< /head > tags, as follows: < head > ---> insert code here <--- < /head > /* Content ----------------------------------------------- */ #content { width:975px; margin:0 auto; padding:0; text-align:left; } #main { width:715px; float:left; } #sidebar { width:240px; float:right; } /* Headings ----------------------------------------------- */ h2 { margin:1.5em 0 .75em; font:bold 78%/1.4em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.2em; color:#777; } /* Posts ----------------------------------------------- */ .date-header { margin:1.5em 0 .5em; color:#B4C3CC; } .post { margin:.5em 0 1.5em; border-bottom:2px solid #B4C3CC; padding-bottom:1em; } .post-title { margin:.25em 0 0; padding:0 0 1px; font-size:150%; line-height:1.4em; .post-title a { text-decoration:none; color:#B4C3CC; font:bold } .post-title a:hover { color:#B4C3CC; } .post div { margin:0 0 .75em; line-height:1.6em; } p.post-footer { margin:-.25em 0 0; color:#357; } .post-footer em, .comment-link { font:78%/1.4em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; } .post-footer em { font-style:normal; color:#579; margin-right:.6em; } .comment-link { margin-left:.6em; } .post img { padding:4px; border:1px solid #222; } .post blockquote { margin:1em 20px; } .post blockquote p { margin:.75em 0; } /* Comments ----------------------------------------------- */ #comments h4 { margin:1em 0; font:bold 78%/1.6em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.2em; color:#FFF195; } #comments h4 strong { font-size:130%; } #comments-block { margin:1em 0 1.5em; line-height:1.6em; } #comments-block dt { margin:.5em 0; } #comments-block dd { margin:.25em 0 0; } #comments-block dd.comment-timestamp { margin:-.25em 0 2em; font:78%/1.4em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; } #comments-block dd p { margin:0 0 .75em; } .deleted-comment { font-style:italic; color:gray; } /* Sidebar Content ----------------------------------------------- */ .sidebar-title { color:; text-align:center; font-size:120% } #sidebar ul { margin:0 0 1.5em; padding:0 0 1.5em; border-bottom:1px solid #634929; list-style:none; } #sidebar li { margin:0; /* padding:0 0 .25em 10px; */ text-indent:15px; font-weight:bold; /* line-height:1.5em; */ } #sidebar p { /* line-height:1.5em; */ } /* Profile ----------------------------------------------- */ #profile-container { margin:0 0 1.5em; border-bottom:1px solid #634929; padding-bottom:1.5em; } .profile-datablock { margin:.5em 0 .5em; } .profile-img { display:inline; } .profile-img img { float:left; padding:4px; border:1px solid #634929; margin:0 8px 3px 0; } .profile-data { margin:0; font:bold 78%/1.6em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; } .profile-data strong { display:none; } .profile-textblock { margin:0 0 .5em; } .profile-link { margin:0; font:78%/1.4em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; } /* Footer ----------------------------------------------- */ #footer { width:660px; clear:both; margin:0 auto; } #footer hr { display:none; } #footer p { margin:0; padding-top:15px; font:78%/1.6em "Trebuchet MS",Trebuchet,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; }

Day By Day by Chris Muir.



Since last week's installment was so popular, I would like to give you, my audience, the oppurtunity to 'caption' this photo in the 'comments' section. At the end of the day I will decide the who submitted the most fitting caption and place it on the post for all who stop by Publius Rendezvous to observe.


'Ends' Justifying Whatever 'Means' Necessary

It seems as though that our friends on the left side of the aisle will stop at nothing to utterly destroy our Republican leaders through any means they deem necessary necessary. As you very well may know, Tom Delay had a "one count of criminal conspiracy" indictment handed down to him yesterday by a grand jury in Travis County, Texas. Curious as your humble pundit was about the matter, I began to seek more and more information attempting to gleam what was actually transpiring. My audience should take it for what they will, but it seems as though Mark Levin has hit the proverbial nail on the head with his notation on NRO's Corner,
Here's my first take on this indictment (I've only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that "one or more" of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can't find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there's not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury's action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a
conspiracy, there's no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there's more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It's a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!

Dare I speculate that many democrats and liberals do not even have an ounce of understanding to what is actually the 'goings on' surrounding this indictment? (If you have not seen the indictment, here it is) It the unfortunate reality of our lived that our leaders would cling to such meager scraps of political meat in launching a political attack with such brevity. Make no mistake, your humble pundit will be one of the first to chastise Delay if there is credence within this process, but as of this moment it seems as though this is much ado about nothing. As Delay himself said yesterday,

"This morning, in an act of blatant political partisanship, a rogue district attorney in Travis County, Texas, named Ronnie Earle charged me with one count of criminal conspiracy, a reckless charge wholly unsupported by the facts."

Other Bloggers discussing these matters:
Donkey Stomp Captain's Quarters The Political Teen Michelle Malkin Generation Why? GOP Bloggers Conservative Outpost Polipundit Sister Toldjah Reganites Unite! Junkyard Blog! This Blog Full of Crap Ace of Spades California Conservative The Creative Conservative The Moderate Voice Dean's World


Judge John Roberts has just been confirmed as out 17th Chief Justice to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States. In a vote that was more of a disparity than I thought it would be, Roberts was confirmed 78-22 by the Senate.

How could anyone vote against someone with such incredible credentials? Ask these 22 individuals why Judge John Roberts should not deserve to be confirmed:


One need not have a great deal of intellectual insight to see what these individuals have in common. These were the democrats who demanded ridiculous standards be thrust upon Roberts due to the fact that he was nominated by President Bush. There is nothing extreme about this man and what his career has undoubtedly shown. It should not even be a subject for discussion, speaking of his political beliefs, this should not even be discussed as apart of the role of a judge. However, let us not dwell on the transparent partisan rancor of this small minority of senators. Judge John Roberts shall make a fine addition to the court based upon his disntinguished legal mind and proven capabilities in leadership.

As we move forward, President Bush is expected to announce a successor to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat. Many expect that Judge John Roberts easily made it through his confirmation due to the fact that the democrats wanted to hedge their political capital with the O'Connor seat and whomever the nominee will be. This would make perfect sense in light of the fact that her seat has been a 'swing' vote for quite some time. With these thoughts in mind, as I was parusing through the confirmation news circulating about John Roberts, this quote caught my eye:

On Wednesday, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, and Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, sent Mr. Bush a letter urging him not to name to the court any of the three judges who were part of the compromise - Judge William J. Pryor Jr. and Judges Owen and Brown. "The nomination of any of these individuals to the Supreme Court would represent an unnecessary provocation and would be met by substantial opposition in the Senate," the letter said.

How can this be construed as an "unnecessary provocation?" Was this not the entire point of the "Great Compromise of 2005?" As many pundits and commentators stated, this is further illustration of just how disengenuous the democrats are in this process.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. Over 100 blogs are already on board. If you want to join us, just register through our portal. We will add you to our mailing list, and send you the info on how to get aboard and fight the ACLU.

Boards already on board


Sheep in Wolf's Clothing

Do these types of antics somehow bolster the cause of the radical left in there perpetual demagoguery of President Bush and our War on Terrorism? For just a fraction of a second, your humble pundit felt somewhat saddened for these misguided miscreants that their desperation has reached this crescendo.

As Donkey Stomp reports, those on the left have taken to impersonating those on the right in their efforts to swell their ranks against an assorted number of causes. Yet, it seems as though the War on Terror and anything that President Bush is for now is a rallying point. How many Republicans stoop as low to advocate their cause? Do they need to? I think the answer is somewhat obvious when a majority of Americans voted him back into office for a second term. It is somewhat pathetic that these tactics have now been invoked to somehow legitimize their promulgations and contentions.

As this past weekend has reminded us all, the lemmings following Cindy have come out from beneath their rocks, and are exposed for what they are:
The Jawa Report
California Conservative

(If there are additional resources pertaining to photographs from the peace march, I would be highly interested in knowing for I would like to link to them. If you would please e-mail me or leave the link in the comments, I will be glad to do so accordingly)


"Who Has Used Her Son's Death..."

This is the first group blog of the Revolutionary Alliance. Written independently and posted simultaneously, they represent our thoughts on a matter of current interest. Other participants are:
-The Right Track
-The Right Field

As has been noted countless times, this woman has morphed into something despicable from what could have been a genuine display of emotion after the loss of her son. It is beyond any plausible reconciliation to construe her antics and shenanigans as anything but self-gratification. Her son's name, Casey Sheehan, who died in Iraq for the preservation of freedom throughout the world, will forever be linked, and thus mired by these selfish acts of his own flesh & blood.

Much has been made of this weekend's protest as these groups spear-headed by Cindy have descended upon Washington D.C.; yet we do not see the lemmings who follow her. They are mere apparitions mentioned, but inside the mainstream nothing is seen to be observed of these masses. Where are they? I postulate, along with others, that these masses do not exist to the extent portrayed. Though, all in all, she does have some within her ranks, propping up her transparent message and using her situation to promulgate their own selfish desires. This should be the true story for analysis; how this unfortunate situation has seduced the naive Cindy, creating her unfortunate disposition. As snippets from Michelle Malkin and The Moderate Voice illustrate, these voices are not as pure as what could be the message construed by Cindy had she not slipped head first down this slippery slope of fanaticism. As The Moderate Voice highlights,

The group self-lovingly calling itself "United for Peace and Justice" is by no means "narrow" in its "antiwar focus" but rather represents a very extended alliance between the Old and the New Left, some of it honorable and some of it redolent of the World Youth Congresses that used to bring credulous priests and fellow-traveling hacks together to discuss "peace" in East Berlin or Bucharest. Just to give you an example, from one who knows the sectarian makeup of the Left very well, I can tell you that the Worker's World Party Ramsey Clark's core outfit is the product of a split within the Trotskyist movement. These were the ones who felt that the Trotskyist majority, in 1956, was wrong to denounce the Russian invasion of Hungary. The WWP is the direct, lineal product of that depraved rump. If the "United for Peace and Justice" lot want to sink their differences with such riffraff and mount a joint demonstration, then they invite some principled political criticism on their own account. And those who just tag along as well, they just tag along.

Now, with all intellectual honesty, as stories such as this illustrates, should we take the motivations by these groups in good faith as being pure and noble? Can we not speculate on Cindy's motivations when she aligns herself with such Anti-Americanistic efforts? It is a relationship of mutual expediency for both parties are selfishly using one another, for as The Creative Conservative notes,

"[U]nfortunatelyely, Cindy IS the mother of unthinking lemmings who don't care about anyone but themselves, wanting desperately to spread their anti-American socialist garbage any way they can. This protest only helps our enemies to kill more Americans and Iraqis by encouraging terror."

In countless sites your humble pundit frequents, this sentiment is clearly ascertained by many, and her message is not resonating in the least with those constituting the backbone of America. In such, the Democrats should be given credit for not directly pandering to such despicable antics by the fringe of our society. No prominent Democrat has been so bold as to embrace this effort or lend their political capital to afford any credence to Cindy's efforts.

Yet, as Mark Noonan notes,

So, there she was, Cindy Sheehan being arrested (as per her plan) at the White House yesterday...if you missed the photo, it is a real winner. It shows a smiling, happy Cindy Sheehan being carted away by the cops...smiling and happy. Doesn't exactly come across as grievinging mother"

But, this does not explain why she is given so much time in the media. Should much credence be given to the Democrats and those on the left side of the aisle? With such disingenuousous displays, should she not just slip into irrelevancy? Zaphriel's Blog speculates that

[i]t is a funny bit of mimicry that her handlers have produced here, trying with all their might to make it look as if there truly is a movement that in any way resembles the huge war protests from the Vietnam era. Scripted, bought, and sold on the evening news. Man does she know how to put on a show, even if everyone sees through the transparent venire.

Where is her thrust of popularity coming from? Who is lending her a proverbial ear? I would have thought her fifteen minutes had long since expired, but I have been consistently wrong. Someone or something is lending her credence for her to continue tirelessly with such utterly hopeless displays. Though, as we continue to be lambasted with her shenanigans day after day, let us all remember, in the end, the most tell-tale aspect to gleam from this is what MyWay stumbled upon:

"Cindy Sheehan, the California woman who has used her son's death in Iraq to spur the anti-war movement...."

If you have a post of interest that you wish to promote, please go to Stop The ACLU and participate in the "Open Trackbacks."

"Theology Matters" (indeed)

A regular read of mine for quite some time has been Hugh Hewitt's commentary. As I found out via All Things Beautiful, Hugh Hewitt has begun a new project called the OneTrueGodBlog.

In the introductory description, Hewitt explains the fundamental purpose behind his rationale for putting together this venue,

The first question should be: Why? The answer is because theology matters. A lot. I have asked these five excellent minds to ponder occasional questions from a layman that the layman thinks would be of interest to many more layman. I have discovered after 15 years in broadcast journalism that such questions and the answers they elicit are of great interest to the general public.
How to Read This Blog

You should read this blog more like a discussion board than a traditional blog. The questions are listed below, and over in the Categories section under "Hugh's Questions." Each question is its own category, with the responses listed in the order they were posted, like a discussion board.

As PowerPundit iterates,

Hugh Hewitt is running a fascinating new blog called OneTrueGodBlog. I ran into the site while doing some research, after seeing the movie The Exorcism of Emily Rose. Bookmark this blog/discussion board if you are interested in a serious Christian theological discussion among some highly qualified individuals. Hugh asks the questions and the contributors respond with individual posts similar to permalinked blog posts.
As these matters should play a central role in our lives, this will be a blog of interest that I will frequent in the future. Take note, yourself, as I will be looking forward to the read here, so should you.

The approach taken by Hewitt is quite simply outstanding. Particularly, his instructions for us all to approach the commentary as a "discussion board" in reading proves to be a very challenging instruction. This instruction mandates that we approach the issues and topics presented with an open mind, and with a mind ready to articulate our own individual beliefs.

The discussion currently piquing my interest is the 'Demons' post, which is a subject many of us ignore on a daily basis. However, as the discussion demonstrates, this topic is something we all should all think about. If this is illustrative of what we can expect in the future, your humble pundit joins my fellow bloggers in anxiously awaiting what is to come.



With Whom Much Is Trusted

It is quite disheartening to see such lofty positions of trust filled with corruption and such blatant deceit. In this time of American History, where grave threats are leveled against us, questioning our national security apparatus; those that act as brokers for the weak and hapless, prey off both sides of the field. Whether the people who seek citizenship are innocent or whether these immigrants proactively participated in the deceit, it matters not, for the individuals who lawfully seek citizenship are displaced as the manifestation of distrust is planted in the collective American mindset.

As this story reveals, an attorney engaged in the practice of aiding those seeking citizenship within the United States was sentenced,

United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein announces that today U.S. District Court Judge Alexander Williams, Jr. sentenced Maqsood Mir, 52, an immigration lawyer practicing in Potomac, Maryland, to 78 months in prison followed by 3 years of supervised release in connection with his April 14, 2005 conviction by a federal jury of immigration fraud related to the filing of false immigration documents that allowed illegal aliens to enter and/or remain in the United States. The Judge also ordered Mir to pay a $25,000 fine and Mir Law Associates to pay a $200, 000 fine.

The travesty truly found within this story is that this attorney disenfranchises immigrants to this country who petition lawfully. The seeds of distrust are now planted within our collective mindsets. Matters pertaining to illegal immigration are already at the forefront due to the nature of our porous borders, and now we must be concerned with those on the inside working against our laws and security.

Furthermore, in the least of this travesty, this attorney and his practice has tarnished the reputation of any and all of those who wish to go about doing the process in the correct manner and have already done so. Now the aura of skepticism will be laid on all of those as these stories emerge. What careless, and what a grossly liable practice, in the least, how foolish was this act for every single party involved.

Ultimately, once again the American people are the ones bearing the costs and are the ones who bear much to be concerned with.

This has been a production of the Guard the Borders Blogburst, held every Monday at Euphoric Reality and other blogs. Our mission is to keep immigration issues at the forefront. If you'd like to be a part of it, send your blog URL and name to kit.jarrell@ gmail dot com.



A recent post on The Right Field piqued my interest and the analogy posed. Herein, "Right Fielder' masterfully weaved an analogy between Red China and a democratic frontrunner for the presidency. In the post, 'Right Field' discussed recent restrictions upon free expression engaged by the communist government of China. Such action is necessary when the ideology of that government has been proven time and time again to be an utter failure. The government has but no choice in the least but to stifle the truth and fact from its citizens.

As 'Right Fielder' illustrates, such was the logic of Senator Hillary Clinton during her husband's decadent second term.

"When pressed for thoughts on the internet, Clinton states 'we are all going to have to rethink how we deal with' the Internet because of the handling of White House sex scandal stories on Web sites."

Yet, does this not go further? The modern democratic party meanders aimlessly with no guiding light. Democrats do not have a set of core values which allows them to "triangulate" and shift their beliefs to better suit their political posturing. With the advent of such resources as MoveOn.org, does Hillary feel the same way? What were motivations for saying something so preposterous back in 1998?


As Michelle Malkin speaks about this morning, much of the rhetoric emanating from New Orleans, and much of the hype of what those poor souls were enduring may not have happened. By no means should this be construed to minimize what went on and some of the mistakes that were made, this is directly aimed at the way the entire occurrence was reported. Many of the rapes and murders bantered about the news incessantly in the days following Katrina's rampage either did not occur at all, or has not as yet been corroborated.

This is illustrative of the symptoms plaguing the MSM. It is not so much about covering the news anymore as it is of agendas and ratings.


Continuous Hurricane Rita Coverage (Sticky Post)

RITA ARRIVES! - With howling winds and driving rain, Hurricane Rita made landfall at 3:30 a.m. ET Saturday on the extreme southwest coast of Louisiana near Sabine Pass, Texas.
The Category 3 storm -- packing winds of 120 mph -- lashed the Texas and Louisiana coasts for hours before landfall, and first pre-dawn damage was reported in several locations, including Galveston, Texas, and Lake Charles, Louisiana.

Local Forecasts:
Houston, TX
New Orleans, LA
Galveston, TX
Cameron, LA

It is being reported that the heores of the Houston Fire Department, in the midst of this hurricane, are battling fires during the storm....the same is being reported in Galveston.

MSNBC's Hurricanes' Havoc: "Seeking Solace"

In SouthWest Louisiana...Hurricane Rita's eyewall, containing wind gusts of at least 90 to 115 mph, has absolutely punished coastal and interior areas of southwest Louisiana along with portions of Jefferson and Orange counties across the border in Texas. Hurricane Rita made landfall at 2:30 am CDT just east of the Texas/Louisiana border in western Cameron Parish between Sabine Pass and Johnson's Bayou. With the likelihood of a tremendous surge along with the torrential rain, there were immediate reports of flooding in Cameron and Lake Charles, Louisiana. In fact, there is almost no doubt that a powerful surge has overcome a good portion of Cameron Parish, Louisiana.

Optimistic Outlook! Hurricane Rita with 125-mph winds is now a Category 3 storm. Drier mid-level air from over the continent to the north and west of the hurricane is being entrained into the system, disrupting the eyewall core. Rita continues to successively reorganize its eye but the overall effect is to steadily weaken the hurricane. Rita is still a major hurricane but every little of weakening helps.

"Overall Tendency is for Rita to Weaken Gradually..."

Pushed To The Brink.....AGAIN!!
Hurricane Rita's steady rains sent water pouring through breaches in a patched levee Friday, cascading into one of the city's lowest-lying neighborhoods in a devastating repeat of New Orleans' flooding nightmare.

Houston & Galveston May Not Be In Direct Path! Hurricane Rita closed in on the Texas Gulf Coast and the heart of the U.S. oil-refining industry with howling 140 mph winds Thursday, but a sharper-than-expected turn to the right set it on a course that could spare Houston and nearby Galveston a direct hit.

The CatHouse Chat and The Donkey Stomp reminded me of something we ALL need to keep in mind. As Hurricane Rita approaches Texas and Lousiana, let us all submit a "Prayer for those in the path of Rita" because this is "Another Time for Prayer."

Barking Moonbat has a collection of links regarding Rita.

Environmentalist Cannot Wait to Gnash Their Teeth - "This is global warming, says environmental chief" Super-powerful hurricanes now hitting the United States are the "smoking gun" of global warming, one of Britain's leading scientists believes.

Can Louisiana Stand Fast?
Some areas of southwest Louisiana are already experiencing Hurricane Rita's outer bands despite the predicted landfall not expected until Saturday.

Forecasters Are Correct, Thus Far...
Rita downgraded to

Category 4 - Hurricane Rita weakened to a Category 4storm with winds at 150 miles per hour but remained an extremely dangerous storm, the U.S. National Hurricane Center said Thursday afternoon. It forecast the storm would hit near the Houston area, the heart of the U.S. oil industry, as a dangerous hurricane of at least Category 3 intensity early Saturday.

Cautiously Optimistic...
The Category 5 storm weakened slightly Thursday morning, and forecasters said it could be down to a Category 3 _ meaning winds as high as 130 mph _ by the time it comes ashore late Friday or early Saturday. But it could still be a dangerous storm _ one aimed straight at a section of coastline with the nation's biggest concentration of oil refineries.

The Daily Blogster picked up on a story that should be of interest to many of my readers. It seems as though an outlet of the MSM has given legitimacy to the blogosphere as a vehicle for promulgating the news of the day. This is the only explanation that I could come to other than the fact that they are just too cowardly to do their own jobs. Makeup your own mind at "The Houston Chronicle Encouraging Bloggers to Stay?"

Rita Could Be Strongest Storm
to Hit Texas - Gaining strength with frightening speed, Hurricane Rita swirled toward the Gulf Coast a Category 5, 175-mph monster Wednesday as more than 1.3 million people in Texas and Louisiana were sent packing on orders from authorities who learned a bitter lesson from Katrina.

Rita Upgraded To Category 5 Storm!!
(Hat Tip:
Gina's Rantings)

Cat. 5 Status is Quite Difficult to Maintain,
"If there is any good news at this point, it is the fact that it is very difficult for a hurricane to maintain category 5 status for any lengthy period of time. Near-perfect to perfect atmospheric conditions are necessary for a category 5 hurricane to exist and these "perfect" conditions are first - difficult to come by and second - do not remain in place for a long period of time. So although Rita is currently a category 5 hurricane, fluctuations in intensity is likely. That being said, it is almost a certainty that Rita will make landfall as a large, intense, major hurricane with impacts extending well away from the center."

-Galveston County officials are planning a mandatory evacuation.
Mandatory Evac Tomorrow) -Houston Mayor calls for partial evacuation. -Governor Rick Perry calling for "voluntary" evacuations throughout east Texas...

Local Texas Bloggers Cover Hurricane Rita Coverage:

Generation Why? (Houston) - Evacuation Routes

Blogs of War (Houston)

Houston's Clear Thinkers (Houston)

Liberty's Blog (Galveston)

Burnt Orange Report - Storm Surge Zones

Lone Star Times - Worst Case Scenario

As noted by the Houston Chronicle's Huricane Rita blog, hotel rooms as far away as Oklahoma are beginning to fill up.

Rose Rougeau, spokesperson for AAA Texas, said early this afternoon that members seeking to get out of Houston are being placed in Oklahoma hotels now." There are still some rooms left in Abilene. But when we tell people we can't place them closer than Oklahoma they are fine with that. They just want to get out of harm's way," Rougeau said.
Rita's Tracking Map
Loop....(amazing satellite imagery)
Tracking Models

Valero Energy Corp. Chairman and CEO, Bill Greehey,
spoke this morning on Rita's expected impact to the already stressed oil production and refining capability here in the United States:

"If it hits the refineries, and we're short refining capacity, you're going to see gasoline prices well over $3.00 a gallon at the pump," Greehey said in a Tuesday night interview.
Simply unfathomable! Rita could mean
$5.oo gasoline...

Links (if any readers know of additional resources, please feel free to e-mail me or leave a comment):

-The Weather Channel Blog

It is a sad state that Bush Administration has to
release statements such as this in times such as these.

President Bush: "I urge the citizens to listen carefully to the instructions provided by state and local authorities and follow them," Bush said in a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition. "We hope and pray that Hurricane Rita will not be a devastating. storm but we got to be ready for the worst."

Unfortunately, I propose a theory regarding this scenario, and how it will inevitably unfold. I diagrees with the postulations of The Violence Worker on this issue. With the efforts to evacuate SouthEast Texas, and the relative success it has seen thus far, your humble pundit postulates that before this is all said and done, that President Bush will be blamed for pandering to his home state in some form or fashion.

Saturday Synopsis (3d ed.)

This is the third edition of the best the blogosphere had to offer in the week that was September 18 - 24, 2005:

  • As much as liberals blame President Bush for Hurricane Katrina, at least this gentleman put some thought into his conspiracy theory. Of course, I reference Scott Stevens, the Idaho Weatherman who believes "the Yakuza Mafia used a Russian-made electromagnetic generator to cause Hurricane Katrina in a bid to avenge the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima." As this story observed by Euphoric Reality illustrates, he is still the only person to lend himself any credence whatsoever.
  • While I was enthralled with covering Hurricane Rita, other blogs such as A Conservative's Corner covered the John Roberts confirmation by the Senate Judciary Committee. Needless to say there was much in the ways of pontification and "meatless rhetoric," yet in the end Judge John Roberts was confirmed and will now move to the full Senate for a vote.
  • Except in the realms of the blogosphere, here A Captains Quarter's, why does this story continue to fly under the radar?!
  • Reagenites Unite! reminds of why we all should read more Ann Coulter, and also shows us how conservative morale is not at an all time high now with the innerworkings of this governement and, particularly, the Bush Administration. Where do you stand on this issue? Yet, this is not the only scathing piece of the week in the realms of the Big Government, The Wide Awakes also poignantly reamed the the outrageous governemental spending that has become status quo ante of late.
  • Definition of "PatriAutism"
  • Heineken shamelessly exploits the looters of New Orleans!


Caption This!

In an effort to prepare for the weekend in a lightheaerted manner, a new 'regular' will be attempted this week. I will submit a photograph, and you, the reader should 'caption' the photgraph in my comments section. And, for this, the first week, I submit to you, everyone's favorite Governor:

Dangerous Games

The Constitution itself reads,

The President . . . shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law. . . .

And, The Heritage Foundation presents a compelling analysis of the plain-text rationale connoted by this verbiage:

The principal concern of the Framers regarding the Appointments Clause, as in many of the other separation of powers provisions of the Constitution, was to ensure accountability while avoiding tyranny. Hence, following the suggestion of Nathaniel Gorham of New Hampshire and the example of the Massachusetts Constitution drafted by John Adams, the Framers gave the power of nomination to the President so that the initiative of choice would be a single individual's responsibility but provided the check of advice and consent to forestall the possibility of abuse of this power. Gouverneur Morris described the advantages of this multistage process: 'As the President was to nominate, there would be responsibility, and as the Senate was to concur, there would be security.'

Furthermore, the Federalist Papers further illustrates some of these tenents by highlighting the original intent of the individuals responsible for the constitution's drafting,

'[I]t is easy to show that every advantage to be expected from such an arrangement would, in substance, be derived from the power of nomination which is proposed to be conferred upon him; while several disadvantages which might attend the absolute power of appointment in the hands of that officer would be avoided. In the act of nomination, his judgment alone would be exercised; and as it would be his sole duty to point out the man who, with the approbation of the Senate, should fill an office, his responsibility would be as complete as if he were to make the final appointment.'
-The Federalist No. 76.

With such conclusions to be drawn by the Heritage Foundation and the individuals responsible for such fundamental elements of our constitution; should the statements of Senator Hillary Clinton and Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg be construed as anything less than dangerous?

Senator Hillary Clinton, in her statement announcing she will vote "NO" for the confirmation of Judge Roberts stated:

[B]ecause I think he is far more likely to vote the views he expressed in his legal writings, I cannot give my consent to his confirmation and will, therefore, vote against his confirmation. My desire to maintain the already fragile Supreme Court majority for civil rights, voting rights and women's rights outweigh the respect I have for Judge Roberts's intellect, character, and legal skills."

The 'non-partisan,' 'non-political,' 'neutral' Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg opined yesterday at a speech to the New York Bar Association:

"[S]ome women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights..."
"I have a list of highly qualified women, but the president has not consulted me," she added during a brief interview Wednesday night.

Thus, based upon these statements, that represent but a microcosm of what those on the left emanate daily in how they approach ourfundamentall rights. Is it not easily to construe why those on the left promulgate their beliefs through the courts and not through our established democratic processes? Can these statements even be closely reconciled in any form with what out Constitution states plainly?



Stop the ACLU BlogBurst (09/22/2005)

It seems as though an escalation of news stories from around the world wide web illustrate a growing threat to our way of life. A collection of individual, somewhat unique occurrences coalesce into common threads; specifically, these instances should demonstrate that terms referencing 'Jesus Christ' or any other symbols of our christian heritage have become explicative. Take for instance an ominous situation faced by the citizens of Oconee County, South Carolina,

At a city council meeting earlier this summer in Anderson a lawmaker opens in prayer referring to Jesus Christ. Just a year ago a federal appeals court ruled against the city of Great Falls, South Carolina for doing just that; writing, referring to a specific god like Jesus Christ shows preference for one religion and officially discriminates against all others.Mike Cubelo/President, Piedmont Chapter of ACLU-SC: 'The minute they have an invocation that refers to a specific deity they are in violation of the law.' And that's why the A.C.L.U has chimed in-- warning Oconee County and the cities of Anderson and Seneca of the potential high cost in legal fees and demanding confirmation the councils' uphold the courts ruling.
What is it specifically that the ACLU has against our heritage? Not only are they aggressivesive in their collective efforts to systematically erase reality, they have now become quite bold. With the inroads this organization has made, does their own power allow them to yield a blade of extortion? Notice,

"[W]arning Oconee County and the cities of Anderson and Seneca of the potential high cost in legal fees and demanding confirmation the council's uphold the courts ruling."

Piece by piece, jurisdiction by jurisdiction, the ACLU ravages one small group of Americans by singling them out. A proven strategy has been mastered and until Americans such as you and I begin to stand our ground, it will continue. They already engage in an Orwellian practice such as "Newspeak," which would call for documents such as our birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence to be purged or excused from legitimacy. It is quite lucrative, and they are quite successful, for they devour small groups of citizens in single sittings. It is time that several of these smaller groups band together to resist such tactics, it is time to Stop the ACLU. What this nation has established since its inception, and what we accomplish through the ballot box should not be cast aside in the court room.


This was a production of Stop The ACLU blogburst. If you would like to join our efforts to fight the ACLU, it’s very simple. Just register at our portal. We will add you to our mailing list, and send you the info you will need. Over 100 blogs already on board. Join us!


Gleaming From Comparisons

More died at the Superdome after the Governor decided on a Pol Pot solution for evacuation of the city, e.g. Starve the city dwellers to force them into the countryside. And of course FEMA's political appointees, and by extension the Administration, failed to step in to address these and other problems, particularly the lack of coordination between the many agencies that were flying blind for the first 48 hours.

As observed by All Things Beautiful from a story appearing in a recent installment of Real Clear Politics; a strikingly inappropriate comparison has been cast into the discourse regarding asserted shortcomings in the leadership surrounding the lead up and aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. This analogy deserves nothing more than passing scold, yet it warrants reflection as it is illustrative of the sad state of affairs plaguing our modern political dynamics.

Naivete should not be given the same credence as evil, plainly and simply, just as ineptitude should not be compared with the darkest side of our human nature. What should never cease to amaze us as human beings, is the ability of our fellow human beings to inflict dastardly acts of evil. However, it is all too often that we, in our various strains of discourse, morally equate evil with what should be properly construed as mere ineptitude. Comparing Governor Kathleen Blanco (D-La.) with one of the twentieth century's worst despots does nothing for either side of the aisle. Yet, this is nothing short of pathetic; neither side of the aisle should be a factor for consideration since some events, and some of our concerns should supersede political issues. In these efforts, such political rhetoric and shenanigans deflects the attention from those in dire need. Correspondingly, stark comparisons invoked for political assassination should be scornfully construed in no less a fashion.

When should we begin to gleam, and what is to be learned? It should come well after all that Katrina has wrought has been put in place, when we have aided our fellow Americans in putting together the misplaced pieces of their lives. Just now we are beginning to see the causes that led to the effects in and all surrounding this natural disaster.

Everything wrought by this tragedy has illustrated that big and bigger government does not adequately meet the needs of the Americans it swore to protect. From the federal government's supposed lack of response, which, with everything cited by those from the left indicting President Bush, has done nothing more than highlighted the folly undergirding the tenets of their party's mantra since the days of their hallowed FDR and his New Deal. Furthermore, it is undeniable that the ideals of the Democratic Party have had opportunity to flourish in Louisiana; securing a bastion of liberal 'bliss' for numerous generations. What has been starkly observed these last few weeks is the welfare utopia that was New Orleans was nothing more than a house of cards.

Where are the equations to be ascertained from these stark realities?

With all such said as preface it may be clear as to where I lead, but it must be reverberated that Governor Blanco's clear lack of leadership cannot be morally equated to despotism. It would not do justice to the lives lost under such scourge of this earth, and for the only hope for goodness blossoming from such dastardly acts: a lesson for humanity's future generations. Make no mistake, her actions should be construed as heinous for they bordered, if not spilled over, the realm of criminal negligence. For such, this individual should be held liable. Blatantly, therein lies the fork dividing our road of analysis, for your humble pundit firmly distinguishes between what should be promulgated as culpability and what should be observed as liability. Quite simply, I state her actions clearly lacked the requisite malice aforethought to be morally equated with those in the annals of humanity's worst.

It has been proven time and time again that which socialistic idealism mandates clashes with the tenets that made this country what it is in the world today. It takes such times that we endure to cast the illuminating light onto that which most of us already know: Dependence creates haplessness Yet, liberal idealogues such as Governor Blanco should not be equated with the worst in humanity simply because they are naive and foolish.

Let us learn from such grave hardship that we have endured as a nation. Just as we did on that fateful day, on that warm September morning not such a long time ago...let us come together as a nation, and refrain from the wedges that will tear us asunder. Both Presidents Bush and Clinton, and their predecessors alike ignored the tell-tale signs that could have prevented 9/11's evil accomplishments. Yet, through such, it does not make any one of them guilty of sins warranting callous equations and accusations. Our careless indictments only prevent work that must be done and it clouds our vision to learn the lessons to be gleamed and implemented in the future.

Too Good To Resist

As The Right Track reports today, ex-President Bill Clinton finally has a suitable monument to his esteemed and unforgettable legacy.


Turn Back The Clock

As your humble pundit has noted time and again, Cindy Sheehan has been used and abused by the those on the far left in their efforts to denigrate President Bush utilizing every conceivable ploy at their disposal.

However, as noted by The Wide Awakes, thankfully, her fifteen minutes of fame should have long since expired.......but have they? As Michelle Malkin notes, the clock may have just turned back a couple of minutes...

Mrs. Clinton is "waiting for the best political moment to say" she opposes the war, Ms. Sheehan said during a 15-minute speech. "You say it or you're losing your job," she said, provoking a roar of approval from the audience. Mrs. Clinton, believed to be a possible presidential contender in 2008, has said she supports the war in Iraq and has pushed for a greater troop presence in the country.


As I was perusing through the various headlines generated over the weekend, something slowly caught my eye as I shuffled through more and more websites. A name leapt from the title page. It was an old friend, and this name leaping from these headlines was none other than everyone's favorite ex-president, Bill Clinton.

Though, I must say, some of the headlines on each and every page, and their accompanying stories had to do with statements of asininity; someone so prolific as President Clinton should engage in such petty, naive talking points. Invoking race and somehow equating race as being the underlying factor of why "mistakes" were made is beyond someone of the position or stature of ex-President Clinton. However, as I began to look back on the "glorious" days that saw Bill Clinton as our Commander-in-Chief, I began to realize that this was not so surprising. What was the one theme, the one mantra that can be taken from the Clinton Administration during the 'Roaring 90s?' Let us just say it resonates well with a line from one of your humble pundit's favorite cinematic works:

"Vanity, definitely my favorite sin."
-John Milton (Al Pacino)"The Devil's Advocate"

Throughout the Roaring 90's, all Clinton was concerned with was making himself as popular as he possibly could. Incontrovertible in that every decision he needed to make, he did not demonstrate leadership, he demonstrated an undying ability to calculate every iota of public opinion on the particular matter. One is naive to politics and history if that person does not distinguish ex-President Clinton from other Presidents in this realm; and, is extremely ignorant of intellectual honesty if they would consider him synonymous to others in how he weighed his precious polling data. For up until that point in American History, nothing had been seen as the likes of 'The War Room' and no President has ever been as poll driven as that president in that administration. One thing that will reverberate throughout the annals of history is his uncanny ability to slither through a scandal with the least amount of shame and incredulously as possible. This will be his legacy and this will be the way he is remembered.

With such, why am I reopening these old subjects? Why am I wasting space in my realm to engage President Clinton's rhetoric? Simply stated, history should always be reviewed in order to learn from such events to prevent those events from returning. Clinton's favorite stratagem was to implement a proactive game plan against those who stood in his way; this, in order to stay ahead of the polling data, to entrench himself within the "will" of the American people. Herein, the statements from Tim Russerts's interview with Clinton illustrate one of two possibilities:
  • He is further solidifying the posturing and triangulation being conducted by his wife, Hillary, for her run for the presidency in 2008. Bill Clinton is making statements that Hillary cannot, but in essence, he is her mouthpiece at this point in time. This, demonstrated by the fact that he has the audacity to state that she need not make any pledge of allegiance to her constituency as she is keeping her eye on her senate seat. Or,
  • Something lurks within his legacy for which he is utterly ashamed, and he knows it will cost him dearly as he perpetually resuscitates that shell of a legacy he has. Namely, my fellow pundits throughout the blogosphere have already began to stipulate, and many times, they clearly outline the failures of the Clinton Administration in the realms of protecting the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Personally, I believe the latter speculation is more than likely what is being engaged here by ex-President Clinton. It was quite a bold move for Clinton to go on a scorched earth offensive against President Bush. This, in light of the fact that President Bush, in good faith, extends the hand of bipartisan collaboration by having Clinton aid his father in the rebuilding efforts after Hurricane Katrina. His poisonous barbs inflaming the racial tensions during these times of national peril show a low move; even for a someone such as Clinton. Nevertheless, his actions should not be taken as purely partisan or simply as some cheap attack on President Bush. Clinton is a clever fellow, and he never makes an uncalculated move. These statements should not be callously brushed aside for they reveal some deeper movement is underway. With such, another line from John Milton should be remembered as the left will seize upon these statements in utter delight.

"Well, consider the source son."

Remember this as "The First Black President" goes on the offensive and his statements are recycled over and over this week. What is the purpose behind these statements, we already know them to be egregiously careless, but what were his motivations?



"[W]hatever it's going to cost"

"'It's going to cost whatever it's going to cost, and we're going to be wise about the money we spend,' Bush said a day after laying out an expensive plan for rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast without spelling out how he would pay for it."

Has similar rhetoric not been the mantra of this Administration in the "ways & means" of fiscal matters? With all due respect, Mr. President, rare is the instance in life when an individual "can have it both ways..."

I have not come to terms with the concept of those inside the beltway when it comes to strategies implemented during times of budgeting concern. For most Americans, when outflows come perilously close to exceeding inflows, it would be high time to stifle the outflows. However, once inside the beltway, spending another person's money, this is not the first perogative of those in government. The first, and, seemingly, only option excercised by those in power is to increase inflows via raising taxes. Why can our own leaders not reflect what most Americans find to be common sensical? Most Americans wold not seek a second revenue source, they would simply cut any additional, unnecessary spending.

As noted at Donkey Stomp, President Bush should be credited for not seeking to raise taxes; it would seem as though he learned this from his father who sealed his own fate by raising taxes. Though, President Bush should take fiscal responsibility in decreasing unnecessary spending. His inability to reject any congressional funding plan further blurs the line that divides the aisle between the left and the right when speaking in the realm of fiscal matters.


Saturday Synopsis (2d ed.)

This is the second edition of the best the blogosphere had to offer in the week that was September 11 - 17, 2005:
  • It Is What It Is notes that the esteemed Mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin is now blaming the Bush Administration for the lower (no, sadly, this is not a typographical error) body count. It seems that he is not at all happy that the casualties that his city endured is not larger in their total. I wish this was something out of The Onion, but, unfortunately, it is not: "New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin today blamed President George Bush for the lower-than-expected number of bodies discovered in the receding flood waters, and said it's part of a White House campaign "to prevent black people from getting what they deserve." But, more and more criticism of this inept individual is beginning to gain momentum in the blogosphere. Could his own ineptitude and shortcomings be the reason that blogs such as the Right Field have begun to fervently criticize this man? Can he not take any personal responsibility, or is everything someone else's fault?
  • Recently, I have subscribed to the political comic strip, Day by Day, due to a recommendation from The Right Track. It is updated daily and can be found 'underneath' my commentary.
  • The Wide Awakes has an interesting piece of commentary regarding what President Bush's speech of Thursday night means fiscally for this country; and, how it is a further revelation that is 'conservative' President is anything but when it comes to distributing wealth to the masses, he does it with the same veracity as some of the great Democrat stalwarts. (Thank God he is not following in his Daddy's footsteps....)
  • Does this mean Hurricane Katrina is Tony Blair's fault?!?
  • Quote of the Week: "George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power. The only way America will become more secure is if we have a new administration that cares about Americans even if they don't fall into the top two percent of the wealthiest." Sometimes, one's own words and where they arise are all that need to be reported. If you notice in the story, Cindy Sheehan is no longer relevant for this statement comes to us via Michael Moore. As The Violence Worker notes, "If reading this doesn't wake you up to the fact that this woman is so out of touch with reality as to have completely lost all powers of reasoning, than you are either dead or terminally comatose."
  • An excellent definition of a "Barking Moonbat" can be found at The Daily Blogster.



"free from a coercive requirement to affirm God...."

How did this nation get to the crossroads in time where an affirmation of a God could be in any plausible way construed as 'coercive?' Most Americans, and your humble pundit is but assuming herein, but an educated guess would lend itself to inference that most Americans do not even know what the specific verbiage of the First Amendment includes, let alone any other document pertaining to these matters. Yet, most of my fellow Americans cling to the deceivingly innocuous phrase "separation of church & state," which will not be found in any particular bastion within the Constitution; lest one considers the personal correspondence of a man living in France at the time of the Constitution's drafting and passage that pertinent for discourse. Whatever ideological perspective one puts their respective jurisprudential beliefs into, cannot, with any resemblance of intellectual honesty, state that the founders of this great nation did seek resolute affirmation from their Creator.

How can this rationale, this assertion, that the simplistic phrase "under God" be construed as a "coercive requirement?" I cannot possibly begin to reconcile this simple phrase's supposed coercive nature with the words emanating from the document giving birth to this nation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

This great nation was conceived under the auspice that any fundamnetal Right men cherish and enjoy is derived from our Creator. With such clear rhetoric, is this to be construed as "coercive" as well? This inquiry, notwithstanding the irreconcilable fact, that the word "coercive" has no reference or inkling within our founding documents, but it has become the determinative factor based upon the fiat of those who arrogantly assert their will before the American will. Let us live by what is said in our founding documents, let the tyranny of the judiciary cease, and be no more.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof......

Combination of both the Declaration of Independence and the aforementioned Amendment to the Constitution delineates that there is no "coercive" nature by the affirmation of our God who bestowed our unalienable rights. It is merely an expression of gratitude and neutrality that the rights each citizen enjoys is not of this world, that is, it is not of man. Yet, men, in their arrogance are demanding that no intercession be made; that certain Rights we enjoy are the fruit of the government. Was this not a significant portion of the reasoning undergirding the foundational determination to fight to break those surly bounds?

What is it about the mere acknowledgement of a god? What makes this so heinous to some that others believe in something, anything? Why must the nation be subjugated to such narrow-minded ideology? Mr. New Dow and the ilk such as the ACLU will not rest until we are coerced into following their dogma. It is such a shame that this utter hypocrisy is given even an ounce of credence, but being given its day in court is patently absurd. America deserves better for we sprang forth with an ideal that was better. Our God gave us unalienable rights so that we may enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without the coercion of any government.

Thank God Almighty that their are others who cherish these unalienable rights:
Cao's Blog
The Right Track
Stop the ACLU

I Want To Be In That Number...?

The Captain's Quarter's in "Will Only Saints Come Marching Back?" is reporting on a very interesting poll generated from the evacuees out of New Orleans who are pondering whether to return 'home.' It seems as if they are reluctant to return to the Crescent City after these course of events brought about by Hurricane Katrina.

Now, this polling data is particularly interesting in light of the fact that Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert was chastized and berated for his comments pertaining to his reluctance in forking over a substantial amount of federal money to rebuild New Orleans immediately after the storm had passed.

This is quite the delicate subject, indeed. As The Museum of Left Wing Lunacy proclaims: Wake up! Discuss!

Drunken Sailors

For the sake of all things conservative, surely House Majority Leader Tom Delay speaks in jest, for any reasonable conservative would not iterate something that is so diametrically opposed to one of the movement's most fundamental tents. Limited government and the ancillary, lowered government spending, is one of the key promulgations of the modern conservative movement. Is this not a crass, and somewhat frightening statement from a key Republican?
"'My answer to those that want to offset the spending is sure, bring me the
offsets, I'll be glad to do it. But nobody has been able to come up with any
yet,' the Texas Republican told reporters at his weekly briefing."
This statement, here, is why your humble pundit has not (completely) lost heart. Would it not be a clever ploy to bring 'statist' and liberals from their hiding? Majority Leader Delay has postured himself in quite a strong, defensible position when analyzed from the proper perspective. From his position, he is inviting criticism on such a robust statement for both sides of the aisle have been harping on how much spending and waste the last few terms has yielded. Tis true that this is quite a dangerous game, but he stated he will gladly hear where the government needs to trim it's fat. On the converse, if the state of our budget is as he says it is, then the Republicans have done a noble deed for this nation. In such, Republicans have done a noble work in a very small amount of time.
"Yes, after 11 years of Republican majority we've pared it down pretty good."
While those of us on the right side of the aisle know that the latter is not the case, it will be entertaining to observe the writhing and antics of those on the left as they wrestle with this grand 'strategery' of House Majority Leader Delay. Let us hope and trust that this will shine a bright light on the radical, out-of-control spending of our leaders, left or right. Unfortunately, our government emanates the theme of a quote from former President Reagan,
"It's not fair to say that Congress spends money like a drunk sailor. At least
the sailor is spending his own money!"


The John Roberts Show

Regardless of whether Judge Roberts is an 'activist,' a 'textualist' or an 'orginalist,' it matters not in any sense at this point in time, for he is about to be confirmed as this nation's 17th Chief Justice to the Supreme Court of the United States.

This assertion should be seen as a foregone conclusion at this point in the procedure. Despite my daily toils and tribulations, I was able to sit down and absorb limited coverage of the confirmation hearings this afternoon. It is with such limited time that I make no mistake in saying 'regardless,' for anyone observing the poise and candor of Judge John Roberts knows how he developed his solid reputation and distinguished resume in his short fifty years and shorter legal career. His ability to recollect the most minute detail of some of the most archaic cases and controversies is unfathomable. Not to mention, his ability to articulate some of the most difficult legal issues with such poignancy and simplicity is nothing short of mind-boggling.

Despite the poisonous barbs flung from those sitting to Chairman Arlen Specter's left, Judge Roberts was able to maintain his composure and run circles around anything that the Democrats believed they had in their arsenal. The Democrats should take a moment and realize that their actions do not come across as noble, nor do they come across as valiant, these attacks are as transparent as the puny rhetoric contained within the attacks. Again, these games played by the politicians matter not in the least since Judge John Roberts could not be handling the situation in a more dignified manner.

Judge John Roberts has, and will continue to prove he is qualified for the position that President Bush has nominated him for, it is not to be the decision of the Senate on the merits whether he ascends to the center chair, it is the Senate's responsibility to determine his qualifications. With each barb lobbed by Senators Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer; Judge Roberts further illustrates why I, along with others, are beginning to see President Bush plucked the right man to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist.


Monumental Day

Considering this nation will only have had 17 Supreme Court Chief Justice's when Judge John Roberts succeeds the late Chief Justice Rehnquist, today's process and the ramifications that will be felt from it, should merit anyone concerned with the leaders of this nation to take observation of this process as it unfolds this week.

National Review's Edward Whelan provides a thought-provoking forecast of how he speculates the confirmation of Judge Roberts will inevitably play out:

[T]he three fundamental dynamics of the hearing: (1) While feigning
openmindedness at the outset of the hearing, the committee's Democrats will
harshly attack Roberts. (2) Roberts's primary strategic goal will be to secure
Chairman Arlen Specter's support, not to appease Democrats. (3) And the other
Republican senators on the committee will face a choice between the politically
safe and lazy course of defending Roberts entirely on neutral grounds and the
jurisprudentially sound course of advancing the arguments for judicial

There is every reason to believe that Roberts will be confirmed as chief justice. But how these dynamics play out during Roberts's hearing will shape the battle over the next justice.
As Mr. Whelan states, it seems to be a growing conclusion that this process is all but a non-issue for the credentials that Judge Roberts has devloped over his short, but prestigious career ensure his speedy confirmation. I, too, share this belief, though I do not foresee the Democrats neglecting an oppurtunity to grandstand and berate President Bush's nominee before a national audience, I think he will readily ascend to the bench before the Court's new term is set to begin.

Hat Tip to the 'Museum of Left Wing Lunacy' for this political cartoon. I am sure that everyone, on both the left and right side of the aisle, can find a little humor from this.


9/11 (+4)

I laughed, I scoffed at my friends. I blatantly told them that they were blowing it out of proportion somehow and arrogantly told them that what they were describing could not conceivably occur in the United States of America.

Then, a man with whom I would not suspect to be one succumbing to emotions entered the room to begin our meeting, and stated, with a tearful eye, that he had friends in the Pentagon, saying nothing more as he departed. Dumbstruck and not knowing what to expect, I rushed home to a find a great friend staring at a television screen in disbelief, and with genuine fear, an image that would inevitably be seared into my mind: the first scenes of the WTC crumbling. I will never forget the look on his face as he turned to look at me....

With such, I was swept away into action for the rest of the day, emotion did not catch up with me until standing at a Red Cross shelter looking at the countless faces that reflected the same look, the same eyes that my friend had.....

What happened? Why? Who? Of course, we did not know that day.

In the ensuing weeks we learned. I received this letter as a 'FORWARD,' and its words resonated with me throughout those early weeks. It words still bring those same basic human emotions that I felt that day and the weeks to follow:

'We'll go forward from this moment'

It's my job to have something to say.
They pay me to provide words that help make sense of that which troubles the American soul. But in this moment of airless shock when hot tears sting disbelieving eyes, the only think
that I can find to say, the only words that seem to fit, must be addressed to the unknown author of this suffering.
You monster. You beast. You unspeakable bastard.
What lesson did you hope to teach us by your coward's
attack on our World Trade Center, our Pentagon, us? What was it you hoped we
would learn? Whatever it was, please know that you failed.
Did you want us to respect your cause? You just damned your cause.
Did you want to make us fear? You just steeled our resolve.
Did you want to tear us apart? You just brought us together.
Let me tell you about my family and my people. We are a
vast and quarrelsome family, a family rent by racial, social, politics and class
division, but a family nonetheless. We're frivolous, yes, capable of expending
tremendous emotional energy on pop culture minutiae - a singer's revealing
dress, a ball team's misfortune, a cartoon mouse. We're wealthy, too, spoiled by
the ready availability of trinkets and material goods, and maybe because of
that, we walk through life with a certain sense of blithe entitlement. We are
fundamentally decent, though - peace loving and compassionate. We struggle to
know the right thing and to do it. And we are, the overwhelming majority of us,
people of faith, believers in a just and loving God.
Some people - you, perhaps - think that any or all of this makes us weak. You're mistaken. We are
not weak. Indeed, we are strong in ways that cannot be measured in arsenals
Yes, we're in pain now. We are in mourning and
we are in shock. We're still grappling with the unreality of the awful thing you
did, still working to make ourselves understand that this isn't a special effect
from some Hollywood blockbuster, isn't the plot development from a Tom Clancy
novel. Both in terms of the awful scope of their ambition and the probable final
death toll, your attacks are likely to go down as the worst acts of terrorism in
the history of the United States, and probably, the history of the world. You've
bloodied us as we have never been bloodied before.
But there's a gulf of difference between making us bloody and making us fall. This is the lesson Japan was taught to its bitter sorrow the last time anyone his us this hard, the last
time anyone brought us such abrupt and monumental pain. When roused, we are
righteous in our outrage, terrible in our force. When provoked by this level of
barbarism, we will bear any suffering, pay any cost, go to any length, in the
pursuit of justice.
I tell you this without fear of contradiction. I know my
people, as you, I think, do not. What I know reassures me. It causes me to
tremble with dread of the future.
In the days to come, there will be recrimination and accusation, fingers pointing to determine whose failure allowed this to happen and what can be done to prevent it from happening again.
There will be heightened security, misguided talk of revoking basic freedoms.
We'll go forward from this moment sobered and chastened, sad. But determined, too. Unimaginably determined.

You see, the steel in us is not always
readily apparent. That aspect of our character is seldom understood by people
who don't know us well. On this day, the family's bickering is put on

As Americans we'll weep, as Americans we mourn, and as Americans, we will rise in defense of all that we cherish.
So I ask again: What was it you hoped to teach us? It occurs to
me that maybe you just wanted us to know the depths of your hatred. If that's
the case, consider your message received. And take this message in exchange: You
don't know my people. You don't know what we're capable of. You don't know what
you just started.

But, you're about to learn.
-Leonard Pitts, Jr.

Now, in retrospect, as I look at these same words for the first time since those days, the words that jump from the page are

When roused, we are righteous in our outrage, terrible in our
force. When provoked by this level of barbarism, we will bear any suffering, pay
any cost, go to any length, in the pursuit of justice.

Thank God almighty himself for genuine leaders who do not utter such rhetoric for it's own sake, but who pursue such endeavors with cognizance of the ramifications they entail. This war against the barbarians began long before 9/11, but just as we have done throughout our long history, we were slow to ascertain a threat upon our national security until the losses were personal and loss was quite substantive. This directly correlating with our peaceful nature and our seeing the best in anyone before coming to terms with the worst human nature has to offer. Despite the disingenuous nature of the those on the left who will stop at nothing in their frothing hatred of this President, Americans have stayed the course. Americans, reminiscent of scores of previous generations, know, as does our President, that we have a long, treacherous road ahead of us. It is with such that I am genuinely proud of my fellow Americans, our family, being united in times when it matters the most. Just like a family, we know when and how to put away the bickering.

As we still move forward, we must not afford to forget the pain. We cannot afford to forget the suffering endured by our fellow Americans. As the far left has done in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, they are now doing in full force with 9/11, it has become a political game to be mastered, through which spin and conspiracy theories run ramped. What asinine, naive games those on the left play with such that is the basis of our human existence, our lives. This definitively illustrates why these people continue to fail miserably in every election. Fortunately for every American, left or right, they continue dogmatically to cling to their naivete, through which those with courage to face what is reality continue to protect each and every one of our lives.

My fellow Americans, remember these images, remember that day. I began this post with but a piece of that day that was my own personal account. It still hurts to relive some of those memories, but we must all cling to our memories, our personal accounts. We must steadfastly hold onto what happened to us personally and what happened to our brothers and sisters. If we cannot hold these occurrences, and remember the undying hatred that that day saw, how can we be that beacon of freedom for the rest of the world? How can we spread hope throughout the world? For those who know not what they have, who fail to appreciate the blessings, will surely lose those blessing. Any apathy to something such as 9/11 would show that we have not learned, and those that do not learn from history....

(Please consider this an open forum to iterate your memories or share in other memorials. I will continue this thread as a forum that I will continue to update, if you would like to share any links of interest, or just share your thoughts, it is encouraged and would be appreciated)

Ace of Spades - September 11th
All Things Beautiful - Remembrance of Things Past
Area417 - Sept. 11: What were you doing four years ago today?
Atlas Shrugs - No Words
Barking Moonbat - The Day the Music Died
Blogs for Bush - Remembering
Bring it On! - Reflecting Back and Looking Forward
Brutally Honest
- You haven't forgotten... have you?
California Yankee - A Day For Remembering
Cap'n Bob - Remembering September 11, 2001
Captain's Quarters - Remembering 9/11
CatHouse Chat - Four years ago - never forget
California Conservative - 9/11: In Memoriam
Confederate Yankee
- Nine Eleven Zero Five
Hugh Hewitt - The Heroes of the Long War
Pirate's Cove - 9/11: 4 Years Ago
The Jawa Report - Al Qaeda takes 9/11 anniversary to threaten more attacks
Ogre's Politics & Views - September 11th
PoliPundit - September 11 – In Pictures
Sportshaven - A Time to Reflect
Southern Appeal - Remember the Blood of Heroes
Generation Why? - Never Forget
Michelle Malkin
My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy - In Memoriam
Peat Bog - 9.11: A Beautiful Story
The Donkey Stomp - Remember September 11, 2001
The Moderate Voice - Four years later...
The Political Teen - 9/11 - Never Forget
Ravings of a Mad Tech - 9/11: My Remberance by Todd D. Miller
Red State Rant - September 11, 2005
Sister Toldjah - Remembering 9-11-01 (Reposting)
Stop the ACLU - September 11th Remembered
Speed of Thought... - Remembering...
The Wide Awakes - 9/11
The Gun Toting Liberal - It's 9/11 Again
Winds of Change - 9/11: Risin' Up From The Ashes...
Wizbang! - 9/11 Four Years Later (1)
Zaphriel's Blog - It was a Tuesday morning

Powered by Blogger

Locations of visitors to this page