The Imus and Sharpton Story, Take Two
Jun 24, 2008 General
Well, here we go again with Don Imus. Yesterday on the Imus show they were discussing NFL player Adam Jones and the fact that he had been arrested six times. Imus asked what color he was and when informed that Jones was African American Imus stated; “There you go. Now we know.” Needless to say, this has set off round 2 of the firestorm with Al Sharpton declaring that this would be looked into to see if action needs to be taken. First of all, who made Sharpton the radio police? Second of all, why not wait for the rest of the story which happens to be that Imus was indicating that Jones was being picked on because he is black.
Does anyone remember Al Sharpton declaring that he would look into the comments made by Barack Obama when Obama said that his grandmother was a typical white person? No one can remember such a thing because it did not happen. None of the race baiting poverty pimps decried Obama’s comments and when a stink was made about the issue Obama and his people gave an explanation and it was bought by everyone who has fallen under his spell. No protests from Sharpton, no demands that Barry step down and I think that Sharpton even accused Obambi of schmoozing up to the whites too much.
Whether Imus meant it as he says or not is only known to Imus but the fact is he stated that is what he meant and that is how it should be taken. Sharpton has no right to look into anything to begin with but now this should stop him in his tracks. Sharpton has no moral authority in race relations. He is a race baiter who overlooks acts of racism by black people and exploits any possibility of racism from whites. Al has incited violent riots where people have been killed (if it had been my family member there would be no Al Sharpton) and he has continually made racial issues out of nothing. Duke rape case, Jena six, and countless other issues were incited and inflamed by him and he moved on leaving the embers to burn. When the issues were settled and no racism existed, he did not apologize, he made excuses and still linked it to racism.
I understand that there are those who will say that Imus has a history so his acts need to be looked at. Well, Barack Obama has a racist history and his associations with people like Pastor Wright (who was also ignored by Sharpton) as well as Father Pfleger leave him open to the same scrutiny. I would think that Obambi’s associations with Al Sharpton would be considered a racist history.
Of course Al and his lemmings cannot go after Barry O. He is a brother and he might be president some day. We all know black people cannot be racists and Al cannot take them to task because of slavery oh so long ago. As an aside, Al and Barry seem to be doing pretty well for people who are still oppressed by the scars of slavery.
I know Al will never go after a black guy and will concentrate on any white who he thinks has offended in even the most remote way. But Al, Barry Obama is half white and given your hatred for white people I would think you’d at least pick on Barry half the time.
Regardless of how Imus meant it, the bar has been set and he should be left alone.
Tags: Imus, Obama, race baiter, racist remark, sharpton
SCOTUS Ignores History in Decision
Jun 14, 2008 General, Terrorism
The Supreme Court ruled this past week that terrorists at Gitmo had the same rights as American citizens even though they are not in our country and they are not citizens. In so deciding, the majority, comprised of the liberals on the court, and the new Sandra O’Connor, Anthony “Swing Vote” Kennedy decided that they would ignore centuries of legal precedent. Amazingly, Democrats like Chuck Schumer are not jumping up and down and screaming at the court.
You see, Schumer was one of the libs who grilled John Roberts in his confirmation hearing on the subject of abortion. The concept of stare decisis came up and Roberts agreed that it was important. Stare decisis is a doctrine that says courts will follow previous judicial decisions unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. Schumer wanted to make sure Roberts understood that the Democrats viewed the issue of abortion settled law and they wanted Roberts to affirm his belief in the settled law, the principle of stare decisis.
With regard to Boumediene v Bush, the court ignored centuries of legal precedent and they ignored the Constitution. They cite article I Section 9 which states the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in time of rebellion or invasion. This is all well and good but it means with regard to whom the Constitution applies. The terrorists at Gitmo are not citizens and they are not even in our country. Not only did the majority ignore history but they admitted they have no basis upon which to justify the ruling:
The court majority did so acknowledging that they could find no precedent to confer such a right to alien enemies not within sovereign U.S.
They could find no precedent to confer such a right on aliens but they certainly had plenty of precedent to deny the right. They ignored the precedent and though only they know absolutely why, their actions make it appear as if they support the enemy and want to see America weakened.
Americans who are bothered by this decision and the blatant disregard for our Constitution should remember this. The next president will likely get to appoint two or three justices. Do we really want two or three more of the kind of people who gave us this ruling? As an aside, these are the people who ruled that it was OK for the government to take your property and give it to private entities.
Do we really want more people like this on the court or do we want justices who use the Constitution and the rule of law to make decisions?
Sources:
Townhall
US Constitution
Tags: liberal majority, poor ruling, precedent, stare decisis, supreme court
Tim Russert Dies of Heart Attack
Jun 13, 2008 General
Tim Russert, NBC News’ Washington bureau chief and the moderator of “Meet the Press,” collapsed at the NBC’s Washington News bureau and died of a heart attack this afternoon while recording voice overs for Meet the Press. He was 58 years old.
The Big Dog family extends it prayers to the Russert family.
Sources:
MSNBC
New York Times
New York Post
UPDATE: I heard that Russert had just returned from Italy (his family was there at the time of his death) and I am wondering if he suffered a thrombosis from the long flight and threw a clot while working. I guess they will do an autopsy to find out.
UPDATE II On Fox they reported that an autopsy will be performed tonight and that a medical technician said they would look into whether he threw a clot.
Others:
Jake Trapper | Wizbang | Hot Air | The Anchoress
Tags: dead, nbc, tim russert
Some Advice for Israel
Jun 10, 2008 General
Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit has been in captivity for two years after he was abducted by militants in Gaza. He recently sent a letter begging his country not to forget him and that he wanted to be home. He also indicated that his health was failing. There is no reason that this soldier should still be in captivity. His country started fighting to get him back but the UN complained about the disproportionate response. Sadly, our own country worked to get the fighting stopped. The people who took Shalit will not let him go unless they are afraid. Here is what Israel should do:
Send notification to the UN that they have one week to get the soldier released. He needs to be alive and relatively unharmed. If, at the end of the week, the UN has failed to get him released Israel will give his captors an additional 24 hours to send him home. Israel needs to make it clear to the UN and to the terrorists holding him that they plan to bomb his captors into oblivion if they fail to release him as outlined.
Israel needs to make absolutely certain that the UN and the captors as well as those harboring them know that the bombing campaign will not stop until the place is leveled and every living thing is killed. Then, if he is not released, Israel needs to make good on the threat and they need to continue bombing the place until the soldier is released or everyone is killed. It is that simple and the UN needs to understand that Israel will not bow to pressure because they gave that body its chance.
If other countries feel the need to get involved Israel needs to make clear its intent to use nuclear weapons against any country that jumps into the fray. Israel should be relentless and keep killing until they put fear in the hearts of everyone so that they will be left alone. It should also be made clear that any news organization that gets in the way will be considered the enemy and dealt with. Israel does not need more of al-Reuters passing around a baby that Israel did not kill as propaganda.
Gilad Shalit might end up dying in the attack but it is obvious that he is in poor health and that his captors do not care about him. They can, of course, avoid a massacre by releasing the soldier. After the demands are made the ball will be in the court of the UN and the captors. The deadline might seem short but they have had two years to solve this problem.
It is time to stop playing games with these terrorists and start injecting them with fear instead.
Source:
breitbart
Tags: bombing, captive, gilad shalit, Israel, terrorists, war
There Never was a Heterosexual AIDS Pandemic Threat
Jun 9, 2008 General
The World Health Organization (WHO) has accepted as truth that the threat of a heterosexual AIDS pandemic has disappeared. That was nice of them but there never was a threat of a pandemic. HIV and AIDS are transmitted, mostly, through high risk behavior such as IV drug use with shared needles, homosexual sex and sex with those who engage in high risks.
Certainly the possibility exists that monogamous heterosexuals can get the disease. this can happen through tainted blood transfusions and exposure to contaminated body fluids (as in health care workers). However, the risk of contracting AIDS has always been low for heterosexuals who do not engage in sexual activity with high risk partners. The risk of a heterosexual pandemic has never really existed. Yes, outbreaks can occur and heterosexuals can get AIDS but the likelihood of a pandemic was close to zero, or nonexistent.
The whole issue was suggested years ago when homosexuals were singled out as having high risk for the disease based upon their sexual practices. They complained about the suggestion that their lifestyle put them at higher risk and they believed that if AIDS were only recognized as a pandemic in their group (and those of other high risk behaviors) then research and funding for a cure would be minimal. By including the average every day heterosexual they were able, in their minds, to get research money directed toward curing the disease. This idea is ridiculous. We have not halted the research into the cure for lung cancer based on the fact that smokers are more likely to get it.
In all this time research money and time has been wasted looking for ways to stop a pandemic occurrence of heterosexual acquired AIDS when money and time would have been better if it had been focused on those most likely to get the disease. It took quite a bit of time for people to state the obvious.
The study still has unanswered questions:
But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said.
“The impact of HIV is so heterogeneous. In the US , the rate of infection among men in Washington DC is well over 100 times higher than in North Dakota, the region with the lowest rate. That is in one country. How do you explain such differences?” The Independent
I have certainly not looked at the data but off the top of my head I would have to say it is because Washington DC has a larger population of homosexuals and IV drug users than does North Dakota. There are not as many people engaging in high risk behavior in North Dakota as there are in DC. Washington is a bastion of liberalism and the “do what you want in life” mentality, so when coupled with the population demographics, it stands to reason that DC will have the higher rate. Also, the National Institute of Health is in DC and there are research hospitals as well so it also stands to reason that some of the population migrated to DC for [inclusion in] research, testing and treatment.
The waste of time and money over the years is attributable to a politically correct attitude that said we could not single out high risk groups. This makes as much sense as spending years researching the affects of sickle cell anemia in whites who do not come from [have ancestry in] Africa, South or Central America (especially Panama), Caribbean islands, Mediterranean countries (such as Turkey, Greece, and Italy), India, and Saudi Arabia. Since the disease affects mostly African Americans in the US it would be a waste of resources to do expansive research in whites. This is the same principle for AIDS research.
Once again, political correctness rears its ugly head…
Tags: AIDS, HIV, pandemic, political correctness, research, world health organization