CNN percentage of story devoted to headline askew

CNN has a story with the heading "Inquiry into leak of NSA spying program launched". Then out of a 546 word article CNN devotes 45 words to it where a 24 word paragraph is simply a slightly reworded repeat of the 21 word opening.

The other 500 words address the NSA wiretapping itself with a description of the wiretapping, Bush's defense of it from his speech, and criticism of its use by Democrats and "some Republicans". (Note the attempt at painting the criticism as bi-partisan. It is more bi-polar than bi-partisan).

CNN could have used those 500 words to launch into how revealing national security secrets in the past have put our country in danger. They could have talked about the hypocrisy of Democrats with their "selective outrage syndrom" (SOS). They could have talked about mountain leaks (NSA) and mole-hill leaks (Valerie Plame). They could have talked about the devastation of 9/11 as as reminder of why national security is so important. They could have described some of the known steps that countries such as Israel takes to keep their people safer, yet still terrorists get through.

There are many beneficial things CNN could have used this topic to discuss, yet they chose the path most critical of Bush. Just how do these people state there is no left-wing bias in the media and keep a straight face? What a fun reality TV show it would be to get some of these lefties on a lie-detector machine and ask a few fun questions such as:

• Is there a left-wing bias in the media?
• Are you rooting for the US to win the war on terror?
• Do you really believe Bush is as bad as you claim or do you just want power back?
• Are lower taxes good for the US economy?
• Do you really think man is causing global warming or do you just want to hurt the US economy?
  
• Is there a God?
  

Perhaps you can think of other questions for the lefties. Or if you are liberal, what fun questions do you have for those on the right?

ACLU discriminates against brown-skinned males

Either the ACLU is rooting for terrorists or they are discriminating against brown-skinned males. Read all about the ACLU's criticism of a program the profiles on behaviour. TSA agents are being trained to look for passengers that are nervous, won't make eye-contact, wearing heavy coats in winter, etc. They are then trained to make "casual" conversation about their travel plans to get them to give revealing answers. Sounds like a great program, but the ACLU calls it a "code word for targeting brown-skinned males between ages 17 and 45 years". Huh?

Stop the ACLU points out their discrimination:

"I don’t understand, are the ACLU saying that only brown-skinned males between the ages 17 and 45 years old are shifty eyed, avoid eye contact, and act nervous when asked simple routine questions? Are these the only people that might wear coats in the middle of summer?"

It sounds like the ACLU needs to clean house of their racist thinking. If all races can exhibit these less than desireable behaviors, why is the ACLU so quick to brand brown-skinned males with such stereo-typing? Or do they fear the program will actually prevent other terrorist attacks?

Captains Quarters Milking Cookies post shows MSM hypocrisy and maybe a little more

CQ has a very interesting post on MSM exposure of the NSA's website leaving cookies on the computers of those who visit there. The NYT (yes again) printed an AP report (yes again) about the cookie issue and then CNN and the Guardian pile on about it.

CQ' Captain Ed then takes a look on his computer and finds the following cookies:

Cookie ........................................................... Expires

ads.guardian.co.uk ....................................... 12/30/2037
ads.telegraph.co.uk ...................................... 12/30/2037
adserver.tribuneinteractive.com ................... 12/30/2037
adsremote.scripps.com ................................ 12/30/2037
ap.org ........................................................... 09/23/2021
bbc.co.uk ...................................................... 11/21/2009
cnn.com ........................................................ 05/27/2010
foxnews.com ............................................... 12/31/2010
gannettnetwork.com .................................... 12/31/2010
latimes.com .................................................. 12/15/2010
msnbc.msn.com ........................................... 11/04/2021
nytimes.com ....................................... 10/06/2021
usatoday.com .............................................. 12/31/2025
washingtontimes.com .................................. 01/17/2038

There have been a lot of posts about what the biggest story of 2005 is. Most of them I read and say "yeah, that is the one" until I see the next one. Perhaps this post shows one of the biggest stories of 2005 is how the MSM have just fallen all over themselves to look like the biggest fools. By attempting to embarrass Bush, they have often made him actually look good and at the same time done likely irreparable damage to themselves by the mountain of embarrassment heaped on them.

As for the little more part, CQ references a Whizbang observation that the Democratic National Committee website WAS placing persistant cookies on visitor's computers UNTIL this Tuesday. The AP story is dated this Thursday. Did somebody tip off the DNC that this story was coming so they could remove it before publishing? The real question is have MSM employees begun wearing paper bags as they go into work yet?

New York Post smacks down its competitor

The New York Times has seriously exposed it credibility and its reputation and their competitor the New York Post has moved in to strike a blow. With the headline "THE GRAY LADY TOYS WITH TREASON" the Post launches into painting a picture of the NYT as an enemy. The first line asks the question:

" Has The New York Times declared itself to be on the front line in the war against the War on Terror?"

The Post unveils the thinly disguised hypocrisy of the Times where it comes to classified leaks and the Valerie Plame case:

"It has published classified information — and thereby knowingly blown the covers of secret programs and agencies engaged in combating the terrorist threat."
"...though the folks who reacted to the naming of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative aren't exactly shrieking for another grand jury investigation."

The Post points out the Times holding the story for a year and then notes the timing coincides with a book release and the renewal of the Patriot Act:

'The Times says it held the story for more than a year, provoking a predictable uproar on the left. So why did it finally go ahead?

According to a Los Angeles Times report, New York Times editors knew that a book by the article's author was to be published in just a few weeks — and they feared losing their "exclusive" to their own reporter's outside work.

But the exact timing is highly suspect. The article appeared on the very day that the Senate was to vote on a Democratic filibuster against renewal of the anti-terrorist Patriot Act — a vote the Bush administration then lost. At least two previously undecided senators said they voted against the act precisely because of the Times piece.'

The Post also details a other revelations by the Times regarding specific security procedures designed to keep us safe such as the CIA posing as a private charter airline and NYPD plain clothes cops during demonstrations. The Times seems to be methodically stripping all the tools law enforcement uses to protect. The Post clearly points out the result of the Times' irresponsibility:

"The Times, it appears, is less concerned with promoting its dubious views on civil liberties than with undercutting the Bush administration. The end result of the paper's flagrant irresponsibility: Lives have been put in danger on the international, national and local levels.

The ability of the nation to perform the most fundamental mission of any government — protection of its citizens — has been pointlessly compromised."

The bottom line is that there is a high probability that people will die as a result of the New York Times treachery. Islamic radicals stated about the muslims that died on 9/11 that they were martyrs in a cause. Is this how the NYT feels about those whose safety has been compromised by their treason: they will be martyrs for the cause of trying to take down a president? I am sure this article will be dismissed as a hit piece by a competitor trying to get an edge. I think this is the kind of coverage that should be on all of the newspapers and news shows across the country. The Post was too kind. The Times has gone beyond toying with treason, they are up to their necks in it.

United Nations pockets a third of tsunami money

UPI reported on Dec 23 that of the 590 million dollars of relief money funneled through the UN up to 1/3 may have gone to "overhead". While one might think that after the oil for food scandal and the rapes in the Congo by UN peacekeepers the UN might have wanted to lay low on misconduct. One might think that Kofi Annan might have wanted to keep close tabs on the huge amounts of money being handled by the UN. Sadly, no. One third would be over 195 million dollars going to "under the table", I mean "overhead".

The question now is "When will Kofi resign?" When he is not embroiled in scandal, Kofi wiles the rest of his hours downing the USA at each opportunity. The US needs to ask what the purpose of the UN is, and how has the billions we have sunk into this treacherous organization benefited us or the rest of the world for that matter.

This latest outrage will be a true test of the US and world media. Will they actually cover the story thoroughly? Will they probe? Will they ask the tough questions? Will they have the fortitude to stick with it instead of mentioning it in passing? I must say that they are off to a slow start already. Here it is four days after the UPI created this clipping and I am only now hearing about it today. I have been scouring news for days to find some material in this slow time to post about and this is the first I am seeing it because it was mentioned on - you guessed it FNC. Maybe with that exposure, we will start to see the story get legs.

More on Deb Reichmann from AP

I decided to look up Deb 3rd Reichmann to see if she really is the Bush bashing bias reporter I thought she was from the story in my earlier post. Here are a few links where others discuss her and show some of her other works. Judge for yourself:

Patridiot nails her as not reality-based

Painting a nasty picture of Bush according to indcjournal.com

Holy Bush Bashing Batman

Here a Bush basher who is sympathetic with Deb. Deb is the one that took soldiers making sure they had their act together for a videoconference and converted it into a Bush faking news story

Here no surprise Deb was there at Camp Casey in the glory days of Cindy Sheehan

Here is Deb with a winner headline "President Bush Unveils Strategy for Iraq, Democrats Decry ‘Tired Rhetoric’ "

Here Search for Reichmann to see her complain that veterans at a motorcycle rally support Bush over Kerry

Here another hit piece entitled "Bush Trying to Win Over Americans on Iraq"

Like I said, judge for yourself. I for one will know what to expect in future articles and would be shocked if I ever read her write anything positive about Bush.

AP author eyes Completely glazed over by bias

The frequency of AP bias and the number of times I have commented on it almost kept me from pointing out yet another one. However, this one was so beyond the pale I had to point it out. Here an AP author, Deb (3rd) Reichmann, has the gall to claim she can define the legacy of George Bush's presidency. The story is about Bush and 2006; what she thinks he thinks he has to accomplish. Throughout the article, Deb's fangs are dripping with venom after leading this whopper of a statement:

"President Bush, bruised by months of setbacks, enters the new year hoping to win congressional battles over tax cuts and immigration, get rebellious Republicans back in step and nurture a new democracy in Iraq — the make-or-break issue of his legacy."

It is the last part that reveals the politically blind nature of Deb's viewpoint. She just does not have a clue to reality if that is the peephole she reduces Bush's already earned legacy to whether the democracy in Iraq succeeds. It is the "make or break" issue that in her mind comprises the totality of his legacy. While it must be a bitter blow to her that Clinton is still trying to formulate a legacy for his presidency 5 years after leaving office by continued attempts at historical rewrites, she blindly denies the robustness of Bush's legacy sealed before he even leaves office.

While reading one nasty comment after another in the article there is one paragraph dealing with positive items. However, it is couched in the words "Among successes the White House claims in 2005: ..." and followed by a punching one liner "The list of setbacks is longer." One wonders what bitter food she must have been consuming as she wrote: sour grapes, lemons, liquid drain opener??

The success of an Iraqi democracy has nothing to do with Bush's legacy. He has already successfully given them the opportunity and the tools to create their own democracy. If they reject it or decide later to choose tyranny instead, the gift was still given. If I were to bestow a gift of $25,000 to a struggling lower class citizen, I would have given an opportunity to take a life and make something of it. That person choosing to reject or waste my gift would in no way diminish my sacrifice. Iraq can not tarnish Bush's legacy, only their own. Reichmann's self-imposed blindness cannot allow her to see that.

One could devote an entire blog to the exposure of AP ineptness

It seems these days every time I turn around there is yet another opportunity to take umbrage with the Associated Press. They are shamelessly bias and painfully inept in their reporting. More than once I have been corrected for posts based on a fact-challenged AP story.

The American Thinker points to yet another short and sweet falsehood spewed out by AP because of their love-fest with the left by linking to a blog with the original story and commentary. Ron Fournier of the AP cheerfully describes MoveOn.org as a grassroots movement. Please. Take away funding from George Soros and see how much was grass roots.

Better catch it the first time because the MSM won't say it twice

While we are treated to days on end of Tookie Williams and Arnold getting his name removed off Austrian stadiums, don't blink today or you will miss the good Christmas retail news. Reuters is reporting (reluctantly I am sure) that the US spent 8.7 more this Christmas season than last. If the MSM talks about this for more than 1 news cycle it will of course be because they will find a way to cast a dark light on it. Maybe tomorrow we will see a report on the decline of sales of prune juice casting a shadow on the US economy. Today we can celebrate the positive effects of tax cuts on the economy, for tomorrow the historical rewrite and negative spin begins. Hugh Hewitt points out the Dec 1 entry on the LA Times blog claiming a bad season was in the works and that the economy had sprung a leak. I wonder how they will react to the news.

CNN is reporting that the bright sales report (mixed with lower heating oil due to warmer weather because we can't give all the credit to Bush here you know) may be boosting a year end rally in the stock market. The report highlights a point I made in an earlier post:

"The November-December buying period is critical for the U.S. retail industry as it can account for as much as 50 percent of annual sales and profits for some retailers."

My point there was that with this season being the main reason for a large percentage of business activity, it was ridiculous that retailers would bite the hand that feeds them by shying away from the word 'Christmas'.

The report also shows how the prediction was that sales would be down from last year:

"The National Retail Federation (NRF) had forecast holiday sales to grow 6 percent to $439.5 billion, softer than last year's 6.7 percent increase."

We also see there that only in America under a Republican president can GROWTH ever be seen as a downer. As with leaks, I guess there is good growth and bad growth. It is bad growth if it is not as much as some group of yahoos like this one predicted, and good growth if it is better than the same group of yahoos predicted. As a reminder, last year we had 6.7% growth over the previous year, but I recall this being cast as a negative in the press last year (probably because the yahoos had predicted a 6.700000001% growth).

This is great news that deserves more than one news cycle, but since Bush is GOP we will have to enjoy it today. Tomorrow they will probably start speculating on the housing bubble even without new information.

Better to sign and then renege

The world is now doomed because 10 of 15 European countries that signed Kyoto are not meeting their agreement levels. While Kyoto was designed to reduce emissions, carbon dioxide has increased in 13 of 15 countries since signing. While Bush has been trashed for pulling out of the economically suicidal pact just in time, Europe has been praised by the world media for its courage in signing on to the knee jerk reaction to junk science. I guess it is better to commit and fail than never to have committed at all. Well, the truth is that it is better that Bush was able to recognize a skunk early on and avoid it.

Update: Captain's Quarters has an excellent commentary on this here. They especially have a great point on how Kyoto would handcuff the US against China saying:

"Kyoto would handcuff the US while allowing China an unfettered path to sconomic and political domination of the region, the latter being especially unacceptable given China's autocratic one-party regime. Europe, of course, could hardly care less about Chinese expansionism; they care more about reflexive anti-Americanism. The entire raison d'etre of the EU has always been to provide a global economy to rival the US, and Kyoto gives them an opportunity to slow us down. And just as with their debt controls, the EU contingent has no problem breaking treaty mandates on emissions as long as they feel it necessary to do so to remain competitive, making the agreement worthless anyway."

It is important to note that while the American left decries the GOP "having it all", they have no problem with as CQ points out China's 'one party regime'. At least the GOP was voted in rather than taking over with a bloody revolution.

The news cycle filter

It is amazing how the Iraq elections, great economic news or any other news that may reflect positively on Bush or conservatism in general is lucky to get one day's news cycle. They print it or mention it to keep from being accused of the bias they practice, but drop it at the first possible moment.

Then you have a story four days after the strike in New York talking about Mayor Bloomberg's use of the word "thuggishly" to describe the NY Transit union's behavior. Four days later!!! It would take a lot of time, but I have a few ideas for websites that would be very useful. One would be based on events and who / how long stories are posted based on that event. Another would be based on author. In news outlets like AP, you have multiple authors that write the stories. It would be great to see who wrote what to show clear bias trends by author.

For the record, I applaud Bloomberg's use of a derivative of the word "Thug" to describe a union. I have been a union member during a strike (shortly before I launched my current career) and I have had other exposures to unions since and believe me the word "Thug" is the most appropriate word I know to describe them. I think unions were started for good reasons, and they can still have a good purpose. However, they insist by their actions to be very self-destructive. I think the teacher's unions are the bane of the United States, and the biggest reason for the poor performance in our education system. Perhaps four days of news coverage of union thuggishness might have value, but of Bloomberg's use of the word thuggish? No way.

Narnia movie help economy in the candy sector

In the recently released movie "Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" the young boy Edmund is offered something to eat that would be magically made. Edmund asks the witch for some Turkish Delight, which is so good he craves more.

This brief reference in the movie has boosted candy sales of Turkish Delight in the UK with one store ASDA increasing Turkish Delight sales by 42%. The success of the movie is good to see. It will not break the all-time sales records, but its success will surely be enough to launch the next in the series: Prince Caspian.

Perhaps there are other sectors that will receive a boost: archery, swords, horse riding, finely crafted furniture? We'll see.

Do you still get 72 virgins when you accidentally blow yourself up

Six Taliban stooges tried to plant a landmine and the whole operation literally blew up in their faces. The first question I have is how many Taliban does it take to plant a landmine - or change a lightbulb for that matter? The second question is do they still get the 72 virgins even though they did not plan on martyrdom and they only blew up themselves? Of course it is a shame they don't know what is really waiting for them on the other side whether they succeed or fail in their martyrdom attempts. If they knew, martyrdoms would go down to zero overnight. Whether it is Taliban fanatics or the simple purse snatcher, it is always a pleasure to see ironic justice. While I feel bad these people chose such a self-destructive path in life, this outcome is better than the loss of innocent life if they had successfully planted the landmine.

Merry Christmas to all - 2005

The Logic Lifeline is signing off now for the Christmas holiday. After a few more tasks, we are off to family festivities. Our family will be celebrating the miraculous birth of He who was born to die for us. However you might celebrate this holiday, I wish you all a Merry Christmas.

AICS

The power of the oversimplified soundbyte

Remember during Clinton's impeachment and beyond how liberals took Clinton's perjury, the law breaking basis for the impeachment, and reduced it to the simple soundbyte that the GOP wanted to impeach Clinton for sex. Such a simple thing to reroute the real issue into something that many Americans could relate to and view the GOP as witch-hunting for political gain. The power of that oversimplified soundbyte was very successful in making Clinton look like a victim and the GOP look like bullies.

Imagine as this spying, eavesdropping and now radiation monitoring can be boiled down to the oversimplified soundbyte that the Democrats want to impeach Bush for doing all he could to protect the American people. What power. What a complete blowup in the Democrats face. The Democrats had better watch their step in this little endeavor, or they will see this attack turn into a uniting force around Bush that will be the deathstroke for the Democratic party.

The Democrats are already highly perceived as being weak on national security. It is fast becoming axiomatic. If they go for Bush's jugular on this non-issue, while at the same time giving the egregious national security leakers and the treasonous national security printers at the New York Times a pass, their doom is sealed. They will be revealed as power hungry people who's only goal is to get rid of a political opponent. Their actions have thus far appear that they have cheered the US economic demise, they have cheered US defeat in Iraq and they now appear to be cheering on terrorist attacks in the US as long as Bush goes.

I think 2006 will be the most interesting year in US politics ever. I am looking forward to seeing events unfold. May truth and right prevail.

Libs just can't stop showing us why they should never head national security

The Political Teen has a clip from the Fox Dayside show where liberal Ellis Henican makes the outrageous claim that we have not had a terrorist attack in the US since 9/11 due to LUCK. Completely dismissing the hard won Patriot Act and a president willing to stick his neck out to authorize controversial wire tapping, Ellis sits around thinking these things just happen. As many moms and wives will attest: their husbands and kids think housework and meals just magically happen until momma is incapacitated and someone else needs to do it.

The audience was asked to show by applause whether it was luck or the Patriot Act preventing terrorist attacks. Nobody clapped for luck and a lot clapped for the P.A. This ridiculous declaration by Ellis shows how liberals just cannot be trusted with national security. Liberals want to criticize any tough measure used to stop terrorists, while sitting around thinking security just happens by luck.

Bush gets a Christmas poll present

With likely the last poll results by Rasmussen before the holidays, Bush gets a Christmas present and breaks the 50% approval mark. There are now two polls out there in the last 2 weeks showing a 50% job approval. I only look at polls for entertainment value and it is high entertaintment today to think of all the liberal reactions smack in the middle of this non-scandal. Poor things, the more they try the better things go for Bush.

Newsbusters shows Today's ANWR deceit

As liberals everywhere celebrate the blocking of the passage of ANWR drilling so we can continue to be the most dependent on foreign oil as possible, Newsbusters shows how the Today show was extremely deceitful on the subject. The two pictures tell the story as the one with the beautiful mountains were shown on Today. This location is nowhere near where the drilling would actually take place. The real location near what is pictured in the other photo is the pristine wasteland that the environmentalists are protecting.

The ANWR refuge is so huge that the small plot we would be drilling on has been illustrated by comparing a postage stamp to a football field. With environmentally friendly techniques, our footprint in ANWR would be very small. Yet our national security and wallets are hit just to save a spec of what is pictured in the wasteland picture.

Today knew a picture is worth a thousand words and that showing the real location to their viewers would make them scratch their head and wonder why this is such a victory and why paying more at the pump is worth it. So they showed a deceitful picture of lovely mountains and landscape instead. As I have stated before: if you need to deceive to make your point, you are probably wrong.

Rumsfeld hints at lowering troop levels in Iraq

Fox News is reporting that Rummy may cancel the deployment of two Army brigades which along with previously planned reductions would bring levels below 138,000. Now, the Dems have first screamed about having too few troops in Iraq. Then they started the crusade to bring troops home from Iraq. How will they react to this reduction? Will they try to steal credit like I have predicted on several posts? Or will they wildly swing to the other side and again claim there are not enough troops now to do the job? With the constant shifting of positions to posture for the next attack on Bush, who can tell. It should be fun to see what they do next in their quest for irrelevancy.

Newsweek compares South African blacks to terrorists

The title of the commentary is "Where is the Outrage". You can almost taste the disappointment that yet another attempt to harm Bush politically is fizzling. You can almost picture the author Arlene Getz looking under the Christmas tree for some sign of Bush's demise only to see his poll numbers rising and the Democrats looking like chumps ... again. Panic sets in. What can she do! What can she do? I know, what is the baddest thing I can compare this to: Aparteid! Remember the scene in the movie "The Hitcher" where the kid gets the gun and tries to shoot the hitcher, but the bullets had been taken out. The "poor baby" look on the hitcher's face comes to mind here.

Getz tries to compare Bush to the white South African leader justifying spying on the blacks, the problem is that comparison leaves the blacks he is spying on compared to today's terrorists. Just think if a conservative made that link, what howling from the politically correct we would hear.

To make it clear, this is the commentary page, so I have no problem with the political bias dripping from her every word, but you can tell Arlene is pulling out all the stops to gin up some outrage against Bush. She begins talking about how the South African newspapers stopped reporting items such as detaining thousands of blacks, torture including children, hit squads killing political opponents and shooting into crowds of blacks. Arlene then quotes the white woman opening her newspaper empty of these things and stating, "It's so nice, not to open the papers and read all that bad news."

Getz completely sidesteps the fact that the Clinton and Carter administrations had similar policies. I also find it interesting that at the end she launches into a completely unrelated topic of Desmond Tutu's reaction to Bush being reelected. Tutu completely misunderstands the term "free speech" and blames a lack of it on Bush being reelected and being shocked over it. Somehow Tutu thinks free speech is being able to say anything without being challanged. According to him when Bush was attacked during the campaign, he should just have taken it. I guess Tutu thinks free speech is a one way street and that Bush or his supporters don't have the right.

So where is the outrage? Getz is trying to misdirect it at Bush. I have outrage over this issue. It is directed at the terrorists and the liberals around the world not working to help erradicate them. I am outraged against liberals who created an atmosphere with the 9-11 commission that terrorist attacks will mean opportunities to score political points. I am outraged at the liberals who want to shackle and handcuff all efforts to thwart terrorism, while making it clear if attacks occur blame will be laid at Bush's doorstep.

If it were a clear, majority, bi-partisan decision that we would fight terrorism without coming close to treading on civil liberties and if we are attacked, then we did what we could while clearly preserving our rights. If that were an option, we as a country could decide that attacks are better than wire tapping, etc. and deal with the consequences. But that is not an option being given. The options for Bush are stop all terrorist attacks or pay politically, but every tool to stop them is withheld from you; if you use them anyway you will pay politically. Getz asks where is the outrage she was so much looking forward to seeing. I say her outrage and the outrage of the left is significantly misplaced.

Best quote of the day goes to Sen. Pat Roberts

Democrats are trying to spin their way out of being notified about the wire tapping / eavesdropping NSA decision by Bush, so they can maximize their political attack on him. After Bush stated they were notified of this, they tried to claim they 'did not ok it'. Nobody said they did. Executive orders don't need their ok.

Now Sen. Jay Rockefeller throws out a letter written to Cheney in July 2003 stating he was "unable to fully evaluate, much less endorse these activities."

According to a NewsMax article (source AP):

' Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., pushed back Tuesday, saying that if Rockefeller had concerns about the program, he could have used the tools he has to wield influence, such as requesting committee or legislative action. "Feigning helplessness is not one of those tools," Roberts said. '

Roberts quote of the day underscores the fact that Democrats must feign something in order to advance politically. In reality we continue to see that whether they 'feign' or not, they lose.

We have the orchestra but who is the conductor

It is becoming obvious that the eavesdropping story has been well orchestrated by the left as a political hit against President Bush. First, the New York Times has known about this issue, but sat on it until now. While the elections in Iraq were lucky to make a day's news, we have now had several day's news cycles over this issue. We then find that there is a book about to be released having this same information, giving a little insight as to why the NYT waited on this information.

Today we see another NYT piece now claiming that some of the calls snagged by the NSA were actually domestic to domestic calls. Having sat on the original story so long, we can safely assume that they knew this little piece of information before as well, yet timed it to keep the story alive. I suppose it is possible that the leaking spy that gave them the story in the first place called to make this additional claim.

Of course the Democrats at the cue of the conductor stepped in talking about impeachment, parading around John Dean from the Nixon administration. Funny how they cherry pick credibility from that administration. The Democrats are completely blowing off the fact that they were fully aware of this yet never said a word and are completely ignoring the precedent set for this in the Clinton administration.

Now for a crescendo, on cue a Clinton appointed judge in the Secret Court is resigning "out of principle" over the eavesdropping issue. No comment on why he did not refuse to join the court on principle against Clinton's Echelon domestic spying project.

Next we have Newsweek's Jonathon Alter altering the story with a few mind-reading tricks. Bush called the editor and publisher of the NYT to the Oval Office to ask them not to print the story. Alter is somehow able to claim that Bush's motive was to avoid scandal and embarrassment rather than being concerned about natinal security. Did he see this in tea leaves? Did he get a Tarot card reading? Or does he have a psychic as a secret source? Just how did he pull off this amazing feat. He does not say, but writes the claim anyway.

So we have the orchestra playing on cue at each turn, while people ignore the most egregious scandal of the NYT and the Democratic Party synchronizing their steps. The real question is who is the conductor?

The funny part of this whole story is that we have a current culture that practically looks to the government to wipe its nose when they have a cold. They stand in the path of oncoming disaster waiting for government buses to rescue them. They don't want us having guns to protect ourselves; but be at the mercy of the delay between a 911 call and the police arriving. they want government to watch over and protect us from cradle to grave and people are bying it. Yet somehow they think that these same people are going to be upset watching over them by eavesdopping on people with terrorist ties? The sheep are going to think that this is the government's job and most of the engaged are going to realize this has legal precedent and that the liberals are just trying to enact plan ZZ to try yet again to take down Bush.

The beauty of this is that once again the timing of the Democrats stinks. This now explains why Bush has come out swinging a month earlier than I expected him to. The NYT panicked when Bush started making speeches and answering questions and his numbers started rising. Remember right after that when the Democrats had their secret closed door strategy meeting? I think at that time it was determined to pull the trigger on this whole deal early. Disappointed by the Fitzmas fizzle and the tanking of the Murtha initiative, they could not bear the thought of Bush's approval numbers hitting the dreaded 50% going into next year. So they ha ha ha. sorry. they bwaa haaa haaa. sorry having trouble containing myself here. They snicker, snicker. ok, I can do this. They chose the Christmas holidays to drop their bomb. When few are paying attention and fewer even care. So before this story can even get any traction due to lack of paying attention, the "powerful right wing machine" will have severely blunted the "scandal" with facts. Nice try Dems, but this dog won't hunt.

A special Christmas gift for that hard to shop for person

What do you get for that person in your family that is so hard to shop for? The one who has narrow interests, has everything or is picky? Why you steal a penguin from the zoo and give it to him! Apparently someone has done just that and stolen a jackass penguin from Amazon World on the Isle of Wight in southern England.

American Taliban wants out early

John Walker Lindh is asking for a lighter sentence than the one he did a plea bargain for. His lawyer states:

' "As passions have cooled, it became clearer to people that John was a young man ... who was in the wrong place at the wrong time," said Lindh's attorney, James Brosnahan of San Francisco. "Hopefully, this president or some future president will reduce his sentence." '

Funny, I don't see the words "remorse", "sorry", "wrong" or anything like it. Not that these words are a get out of jail free card in my book, but to ask for a lighter sentence without apology is a kick in the teeth to the soldiers he endangered by fighting on the other side.

Interesting coincidence?

Is this an interesting coincidence, or was Hillary trying to get Cheney out of the way for critical votes?

The New York Post reports on Dec 17 that Hillary advised Cheney to go to Iraq to see what is happening.


Today Fox News is reporting that Cheney is on his way back early because some critical votes are too close to call.

What will really be interesting is if a Democrat accuses Cheney of abandoning the troops for political gain. Prepare yourselves for a major eye roll.

SOS a new disease in American politics

There is a new disease out there in American politics called Selective Outrage Syndrome (SOS). We had years of investigation and countless front page articles on the "leak" of Valerie Plame's name. However, I have seen no such outrage over the leak on eavesdropping.

In fact not only is this a serious breach of national security, the New York Times has seriously sold what soul it had left to time the story with the release of a book after having sat on the information for months.

Instead of Democrats calling for an investigation on the leak of national security classified information, they are calling for an investigation into the eavesdropping. That is a fair topic of debate, but the Dems and their water carrying media are bleeding credibility here by not exhibiting outrage over the leak.

Then there is Arlen Specter who can't keep from embarrassing himself. The MSNBC article states:

"Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has promised hearings next year and said he would ask Bush’s Supreme Court nominee, Samuel Alito, his views of the president’s authority for spying without a warrant."

How many times does it need to be repeated. A SCOTUS nominee should not be commenting on issues where cases are likely to come before his court if confirmed.

I am sure this is another accident by CNN

I was just looking at CNN's website and happened to stumble into the Science and Space section only to find listed there an article subtitled "White House announces $3.1B plan to bolster levee system" about Bush's plan to fix the levee system in New Orleans and joining Mayor Nagin to call for people and resident's to come home.

Maybe that is why we don't see much positive news from Iraq on CNN. Maybe they are putting it in the weather section.

A tale of two poll stories

While CNN is leaping to downplay any benefit from Bush's recent education offensive for his policies in Iraq with the following headline:

Poll: Iraq speeches, election don't help Bush

ABC News claims the opposite:

Poll: Bush's Approval Ratings Climb

The CNN poll shows Bush's approval at 41%, but ABC shows 47%.

Other interesting recent approval Polls:

Fox 42%
Rassmussen 44%
Diageo/Hotline 50%

Please note: the stance of the Logic Lifeline and polls is that they are for entertainment purposes here, while the source tends to use them to create news and to shape public opinion rather than report it. The only polls worth their salt are on election day.

Eminem - Mistreatment or Torture

AP is reporting that music by Eminem and Dr. Dre were used as "instruments of torture". The report states:

"New York-based Human Rights Watch has issued a report saying the United States operated a secret prison in Afghanistan and tortured detainees. The report quoted an Ethiopian-born detainee as saying he was kept in a pitch-black prison and forced to listen to Eminem and Dr. Dre’s rap music for 20 days before the music was replaced by "horrible ghost laughter and Halloween sounds." The report said detainees at the facility -- known as "Dark Prison" -- were deprived of sleep, chained to walls and forced to listen to loud music in total darkness for days."

I am sure the ghost laughter and halloween sounds were quite a respite from the sanity depriving sounds of Eminem. Please. Once again we see the word "torture" being watered down for political gain. What is next? Smelling stinky feet?

Two-thirds of Time Person of the Year goes to capitalism

I find it interesting that 2 of the 3 honored as Time's Person of the Year represent the highest echelon of American capitalism: the Gates. Bill Gates has ridden the capitalist stallion to make his billions and is now choosing a high profile philanthropist path in giving much of his money to charitable causes. This goes completely against the liberal tenets that Time magazine so closely embraces. Liberal socialism seeks to even out the playing field to hold back "go getters" like Gates in order to reward the underachievers far and wide. As for wealth redistribution, I am surprised Time is honoring the voluntary give-away instead of forced extraction through taxation. So whether they realize it or not, the underlining "Person of the Year" is a 2/3 vote for capitalism.

Max Boot points out where most so called torture occurs

In response to the silly defense liberals have given against so called torture of terrorist types, Max Boot in the LA Times points out where most so called torture occurs: in our armed forces training camps. The same techniques used against Al Qaeda types decried by liberals are used on our own troops in special training.

"They are routinely made to stand for long periods in uncomfortable positions. They are made to walk for hours while wearing heavy loads on their backs. They are bullied by martinets who get in their faces and yell insults at them. They are hit and often knocked down with clubs known as pugil sticks. They are denied sleep for more than a day at a time. They are forced to inhale tear gas. They are prevented from seeing friends or family. Some are traumatized by this treatment. Others are injured. A few even die."

We provide this training to prepare them in the event they are taken prisoner and subjected to such treatment. While the liberal media is ready to raise the banner to ensure terrorists everywhere are gauranteed a good nights sleep and gourmet meals, we are not likely to hear a word of complaint about the training we provide our own.

It just appears liberals in the media not only lack the stomach to do what is necessary to defend our country as needed, they also have a real loathing for our men and women in uniform. The reports are always skewed against them and never are the deeds of bravery and even kindness given a spotlight by these children of the 70's. Watch how quickly they skip over the successful elections in Iraq thanks to the diligence of our soldiers, while all negative localized issues related to the military are front page for days and weeks.

Tale of two AP stories

Amazing how AP and other liberal media outlets cannot just let good news for Bush stand in a story without balancing it with bad news or pointing out how badly they perceive Bush needing some good news, etc. When it is a story about a Democrat, AP has no problem making the entire story a 'love fest' with nothing but blue skies to see.

Today there were two AP stories: one about Bush and the Iraqi elections and the other about Hillary Clinton's amazing 6 years as a senator.

The Bush AP story bluntly accuses Bush of capitalizing on the Iraqi vote by stating:

"The appearance of a buoyant Bush in the Oval Office alongside six smiling young Iraqis displaying purple-stained fingers was an attempt to capitalize on any positive news in Iraq."

The AP story then goes on to mention the Sen. Joe Biden is in Iraq for the vote and quoted some negative comments that he made. The AP author did not accuse Biden of capitalizing on the situation, and presented his comments as if they were gospel.

The other AP story about Hillary Clinton is just one gushing comment after another with no challenge or negative angle at all. Some quotes from the love fest:

"Today, she appears to be coasting to a 2006 Senate re-election victory that could set her up for a White House run two years later."

"She also has a ton of money in the bank -- about $14 million as of the end of September and still counting. On Tuesday, she and her famous husband hosted 900 people at $500 a plate in New York City."

"Pirro says she's still in the race, but many GOP leaders believe it's a question of when she drops out, not if."

"Keeping the money flowing has another benefit for Clinton. Any money she doesn't spend in 2006 could be used for a 2008 run for the White House. Most polls have her leading the Democratic field for the nomination. "

The point here is not to claim the statement about Hillary are false. The point is that any true good point in Hillaries favor gets additional good will statements piled on top of them. While with Bush, you can imagine that more time is spent dredging up negative statements to counter any good point they ever have to print about him. The AP is a menace that does not even blush at the blatant bias they spew out while wearing a hat with bold letters that say "Objective". If they were to put out a mission statement admitting the true nature of their publishing: to trash conservatives and worship liberals, I would have no problem with these stories. It is the ridiculous attempt at deceit that makes them worthy of criticism.

Federal court ruling recognizes Christmas

I have taken a passive stance to the "Merry Christmas" debate as I see other issues being more important. I do not think that actively denouncing and boycotting weak-kneed businesses over the "Happy Holidays" gives a good image. Some issues are worth getting a bad image over, but I don't think this is one of them.

On the other hand the ingratitude from retailers exhibited by removing Christ from Christmas is a rather poor image as well. Aside from concerns over celebrating a sacred holiday with such materialism as the pope mentioned recently, this one Christian holiday is the single biggest gravy train retailers have. Without it, many would not survive; so the watered down version of the holiday is a classic case of biting the hand that feeds them. As such Christians should express disappointment over this snub, but I think the high profile activism is energy and resources that could be better placed elsewhere.

The court battles specifically targeting and discriminating against Christian symbols and Christmas decor are a more serious matter. A trend of hostility toward Christianity by the government is dangerous and goes against precedent and long traditions established at the founding of this country.

Today, though, there was an interesting curve in the battle over the government and Christmas. I have linked to a clip from the Neal Boortz website discussing a recent court ruling that FEMA must keep funding housing for displaced Katrina victims. Then, in an amazing recognition of the Christian holiday the judge states:

"It is unimaginable what anxiety and misery these erratic and bizarre vacillations by FEMA have caused the victims, all of whom, for at least one point in time, had the very real fear of being without shelter for Christmas."

So as a justification for continued funding, the federal judge recognizes Christmas, a Christian holiday, as being different from other days. Sounds like Newdow and the ACLU better get down there right away and prevent the government from establishing a Christian religion by getting the ruling overturned and the Katrina victims kicked out in the street before Christmas. I'll take my tongue out my cheek now to say "Merry Christmas".

AP wakes up in middle of speech to produce headline

I was able to listen to nearly all of Bush's speech in Philidelphia today. He took the time to explain the entire process since Saddam was toppled including the times when the Iraqis wanted things done differently and the US revised their plan. While I am sure there will be rebuttal to various aspects of the speech by those on the opposite side of the aisle, I was shocked when I saw the headline the AP put on the story covering the speech. Due to a 1 line piece of information given in the speech, AP titled their story:

Bush Estimates That 30,000 Iraqis Killed

There is freedom of speech and freedom of the press in this country, so the AP can do as they wish. That does not mean that such mean-spirited, out of touch, partisanship in a news source that I am sure would claim to be objective is immune from the disdain they deserve. This line could have been quoted in the story, but to bypass 99.9% of the theme of the speech in order to make an anti-war statement in the title leaves AP clueless and grasping for any remaining credibility they have so squandered away over the years.

A theory on what would have happened

I have said a few times before, we don't get the opportunity to know what would have happened (that is if we had made the other choice). I still believe that, so one man's opinion is as good as the next. In the WSJ Opinion Journal, Holmann W. Jenkins, Jr. takes a stab at writing what would have happened if Saddam Hussein were still in power. Liberals have their theories about what would have happened if the US had not taken him out, and Jenkins has his theory. It is interesting reading that brings in events such as Arafat's death, etc. Enjoy.

Great post-header from Captain's Quarters

I love a good post title and Captain's Quarters has a good one about the coming possible enactment of the nuclear option by Frist. The title is Bill Frist, Post-Spine Transplant. It is an interesting read and supports the notion that the GOP are beginning to see that having a spine is the key to political victory and that they will never be friends with the Dems.

Dem panel recommendation in right direction

A Democrat panel has recommended moving away from Iowa/New Hampshire having the biggest voice in nominating presidential candidates. I could not agree more, but probably for different reasons. Their thinking is that these 2 states are probably not as diverse as other states and tends to rob minorities of a voice in the initial process. While I am not insensitive to that sentiment, I have other reasons for wishing the primaries were held differently. To me, the states of Iowa and New Hampshire really don't stand out in any way that leads me to think that they are the best location to begin primaries.

The fact that the momentum of the initial results of the first two states primaries often already yield a front-runner that goes on to win makes the process boring and unfair to those states that vote later in the game. I have yet to figure out why how other people vote in a primary has anything to do with 'my' vote. Why must we be such a country of lemmings that vote for the front runner even if he/she is not the best candidate? I think that George W. Bush was the only presidential candidate since I have been voting that I actually voted for in the primaries. In other primaries I always felt there was a better candidate running and did not vote in the primary for Bush I or Bob Dole.

The problem is that each party is interested in getting the most winnable candidate 'crowned' as soon as possible instead of going through the process of nominating the best candidate. I think that the first voting day of the primary should include a good cross-section of states instead of just one; something like Super Tuesday. While a one day primary in every state might be alluring, there are logistical problems such as funding that would cause problems.

From a sheer GOP standpoint, it would be fun if they picked a more liberal state for the first primary, such as California. This would give quick momentum to the kookiest Dem candidate which would produce a sure loss for them. Maybe we could make it variable by starting with the home state of the current president. That would be a great "lemon test" vote for sitting presidents if their own state would vote against them. I for one am bored with the way it is now and welcome some kind of change. Kudos for a step in the right direction!

Kudos to three heroic passengers

In another incident involving an irrational passenger aboard a flight, three passengers took a "Never Again" attitude and took him down. According the the story I have linked to a man was aboard a Northwest flight bound for Honolulu. The man was acting irrational and ended up threatening to harm a sleeping baby girl nearby. At some point the flight attendents asked the parents to move to the back of the plane. When they went to do this, the man started moving toward the cockpit. That is when 3 passengers jumped the man and wrestled him to the ground where plastic restraints were placed on him.

No questions. No hesitation. This is the way it needs to be. Those three men sent a powerful message to the world that we will never let them gain access to our cockpits again. The message that we will not hesitate to take required action needs to be sent on the individual level and on the country level. Kudos to these three heroes.

CNN panics over good economic news and tries counter-measure

In the face of very good economic news recently, CNN Money writes an economy hit piece. In the current media approach to the economy, good news has been either well hidden or well 'balanced' with vague language designed to cast doubt on the good part. Now CNN pulls out the stops and puts an article on their website with the non-subtle title of "There Go 800,000 Jobs Out the Door" and a cheery sub-title "UCLA: Housing slump to hit building and finance employment, slow the economy, but no recession seen."

So CNN dredges up somebody that is saying something bad about what will happen to the economy instead of talking about the surprisingly good points of the economy today without the usual counter-balance. The title alone is enough to show a seething anger over how well things are going and the desire to torpedo such good tidings with clenched fists. Here are some other telling quotes from the article:

The authors of the report admitted that they had forecast earlier this year that the slowdown in the housing market was going to start in mid-2005, which now looks like it was a little premature. But they noted that recent reports from home builders, real estate agents and the government indicate the slowdown may have now begun.

So before they were wrong, now it is for real and we expect you to believe us this time and CNN says 'OK'.

"There will be weakness in retail, for sure, and in manufacturing. But not widespread losses."

We can't look like we are cheering on a bad economy, but....

"The Anderson Forecast does not make a firm prediction on whether there will be broad or deep decline in home prices nationwide in the coming housing slowdown."

We can't say anything solid here, but we can sure give a solid 800,000 job loss figure (couched with the word 'could' in case it does not happen)

" The report is just the latest in a series of readings suggesting a slowing real estate market ahead."

Yeah, we can allude to this series of reports to shake your confidence now and later as we provide each one over time until it comes true.

One can always predict a certain market will come down, because at some time or another they always do. Instead of the title given, they could have made the title "UCLA Anderson Forecast takes another crack at predicting the future after being humiliatingly wrong for this year" or "UCLA Anderson Forecast Dares Show Face - to Try Again" or "Predictions lately have been off the mark, but here is another for your reading pleasure" or "Wolf!!!".

A revisit of the Aaron Brown - Anderson Cooper Post

On November 2, I posted on CNN's decision to replace Aaron Brown with a second hour of Anderson Cooper. While I think the decision to oust Brown was sound based on ratings, I did not see how the other half of the decision would help CNN. So far it appears I am correct.

At the time of the decision Brown was pulling around 687,000 and Cooper around 765,000 for an average of 726,000. I did not see 2 hours of Cooper to boost that average. I have found a great website that shows ratings called mediabistro.com which lists ratings, graphs, trends, etc. Here are a few samples of Cooper:

Date Hour1 Hour2
Dec 6 647,000 447,000
Dec 5 731,000 419,000
Dec 2 763,000 490,000
Dec 1 654,000 519,000
Nov 30 635,000 540,000

This averages to 584,500 per hour. You can see on the mediabistro website that CNN posted a graph showing Cooper narrowing the demographic gap for a selected set of dates, but other dates since show Cooper being crushed. In my original post I stated "If we apply the law of diminished returns, the second hour of Cooper will likely be less than the 687,000 mark." That seems to be the case as shown above.

I don't have a particular bone against Anderson Cooper. I could not take more than 5 minutes of Aaron Brown but my threshold with Cooper is about 15 seconds. I think this may show to beware when you see the words "rising star" describing a news anchor. The whole thing seemed manufactured to me from the start. I see ads for Cooper all the time on CNN's website. They seem to be trying to salvage the situation. The question is how long before he is back to one hour?

Lion vs Ape

Hugh Hewitt is pointing out that Drudge is predicting a box office smash for King Kong, but that the prize might just go to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. It would be a surprise upset, but I think it is possible. I have been a Narnia fan for over 25 years and have dreamed of the complete set being given justice on the big screen. I am not knocking previous versions. With a low budget, Wonderworks did a fantastic job at giving us a peek into Narnia and truly developed the characters well. From the previews, Disney seems to have truly brought it to life and I hope the public shows enough interest to allow them to complete to The Last Battle. As for the top spot, Peter Jackson is phenomenal director as proven by The Lord of the Rings. The remake of a classic with the likes of his talent will be huge draw and tough to top. However, in the last 10 years I have seen a spike in Narnian interest. I would not say Narnia has religious overtones, but rather undertones. Those of a religious nature will pick up on Lewis' imagery, while those not of that persuasion may not see any; just a great story with incredible special effects. I have to say I am pulling for Narnia, but hope they both do well. Hollywood has been doing a little better in recent years with providing some quality, but they need constant $$ encouragement $$ to produce even more. If you frequent the theater or go at all, you can send a vote for quality to Hollywood by attending one or both of these.

Air Marshals perform pre-emptive strike on terrorist threat

AP is reporting that an incident has occurred at Miami International Airport. The best intelligience available led air marshals to believe the man was carrying a weapon of significant destruction - a bomb. Performing their duty of ensuring the safety of all air passengers, the air marshals performed a pre-emptive strike by shooting the man dead. After completing the strike it was discovered that there was no weapon of significant destruction. So far no word on whether the air marshals manipulated the pre-strike intelligence.

Let it not be said that the Logic Lifeline shies from the truth

Without mentioning any names, someone commenting on this blog seems to think I shy away from certain elements of the truth. I get the impression that this charge will continue unless this blog looks more like Crooks and Liars, Salon.com, Daily Kos, Daily Dissent and other such blogs. Of course this is not going to happen.

In fact the purpose of my blog is not to point to any wrong (perceived, indicted or convicted) for the mere point of saying "See, another Democrat or Liberal did this or that". Instead it is usually to make a point of discussion about things specifically related to that case. (Yes, sometimes I point things out just for humor value) My stance is clear that the actions of some do not necessarily detract from the message of their group. There will always be bad eggs in every group. Out of the thousands of politicians and their administrations and staffers serving only a handful actually get convicted. If somebody did not have a life and took the time to average the numbers per party over the years perhaps you would see that neither party has cornered the market on criminal or unethical activity. Instead of investigating and prosecuting in a cherry picked fashion, I want all politicians engaged in criminal activity to be unearthed and prosecuted.

I was asked why I did not point out the wrong doing of Governor Taft, Duke Cunningham, Abramoff, Safavian and Scanlon. At the time I did not know who that last three were and had not heard of Taft's troubles. I did want to post on Duke Cunningham, but ran out of time until the story was old and I moved on to other things. So I will state clearly hear that Cunningham's acceptance of bribes was wrong, dispicable and shameful. I know from Chicago/Illinois politics how prevalent bribe taking can be as we have seen a rash of bribe related prosecutions among city politicians and even former Governor Ryan whom I despise.

Safavian seems to have been charged with making false statements and obstruction of justice. I still don't know really who this guy is. This guy is so obscure I really have no comment, but have posted what he is charged with. The link provided for Scanlon did not work, so I don't know who he is either.

Bob Taft seems to have failed to report some paid golf games as gifts and been fined $4000 for this breach. In this current environment it is critical that all politicians be careful to report these gifts. Taft joins the ranks of other politicans who have had trouble with filing their gifts/paid trips such as:

Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
Bart Stupak (D-MI)
Maxine Waters
Elizabeth Greer, an aide to Rep. F. Allen Boyd Jr., D-Fla
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
Representative Ellen O. Tauscher, a California Democrat
Rep. Harold Ford Jr.
Two Chicago Democrats, Reps. Bobby Rush and Luis Gutierrez
Rep. Jim McGovern from Massachusetts
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)

* List Compliments of Noagenda.org


Abramoff seems to be some lobbyist that had quite a lot of dealings. I could not find his political affiliation so perhaps the point here was that he had paid for a trip for Tom Delay. This seems to be true. Abramoff has also been involved in providing trips, donations and skyboxes to the following politicians as well:

Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
Dick Gephardt
Tom Harkin
James Clayborn
Others that can be shown at the following illustration also courtesy of noagenda.org

Let it not be said that the Logic Lifeline shies from the truth. Hopefully there is enough truth in this post for both sides of the aisle.

In spite of long term effort to create a housing bubble - no burst

While the story is a few days old, it is still worth commenting on that in October we had a record 13% increase in new homes. The housing market has been one of the factors that kept the US economy doing well in the last few years. In fact I vividly recall during the 2004 election cycle, an anti-Bush caller into a radio show was advocating people to help crash the housing market.

Since that time we have seen Warren Buffet and Alan Greenspan periodically attempt to derail the economy with gloom and doom talk about an impending housing bubble. While Greenspan may not have had bad intentions, it is obvious that the Bush-hating Buffet seems to be driven by a political agenda rather than facts.

While there may be some areas of the country where housing prices are higher than the laws of supply and demand support, most of the country is not. The Chicago area where I live is a perfect example where housing prices have risen dramatically in recent years, but justifiably so. Almost all of Chicago suburbia experiencing continued growth in demand, while the amount of available land to build on is rapidly shrinking. The most new homes are being built in the far west suburbs where there are long commutes. The inner suburbs have shorter commutes and established neighborhoods. Coupled with the trend to bulldoze older houses there and build big beautiful ones, drives the prices here up with good reason.

While the media is quick to point out whenever Bush is wrong, it seems quite slow to point out when a fellow liberal like Buffet is wrong. They media will always connect the dots to show the GOP in an unfavorable light, but if it is a liberal we must connect them ourselves. Now that for some time Buffet's misguided prophecies have only brough him embarrassment, I think it is time for some public pressure to tell him to keep his mouth shut instead of trying to tank the economy.

An employment rate contrast between US and Canada

The American Thinker is pointing out that in a Yahoo's Canada version there is a story proclaiming the latest Canadian umemployment rate of 6.4% is the best in 31 years. While the US media yawns at a 5% rate in the US, Yahoo - Canada is nearly bursting out of the story with quotes like:

"Christmas shoppers will likely be buoyed by the strong employment figures, which were spread fairly evenly across regions of the country and across most sectors."

And

"All that is good news for Prime Minister Paul Martin, who has based the Liberal party's federal election platform on what he calls his government's sound management of the strong Canadian economy."

With the Liberal party in serious corruption trouble, the liberal media must give them a boost here and there to keep out the evil concervative party from Canada. It was bad enough when they let Fox News squeeze in. However, I must credit the story with printing the truth about where the Canadian gravy train comes from: a strong US economy stating:

"Continued health in the U.S. economy is vital to Canada's prospects since its voracious appetite keeps this country's export sector buzzing."

The fact is the US economy is a driving force in the world economy. You would think foreign governments around the world would be more outspoken against the US media for their never ending quest to drive down consumer confidence even when good news is reported. However, like most liberals, they likely think it worth trashing their own financial interests to get in a good Bush bashing.

Murtha trying to salvage his investment with moon-battery

Before Rep. John Murtha hatched a plan with Nanci Pelosi to spearhead the call for troops to come home, from what I read he had a lot going well for him; especially a good reputation. Now here at the tail end of his career he seems to have been talked into "taking one for the team". I am sure it was sold to him that he would get a lot of media glory and possibly go down in history as a great peacemaker and the one that dealt the final blow to the Bush Administration. In the first days it looked like he just might do that. Fortunately, the GOP grew a spine and pulled their now famous "stunt" which effectively broke Murtha's momentum which has yet to recover. In fact as a martial artist uses the weight and force of his attacker against him, the Bush Administration has taken that attempt at momentum and turned it to his advanatage.

With his momentum in pieces and Bush's support numbers rising, Murtha sees his gambit shifting to the losing column. Instead of retiring from Congress gracefully, he is now in risk of becoming a laughingstock. Sure the media and far left still think he is wonderful, but they thought that of Cindy Sheehan, too. Sheehan is swiftly making the shift to quack and laughingstock and Murtha should take a hint from that sad affair.

I don't know if Murtha is speaking for himself or if Nanci Pelosi has arranged for him to have handlers, but his latest comments make me think the latter is a possibility. Murtha claims 'the Army is "broken, worn out" and "living hand to mouth" '. So now he has to insult our troops by making up lies about them. Everyone I have heard coming back from Iraq has had nothing but good to say about our troops. This was an obvious and clear attempt to demoralize them during time of war and is disgusting if not treasonous.

Murtha then seeing that Bush already sees next year as possible to bring troops home makes yet antother statement with the purpose of taking credit when it happens. Murtha states, "I predict he'll[Bush] make it look like we're staying the course." Murtha is attempting to paint a picture of Bush caving under pressure and trying to reconcile that with staying the course. Trying to paint Bush as weak and running out of ideas, etc. We have seen in the last few weeks that Bush is far from weak.

Basically Murtha as is the template with all liberal Democrats is working to salvage the investment they have made in an Iraqi failure. Having gone down this path, Murtha must defend it or turn back. To turn back means he must admit he was sucked in by Pelosi and company. Either way he is likely to become a laughingstock and that is sad given his reputation prior to this whole dark episode in his career.

Update: Having reviewed a fuller context of Rep. Murtha's statements I will retract the points above related to his comments on the army being "broken and worn out". The full context clearly shows that he was not speaking of the troops themselves. The AP story I derived this sentiment from was irresponsible to have pictured it the way they did.

I will wait to see where Murtha goes from here to see if he bases future actions or words on an investment in his original call to withdraw the troops. Until then, my apologies for not finding the full context of these words before writing about them.

After calling the lefty CNN now says Honduras election to close to call

After CNN, ABC and BBC casually declared the leftist victor in the Honduras presidential election as if it were fact, CNN today now says election too close to call. With only half the votes counted, the difference is razor thin:

"With about 46 percent of the votes in Sunday's election counted, Manuel Zelaya of the opposition Liberal Party had 47.9 percent of the vote to 47.4 percent for Porfirio Lobo Sosa of the ruling National Party, according to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal."

May the right man win, not the left man.