Compared to whom?

Barack Obama said that President Bush falls short as a world leader. Since he has made such a blanket statement, I wonder just who is a good world leader according to him? President Bill Clinton? He was was too busy molesting the hired help to be bothered with what was going on in the world. President Jimmy Cah-tah? Three words: Iran Hostage Crisis and if that isn't enough, here's a fourth: Incompetent. Kofi Annan? If there was ever a man more corrupt in the world's most corrupt organization, it has to be him.

I have just thrown out three of the left's favorite "world leadears" and all three of them are a joke. If Obama wants to suggest any others, I'd would like to hear who he thinks a "world leader" actually is. From the examples that I have given, it's easy to see that the only world leaders in the last 30 years have been Republicans. All the Democrats have been total failures.

Arrogance, thy name is Harry Reid

Prime Minister, oops, House Majority Speaker Harry Reid is on a roll now. After stating that tha Iraq war was lost, he now says that President Bush is in a state of denial about the Iraq war. Why does this seem like deja vu from say, 40 years ago? For those who were not alive then, we had Congress doing what they are trying to do here, micromanage the war in Vietnam. As I pointed out before, since the Democrats have always said that Iraq was another Vietnam, with them being in power, they are going to make sure that it comes to pass.

Thoughts on the Virginia Tech massacre

There's been plenty said about yesterday's events, but for some reason I'm not terribly inclined to say much at this point. I think in a week or so, when more facts come out, things will appear much different than they do now.

As for the issue of gun control, I think it's obvious that the no guns policy the university was so proud of a year ago was a complete and abject failure. Now I don't know if having one or even several CCWs in the building would have prevented the shooting, but I do know it would have evened the odds significantly. As far as I'm concerned, given the choice between jumping out the fourth-story window and shooting back I know which one I'd choose.

So if Vice President Cheney is all that, what is Harry Reid?

(Posted from an e-mail at El-ahrairah's request -- CH)

The latest brou-haha at BYU this year involves the selection of commencement speaker. This year, BYU has invited Vice President Dick Cheney to speak. This generated all kinds of criticism by left-leaning members of the church (yes, they do exist although the Great El-ahrairah thinks they are on the path to apostasy) and BYU decided to even allow these misguided souls to protest his visit (which shocked even me). The SL Tribune, not to be outdone in criticizing the LDS Church, decided to wade in with their two cents worth when one of their resident Mormon-haters, Rebecca Walsh, penned this blurb. Yet again, the Mormon-haters at the SL Tribune need to “get a life” as the very next day, BYU announced that Senate Majority Leader “Dirty” Harry Reid will be speaking there in November. The church’s official statement should be read as it gives a good spanking to the SL Tribune for jumping to conclusions before getting all the facts straight (in typical liberal fashion).

Since all newspapers, even those in Utah, are mostly liberal bastions of stupidity, the articles devotes more time airing liberal talking points from “concerned citizens”, and the Deseret News is no exception. However, every criticism that their “concerned citizen” levels at the vice president can also be thrown right back at “Dirty” Harry Reid, and at least the vice president is not advocating that the United State surrender to terrorists. Brother Reid on the other hand would rather that we should “cut and run” from Iraq and is only to happy to start the Defeato-cratic surrender party to people whose only aim in life it to destroy our freedom and free agency (you know, that eternal principle). Now the question for those who would criticize the Bush administration and vice president in particular is “Do you support stabbing our troops in the back and spitting on their graves a la Vietnam like Brother Reid? Yes or No answers only, no liberal nuance or equivocating.”

I do hope that when “Dirty” Harry comes to town, I can be in the state and take time off to protest his visit to BYU. In the same way that liberals at BYU don’t want the vice president speaking there, I do not want Brother Reid to besmirch the reputation of BYU by even showing his cut-and-run, military-hating, terrorist-loving face there. If liberals want to protest to “speak truth to power”, I want to be there to “speak truth to idiocracy”.

Another example of how Mark Steyn (and the Warren) understand demographics

(posted from an e-mail at El-ahrairah's request -- CH)

All readers of the Warren (how many are there?) will know that the Cap’n has posted before about birth rates and demographics. His last post illustrated just how much influence on the political process gays and liberals (who do not have children) will have 20 years down the line compared to him and his wife (four children).

Mark Steyn has used this to illustrate why Europe will become Eurarabia due to falling birth rates and as a quick example, here is a new item (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/070403/world/egypt_population) from Yahoo! Canada about birth rates in Egypt. For those too lazy to read the news item, the headline sums it all up “Egyptian baby born every 23 seconds”. If Egyptian’s are having kids every 23 seconds, how fast do you think Muslims in Europe are having children? Europeans like to whine and moan about risible theories like global warming, but can’t see the train wreck of population demographics that will arrive 20 years in the future. Maybe they s hould change their tourist slogans to something along the lines of “Europe: Soon to be under new management”.

Gimme Dat New Age Religion!

Downtown Salt Lake City was the scene of a big religious revival Saturday, with thousands listening to music, singing, chanting, and learning of The Gospel.

The Gospel according to Al Gore, that is.

Yep, over 3,000 adherents of the newest of the New Age religions -- Gaia worship -- gathered in SLC to spread the Good Word. This was held in conjunction with other revivals across the nation. The goal is to preach the Good Word of Climate Change and force (via Congressional fiat) that everyone obeys it. I mean, cutting your carbon emissions by 80% in 43 years is going to take alot of sacrifice (and you damn well better do it, heretic).

But what about all that CO2 that the event itself emitted? I mean, celebrities and rock groups don't walk to these events, you know. And they don't even ride in electric cars, either. All those stretch limos and private jets have big carbon footprints.

Never fear, o ye of little faith. Our public utility, Rocky Mountain Power, stepped in and provided some indulgences in the form of carbon credits to absolve the participants for their frivolous gas-guzzling. I'm not sure how RMP stopped the emission of 11 tons of carbon; I don't remember them shutting down their coal- or gas-fired plants during the event. But they said they did it, and that's enough for those who Truly Believe.

That's the beauty of the indulgence carbon credit system: All it takes is a little donation to the environmentally-friendly charity of your choice, and Gaia will forgive all.

More Climate Change Nuttiness

In their zeal to convince everyone and anyone that "We're All Gonna DIE and It's George Bush's Fault" the Global Warming Believers and their mouthpieces in the LameStreamMedia have reached new highs (or lows) in ridiculousness. No lie is too obvious, no fact is beyond distortion for this crowd.

An example was found in today's Deseret News. In a story from the New York Times, Global Warming is now being called a national security issue. But true to form, some of the examples they use are completely invalid and laughably inaccurate.

For starters, they claim that "[t]he effects of global warming...could lead to large-scale migrations, increased border tensions, the spread of disease and conflicts over food and water. All could lead to direct involvement by the U.S. military."

Hmmm. Could Global Warming really produce all that chaos? Helpfully, Peter Schwartz, a consultant on the panel provided some examples, such as:

"Just look at Somalia in the early 1990s," Schwartz said. "You had disruption
driven by drought, leading to the collapse of a society, humanitarian relief
efforts, and then disastrous U.S. military intervention. That event is
prototypical of the future."

Yes, Somalia was indeed in a famine in the early 1990's, but that was largely due to a massive civil war that disrupted the lines of supply. And the US relief efforts were hardly "disastrous"; the original deployment of troops stopped the fighting and restored the aid shipments.

Somalia didn't become "disastrous" until military novice Bill Clinton withdrew most of the troops and then tried to nab warload Mohammed Farah Aidid with a few hundred lightly-armed Army Rangers.

Not satisified with that non-sequitur, the paper contains this hilarious gem:

Other recent studies have shown that drought and scant water have already
fueled conflicts in global hot spots like Afghanistan.

Wow! Afghanistan was a peaceful paradise until the drought showed up. Who knew? I mean, it's not as if the place has been in a civil war since the mid-70's that was created and fueled by our old friends the Soviets. If only they could get more rain, then everything would be better.

It's blatantly stupid arguments like this one that cause me to oppose the Global Warming crowd. They have proved time and time again that they will say anything to advance their cause, even if it's blatantly false. They simply cannot be trusted.