WUI (Writing under the influence)

Answer: the same linguistic relativism. If you are against illegal immigration, you are either against immigration or you are a racist. If you don't believe that humans cause global warming, you don't believe global warming actually occurs or you just don't care about environment or, in extreme cases, you are a Holocaust denier.

Liberals can't argue facts, they have to resort to linguistic relativism to find any support for their arguments.

I don't think the credit for abolishing communism in Europe can be claimed by one individual so I'm not particularly opposed to extend it to yet another anti-communism hero.

Historians continue to debate who was more responsible for the final collapse of the Soviet Union, Ronald Reagan or Mikhail Gorbachev. At The Wall Street Journal, our version of that debate concerns whether to give more credit to the Gipper, or to George Melloan.

We'll concede Reagan tipped the scales with the arms buildup, SDI and the "evil empire" speech. But George--who is retiring this week as a columnist and Deputy Editor of the Editorial Page after 54 years at the Journal--favored Reagan's policies before Reagan and devoted much of his career to reporting on and resisting that totalitarian temptation. Significantly, he arrived in Brussels to edit the Wall Street Journal Europe's editorial pages in 1990, and soon thereafter the Soviet Union collapsed. Coincidence? We doubt it, comrade.

Thank you.

Relatives of Polish officers killed on Joseph Stalin’s orders in the Katyn massacre are to take Russia to the European Court of Human Rights. They demand that Russia disclose the full truth about the killings.

Stalin’s secret police killed 21,587 Polish Army reservists in Katyn on the grounds that they were “hardened and uncompromising enemies of Soviet authority”. Russia has refused to prosecute surviving suspects or reveal their names. It is keeping two-thirds of the files on the subject classified, and has classed the murders as an ordinary crime whose statute of limitations has expired.

So Bush and Republicans blink and start threatening (big) oil companies with sanctions if the price of gas doesn't go back down. But the deranged left is not satisfied:

[H]e [does not] possess human empathy for Americans (or citizens of any other nation) -- He just spouts words that actually mean nothing to him; someone just told him to say them.

This people blame Bush for everything. They blame him for market forces. They blame him for insatiable thirst China's economy has for oil. Where are their calls to limit the same insatiable thirst that our government has for gas taxes? 60 cents per gallon.

How pathetic and miserable their lives have to be! They probably wake up in the morning and blame Bush if it rains and blame him if it shines because it's a sure sign of man-made global warming.

The best example of their collective insanity is this message that was sent to Grovenet when, after a few days of inactivity, somebody inquired whether the group was still alive and well:

It still works.
Some of us are contemplating Iran, the mideast mess, the wondering whether Bush will raise the security alert level to orang or red just before the election to stir up fearful emotions and hopefully save his hide for his last miserable years in office.

I'm contemplating how Carter screwed up Iran in the first place and how Clinton vetoed ANWR drilling.

As I'm preparing for my short trip to Poland, I'm buying small gifts for people I'll be visiting. Most gifts are alcoholic beverages, of course. People I'm going to visit have taken full advantage of capitalism and are doing much better, in many cases, than I do. But a bottle of good Kentucky or Tennessee Bourbon will be appreciated even by Poland's nouvo riche.

I'm also reading that the State Department is offering a series of suggestions for Americans traveling abroad on how they can help improve America's battered international image.

So to follow my government in lock step, I've purchased this T-shirt so I can show Europeans that I'm really taking seriously the advise of my own government.

  

  

I can't miss the national day of illegal immigrant protest but at least I will be away on May 5th so I won't have to witness that pathetic excuse for a holiday. I will be traveling on May 3rd, a much more important (at least to me) anniversary for a nation that actually created something worthwhile. Speaking of May 1st and illegal immigration, a writer to CNN's Lou Dobbs' Show suggested that the national strike was a great idea and should be extended to at least a full year. Great idea. Somehow I thing the country would survive. Can't say the same about Mexico.

Lastly, there was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration of the Carousel program in Woodburn this weekend but it has moved to Mexican Consulate in Portland. It's partially a manifest to successful demonstrations of this program in the past. I think the Mexican Consulate hopes that the Portland caps will not be as tolerant as their counterparts in other parts of Oregon.

The protest will take place at the Mexican Consulate office located at 1234 SW Morrison, Portland (corner of 12th and Morrison) this Saturday, April 22, 2006 starting at 9:30 to 10:00. The rally will be peaceful and respectful to the people in the area. This is how everybody will know Republicans are protesting for a change.

$854 to Gdansk with Lufthansa
$918 to Gdansk with SAS

Easy choice. I will have a couple of Tuborgs in Copenhagen. It's amazing to see people drinking beer early in the morning. It's even more fun to join.

Support Denmark.

(I still have my private embargo on German products and services making this choice that much easier.)

The lefties on Grovenet often complain that America is becoming less like America that it used to be.

America is unique in the world and I feel it is becoming less America-like, with those in leadership positions in America who are ignoring our Constitution and various American laws and American rights & freedoms, who are running the country into an un-American condition -- for their own personal greed and agendas, who lie to us -- the very people they are supposed to represent and take care of domestically and in the world.

This is very puzzling to me because I don't know what Americas they are talking about. When was America the way they want it to be? If anything America is becoming less like America I came to because of their crazy ideas.
In any case, today's WSJ editorial agrees with the view that America is dimming. But, obviously, it blames the lefties for it. It describes how lawyers and over-regulation are making more and more difficult to make business in the US and why many companies are moving abroad.

Mr. Greenberg hasn't dimmed, but he believes America has. "You couldn't build an AIG today," he explains. Overbearing regulators, new corporate governance rules, protectionism, a failing tort system, prosecutors unleashed--these, as he sees them, are the obstacles to corporate greatness. And Mr. Greenberg is uniquely positioned to know.
It isn't just that over 38 years he transformed a tiny operation into a global insurance empire currently valued at $169 billion, a feat that even detractors--and he has many--admit counts as one of the great corporate success stories. It's that Mr. Greenberg was front and center to witness how prosecutors, regulators and lawyers could bring that success to its knees, practically overnight. "Why is it that private equity is growing as fast as it is. . . . Why are public companies not doing as well? Once [a country] gets a reputation that way, once it loses momentum, it takes quite a while to regain it. It doesn't happen overnight," says Mr. Greenberg.
[...]
"One of the biggest problems" facing America's competitiveness at the moment "is regulation," he states. He notes the legislative fiasco that flowed out of Enron--Sarbanes-Oxley. "Any time you publish regulations in a crisis mode, you probably do it wrong," he says, and as proof he points to all the companies now listing in London rather than New York. "Friends don't let friends regulate in a crisis," he jokes.

Corporate governance changes alone would make a new AIG impossible. Mr. Greenberg notes that when AIG started, it had almost entirely an "inside" board, made up of senior partners deeply involved in the business. "And we obviously did something right because we became the largest insurance company in history." Today's intense focus on outsiders and independence limits the expertise. "A board of directors can't run a company. They can oversee a strategy, but they can't be involved day to day in a company, otherwise you get nothing done."
[...]
At least for now, Mr. Greenberg is sticking with his private companies, which he calls "more fun," since they allow him to "invest in the next generation of opportunities." He's eyeing China, which has a historical symmetry: Cornelius Vander Starr, his mentor, started his first insurance agency there in 1919. Mr. Greenberg just returned from a trip, "encouraged" by Beijing's new plans to boost per capita income (i.e., more people able to buy insurance) and set up a "social safety net." Anyone who believes "China will become an irritant or a problem in the international arena lacks an understanding of the immense issues they have to deal with at home." He also has a fondness for China, since "it's nice to go to a country where they don't pay as much attention to the headlines." Only, it seems, to the bottom line.

Yes, the US maybe becoming less like the US many of us immigrants wanted to come to. It's obviously still worth staying. But it is also important to keep fighting for those ideals that made this the great nation it is and that the lefties want to undermine.

...than I will ever be.





But it has to stay that way for now...

NY Times Profit Falls in First Quarter

Consumer sentiment improves in April

I don't think so. The fewer people read NYT, the sooner will Americans discover how great this economy really is. Unlike the mess the Old Europe finds itself in.

Some on Grovenet are all wet about a small group of West Point Graduates who have come out against the war in Iraq. Looking at their website, one should easily dismiss their reasons for opposing the war. They all have been debunked.

On the other hand, we have Vets for Freedom that, unlike the other group,

[...] was founded by a group of Iraq and Afganistan [sic] War veterans who believe in the mission of freedom, specifically Operation Iraqi Freedom, but who have become frustrated with the way the operation has been politicized and reported to the home front.

In January 2006, this group of veterans, enlisted personnel, and officers decided to take action. The result was the creation of Vets for Freedom, a non-profit advocacy group whose mission is to promote the unbiased, nonpartisan truth of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to educate the public and mobilize public support for the Global War on Terror.

The founders and members of Vets for Freedom have witnessed the firsthand events, both the successes and failures, of the Iraq War. While their voice has largely been ignored by many policymakers and the media, they have earned the right to be heard and will use this organization to lend their insights to this worthy cause.

The executive director of Vets for Freedom, who served two tours in Iraq with the Marines before being wounded in action, says in his guest editorial in today's Washington Post that people like West Point Graduates against the War, CodePink, MoveOn.org, John Murtha do not represent most troops' views.

In view of his distinguished military career, John Murtha has been the subject of much attention from the media and is a sought-after spokesman for opponents of the Iraq war. He has earned the right to speak. But his comments supposedly expressing the negative views of those who have and are now serving in the Middle East run counter to what I and others know and hear from our own colleagues -- from junior officers to the enlisted backbone of our fighting force.

Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

Like so many others past and present, I proudly volunteered to serve in the military. I served one tour in Iraq and then volunteered to go back. Veterans continue to make clear that they are determined to succeed in Iraq. They are making this clear the best way they can: by volunteering to go back for third and sometimes fourth deployments. This fact is backed up by official Pentagon recruitment reports released as recently as Monday.

The morale of the trigger-pulling class of today's fighting force is strong. Unfortunately, we have not had a microphone or media audience willing to report our comments. Despite this frustration, our military continues to proudly dedicate itself to the mission at hand: a free, democratic and stable Iraq and a more secure America. All citizens have a right to express their views on this important national challenge, and all should be heard. Veterans ask no more, and they deserve no less.

It's clear the anti-American left wants the US to lose in Iraq. This is why it's important to keep the power in Republican hands (while holding our collective nose) so the left has no chance to withdraw from Iraq prematurely. The worst thing they fear is that the US may win and make the world even better place. That would completely discredit their policies and make them the minority party for generations.

This guest editorial in today's Wall Street Journal written by Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, made me think about a guy who often posts on Grovenet about all things that are wrong with the US, the Bush administration and us Americans. One of his biggest pet peeves is that most people are either oblivious or don't care about the so called man-made global warming.

The most recent Gallup poll (March, 2006) of Americans' attitudes on various environmental issues has revealed that there has been virtually no change in the last 17 years in the fraction of people worried about global warming. Only 36 percent of 1,000 adults polled in mid-March said that they worried a "great deal" about global warming. That increased to 62 percent when worrying by at least "a fair amount" was included. While this percentage is significantly higher than it was only two years ago (51 percent), it is lower than it has been in some previous years, with the peak number of worriers being 72 percent in 2000.

So he wrote recently:

My point is that, one of the reasons society chooses to ignore global warming, is trust. Who can a lay person believe? Do you listen to the scientists? Do you listen to Jerry Falwell or George Bush? Do you listen to Detroit, or do you listen to the leaders in California where this issue is so immediate? People don't know who is telling the truth and who is not, so they tune it out and they do nothing. Worse, they buy SUV's and consider their choice "a right". "Me first and get out of my way. The tree huggers don't want me to be happy. They want everything I've worked so hard for."

What rubbish!

I would say I would listen to scientists. The problem, as the editorial points out, is that scientist are people too, mostly employed by universities relaying on government grant money. To get the money for further research they have to come up with a good reason. The editorial also says that the honest scientists who dissent from the "consensus" view on global warming are bullied into silence or changing their views altogether. So I have to relay on common sense and history: I just can't imagine that we could change Earth's climate; the same scientists cried about global cooling only 30 years ago; the Sun, it seems, goes through cycles and it may be in one of those cycles that cause global warming right now. I would say: let's wait a few more decades before we destroy our economy in name of pseudo science.

But the guy on Grovenet is convinced that there is a war against the "consensus" scientists waged by the skeptics, deniers and, of course, the Bush administration, and that there is no more time left and we have to act. And he is ready to act:

If? There you go again. What will it take for you o act? At what point will you be convinced we have a problem? IS it not logical that, even if this is all a cruel joke, and we've tricked ourselves with the evidence, wouldn't it be prudent to start sooner rather than later just on the possibility this is for real? And if you knew anything about global warming you'd know the answer to the latter part of your question. If you appreciated the human animal, you would have some faith that, of course, human kind can do incredible things. We are amazingly resourceful once we accept we have a problem. But that's the problem: some of us still don't see that we have a problem. Do we wait for the slow kids in the class to get it? Do we respond in spite of them? Or, do we wait? Do you have children?

So a few days ago he started talking about buying solar panels to do his part to save the Earth.

I attended a work shop yesterday on Green Building and Renovations as they apply to global warming, and they told of a remarkable opportunity for businesses and home owners. Check this out!

You can buy a 3Khr photovoltaic panel along with the converter and a meter for about $24,000. That's a lot of money, but, guess what! After five or six years, you can own it and it won't have cost you a cent. And, it has a thirty to fifty year life, so it will be making electricity for you for a long time to come.

[...]

There is a large initial investment. It will take some patience and time to do all the paper work. Thus, this is not yet for everyone, but it may be for you and you and you. And rather than burning fossil fuel and putting tons of carbon in the atmosphere, you will be using a renewable source right on your own roof.

He sounded as excited as many people who got badly burned on some of those one-in-the-lifetime-now-or-never investment opportunities. Some people tried to explain to him that solar panels may not be cost-effective in this part of Oregon but he wouldn't listen and had only this to say after consulting with the solar panel salesman:

I don't know that these panels produce anything for people who voted for Bush.

I worry that like the scientists who are milking our government for more research grants, there are unscrupulous salesmen who will milk the true believers.

For almost 2 years now, I've been thinking that the exit polls of 2004 were skewed on purpose to give the deranged left a reason to complain for the next 4 years. Unlike the deranged left, however, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. But the news from Italy (one half of my new family lives in Italy so I vaguely follow the news) points to botched exit polls yet again. And yet again the exit polls were skewed to favor the left.

The spectre of Florida hung over Italy late last night after a general election that all commentators and opinion polls as well as the official exit poll had given to the centre-left seemed to be heading for a dead heat. According to projections by pollsters, the centre-left and centre-right coalitions appeared close to taking 50 per cent each of both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate in the general election.

[...]

Things began to go horribly wrong for the centre-left around 6pm yesterday, as the true results and projections based on them began to flow in. Exit polls published immediately after the close of polls at 3pm indicated that Romano Prodi and his coalition would beat Silvio Berlusconi's House of Liberties coalition by four to five percentage points. Italy appeared headed for a peaceful revolution, and an end to the tumultous Berlusconi era.

Coincidence? Could be. I remember many people explaining the 2004 exit polls by blaming lefties who just couldn't stop babbling to anybody who would care to listen how they were throwing out that bum Bush while conservatives were in rush to get back to doing their jobs and paying taxes.

I'm compiling St. Matthew Parish Subsidy School Registration Form. I have two children in St. Matthew and I will have to pay $6,028 for both of them for the 2006-2007 academic year. It is true that the tuition is subsidized by the parish. But not by much. In the middle of the form, there is this sentence:

The true cost of educating a child is $4,780

No, this is not a typo. True, I have to pay for all sport activities my children want to participate in. But I don't have for other children's sport activities. And I don't have to pay at all if they decide that kicking a soccer ball on the street or playing some hoops behind the garage is good enough. I don't have to pay for unionized teachers, administrators, nurses, advisors, councilors, etc.

This was news about three weeks ago:

Three Oregon school districts have signed on as plaintiffs in an impending lawsuit over the adequacy of state school funding, and nearly 20 more are weighing the possibility.

This is news today:

Portland's superintendent suggests drawing down reserves to maintain class size
[...]
Phillips conceded that her plan is riskier than simply making $24 million in cuts. It also could sour taxpayers who are wary of government talking gloom-and-doom then pulling out a last-minute reprieve.
[...]
The district plans to ask voters to approve a $33 million local-option levy in November to replace that package in subsequent years. Without some longer-term solution, Phillips said, the district will simply be staving off deep staff cuts for a year.

This should be news today but it's not:

The U.S. Census Bureau ranking released Monday uses financial figures for the 2003-2004 school year - the most recent available. It puts Utah's per-pupil funding at $5,008, compared with a national average of $8,280 and a high of $12,981 in New Jersey.

OK, so it's news in Utah. I also found one article from Texas. The reason why Utah and Texas news-papers may be interested in this ranking is because both states' spending per pupil is below average. Maybe both papers want to use the ranking to convince tax-payers not to be so "greedy."

The reason why the Oregonian didn't mention the new ranking is because voters could remember it in November and decide that the Portland schools have more than enough money to adequately educate their children. This is not the first time the Oregonian omits vital statistics to push its liberal agenda. Last year in June, the Oregonian selectively "analyzed" several conclusions of a Chalkboard Project report. In the process it also misrepresented some important statistics. Some of them show that the quality of education in Utah is much better than in many states that spend much more. Did the Oregonian decide to keep quiet rather than to lie? Maybe. Another reason could be that applying a very simple math (that even Oregon children could do) one could easily figure out that the US spends more per pupil than any other country and more for K-12 education than for national defense.

If anybody wants more facts about how much the public schools cost us already (the price tag is second only to health care and much lower than national defense) and how much is wasted, this guy knows it all.

I received this very "rational" comment to my post on the Right Brothers from somebody named Honest Abe. It seems from what Abe writes he doesn't really like the President.

The Right Brothers have a special package they sell on their website called Liberal Bon Fire Kit for $99.99. This is what they say about it:

Heat things up with your liberal friends and burn The Right Brothers music. Great fun and therapeutic release for frustrated liberals. Free signed 8X10 photo included to get the fire started right..or left. Get'em while their hot, baby!

Great sense of humor! In that spirit I dedicate the receipt below to Honest Abe. Yes, Abe, just after I read your comment I went to Right Brothers' web site and purchased the Greedy Capitalist Pig Edition package. I will use the extra CDs as gifts for two friends of mine who happen to have birthdays on our next poker night and both happen to be Republicans.

So, Abe, thanks for inspiration. And flame on! (If you have $100 to spare.)

Dear Krzysztof Zmudzinski, This email confirms that you have paid The Right Brothers (sales@therightbrothers.com) $62.94 USD using PayPal. PayPal Shopping Cart Contents Item Name: TRB Collection - Greedy Capitalist Pig Edition Item Number: SET-0002 Quantity: 1 Total: $55.99 USD Cart Subtotal: $55.99 USD Shipping: $6.95 USD Sales Tax: Cart Total: $62.94 USD Payment Details Transaction ID: 1WT20252J0389244Y Total: $62.94 USD Buyer: Krzysztof Zmudzinski Business Information Business: The Right Brothers Contact E-Mail: sales@therightbrothers.com Your Confirmed Address Shipping Info: Krzysztof Zmudzinski (address deleted) United States If you have questions about the shipping and tracking of your purchased item or service, please contact The Right Brothers at sales@therightbrothers.com. Thank you for using PayPal! The PayPal Team

Via Powerline:

"Whether you agree with the causal argument, these guys are stunningly informed about recent world events."

The Right Brothers deliver a great reply to Bush's critics with their new single. The music is great but the lyrics even better:

Bush Was Right
Written by: Frank Highland

Freedom in Afghanistan, say goodbye Taliban
Free elections in Iraq, Saddam Hussein locked up
Osama's staying underground, Al Qaida now is finding out
America won't turn and run once the fighting has begun
Libya turns over nukes, Lebanese want freedom, too
Syria is forced to leave, don't you know that all this means

Chorus
Bush was right!
Bush was right!
Bush was right!

Democracy is on the way, hitting like a tidal wave
All over the middle east, dictators walk with shaky knees
Don't know what they're gonna do,
their worst nightmare is coming true
They fear the domino effect, they're all wondering who's next

Repeat Chorus

Ted Kennedy - wrong!
Cindy Sheehan - wrong!
France - wrong!
Zell Miller - right!

Economy is on the rise kicking into overdrive
Angry liberals can't believe it's cause of W's policies
Unemployment's staying down, Democrats are wondering how
Revenue is going up, can you say "Tax Cuts"

Repeat Chorus

Cheney was right, Condi was right,
Rummy was right, Blair was right
You were right, we were right, 'The Right' was right and
Bush was right
Bush was right

© 2005 Pool Guy Music (ASCAP), All rights reserved.

I still have to decide whether do buy individual songs or go for either the Capitalist Edition or the Greedy Capitalist Pig Edition. But I know I will be visiting Right Brother's store shortly to support their "IN YOUR FACE POLITICAL MUSIC".

I've been accused many times of "hate-mongering" for expressing opinions that fall somewhere between common sense and sanity. I still have to compile all the things I said on GroveNet that were met with strong objections and condemnations from the dark side. But I for sure have not said anything that even comes close to the following statements:

Pacifist group revealed as moral imbeciles

[...]

These smarmy, international busybodies, the Gladys Kravitzes of the Iraq occupation, peering out at the world from behind the curtains with their pursed little disapproving lips?

These sanctimonious, reality challenged little creeps?

[...]

What would the hostages have done if shots had been fired? Voluntarily returned to captivity?

If ever a group wasn't worth the effort and risk to free them, it's these guys.

[...]

A report out of Baghdad also indicated these self-involved, self-righteous morons declined to provide valuable intelligence about their kidnappers to the British, U.S. and Canadian soldiers who saved their lives!

See, members of Christian Peacemaker Teams are pacifists and they don't co-operate with men with guns who might use the information to track down kidnappers and/or terrorists and shoot them in the head until they agree to stop kidnapping and/or terrorizing people.

Pacifists don't believe in violence and refuse to use it or abet its use. Pacifists are therefore moral imbeciles.

They're like the guy at the party who won't kick in for the pizza but sneaks a slice when he thinks nobody's looking.

Pacifists are the same.

They're thieves who enjoy the protection offered by those they morally despise but aren't willing to get their hands dirty themselves.

[...]

We have a functioning government in this country even when the Liberals are in power --although it pains me greatly to admit it,

Taxes are paid and used to fund various projects which are, technically, for the good of all.

I personally would not volunteer to pay income taxes because I am a greedy libertarian.

I pay my taxes because if I don't, men with guns in the service of the state will come to my house and drag my sorry butt to the slammer for evading income taxes.

We live in a civilized society -- in which wimpy pacifist losers can walk around safely -- because we live under constant threat of socially sanctioned government violence.

It's the reason I don't speed (too much), rob banks, use heroin, enslave the weak so I never have to do my own laundry again, or hunt down the teachers who annoyed me in high school to cover them in Hershey's chocolate syrup and stake them out on the nearest red ant hill in the hot sun.

[...]

Pacifists such as Loney have never accomplished anything in this world and never will, and they've certainly never created what they purport to love: Peace.

They believe violence never solves anything when, in fact, the judicious use of violence solves many of the large problems.

South Korea is free because men -- real men, not pacifists -- sacrificed to stop the North Koreans from enslaving it. Ditto for Nazi and Japanese aggression during the Second World War. Violence ended black slavery on this continent.

All of those achievements were won by men with guns, not the wimps on the sidelines praying and feeling smug about occupying the moral high ground.

Oh, man, do I feel better just reading this stuff! I know what lefties on GroveNet would call this man. To me he's simply a common-sense-monger.

Via Lucianne.com whose "hate mongering" readers are enjoyed this article as much as I did.