, that this recent test and the field’s future production would do nothing to “shave oil prices in the near term”. Perhaps a retraction should have been published by the “newspaper”. Did not happen.
What this poll and prediction (HA!) show is that this kind of reporting is hardly news. News in the meaningful way that sticks to facts, I mean. It clearly shows the non-utility of printing the results of polls. The poll, which was positioned at approximately the 8:00 position from the oil field article, is brain candy, space-taking, and useless. Gallup conducted the poll for what? All it shows is that when asked Americans respond with their hearts or how they feel. “Gas prices are too high and they are going to stay that way!” spouts the normally ignorant, negative public. It still is not news. It clearly affects nothing but our visual neurons. In fact all it shows is that the public can easily be flat wrong.
What the article clearly shows and reports correctly is that current prices of a commodity are clearly influenced by our collective paradigm. And now this paradigm may shift. It also collaterally shows the ingenuity of the American mind. This discovery and test were as the article states accomplished using technology which, “wasn’t available…Until several years ago”. I for one never had realistic doubts. For you see we Americans do not give up easily. If a current technology does not work then we will create an entire new one.
Maybe our own paradigm shift is in order when we first hear of the constant, negative news. Maybe we should just spin it for our selves. Everyday.

Right off the top of my head...

I have not scene the headlines today, but I expect they are trumpeting a major "defeat" for the Bush administration. I am of course referring to the Libby verdict handed down yesterday. Is it not fortunate that the case is referenced in such a way? I mean the way in which everyone calls it the "Scooter Libby" trial. It is sort of poetic that such a menial case filled with nonsensical minutia should have a rather convenient childish moniker. And would everyone please stop talking about the "outing" of a covert agent. Valerie Plame was not under anything. If a person is not under something, e.g. cover, they cannot be outed. Bottom line end of story. Do not listen to the talking heads on the left, do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars, and do not believe these idiots who still refer to this as a leak case. Scooter Libby was basically charged with perjury. In and of itself a fairly serious crime. I will give Fitzgerald that. But what a joke. I saw Plame's husband on T.V. last night babbling on about "his wife's life being in danger" and "the Bush administration targeting him". Please...the only danger his wife was in was if her sashimi appetizer was not fresh. There was no underlying crime! This case was not about Plame, Wilson, Bush, Cheney, or even Iraq. It was about a guy being grilled in front of a grand jury for eight hours by a special counsel with no oversight who needed to produce results. The funniest thing about this case is that it boils down to a "he said...she said" argument. Personally I wish I could sue Mr. Fitzgerald for my amount of tax dollars that were spent investigating, questioning, sleuthing, and only producing this. This, to borrow from old Billy S., much ado about nothing.

Thou Shall Not Besmirch Our Hollowed Ground

On March 17, 2007, a gathering of concerned, peeved, upset, and flat-out fed up veterans, family mebers, and friends will set out to protect an intrinsically valuable memorial. "The Wall", or the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial is a forboding presence amongst grand statues and buildings in our nation's capital. It holds a tender spot in many American's hearts. To have a a bunch of whacked-out leftist losers try and desecrate it to further their twisted view of reality is on the verge of blasphemy. I myself cannot stand any more. I shall put my money where my typing fingers are. My pop and yours truly will be amongst those standing proudly in defense of the black, granite structure which holds the names of those fallen during the Vietnam War. I encourage all my readers to take time away from their normal St. Patrick's Day celebrations and celebrate in a different way this year and join other proud Americans in a seldom seen show of honor, patriotism, and support for our troops, our veterans, and America as a whole.

". . .that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion. . . that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. . ."

Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 19 1863