11 Year Old Boy Hasn’t Stopped Wearing His Brett Favre Jersey Since Christmas Four Years Ago

 Amusing  Comments Off on 11 Year Old Boy Hasn’t Stopped Wearing His Brett Favre Jersey Since Christmas Four Years Ago
Dec 312007

Now this is what you call a die-hard fan. His parents could probably afford the trip to Lambeau Field with all the money they didn’t spend on clothes.

David Witthoft, 11, of Ridgefield, Conn., who hasn’t stopped wearing his Brett Favre jersey since Christmas four years ago, finally attended his first Green Bay Packers game Sunday.

11-Year-Old Boy Wearing Brett Favre Jersey Since 2003 Sees First Packers Game

The boy who hasn’t stopped wearing his Brett Favre jersey since Christmas four years ago finally attended his first Green Bay Packers game.

David Witthoft, 11, of Ridgefield, Conn., traveled with his family to Lambeau Field to watch the Packers’ 34-13 victory over the Detroit Lions Sunday.

Witthoft admits he will probably soon have to hang up the jersey, which he received for Christmas in 2003.

“I thought I would keep wearing it as long as I could get it over my head,” Witthoft said after the game. “But I’ll probably take it off in the next year, certainly. Then I’ll hang it up in a frame or maybe send it to the (Packers) Hall of Fame.”

His mother, Carolyn, washes the jersey every two days and has had to do some mending of the jersey.

The Telegraph Gets It Right: Names General Petraeus Person of the Year

 Amusing  Comments Off on The Telegraph Gets It Right: Names General Petraeus Person of the Year
Dec 312007

That’s right. A UK newspaper saw fit to do what TIME Magazine would not…recognize success in Iraq. This British newspaper gets it, and created a first-time-ever award to demonstrate it.

General Petraeus: man with a message of hope

For a man whose critics say he is far too fond of the television cameras, General David Petraeus, commander of US forces in Iraq, has been rather out of the limelight this Christmas.

The sprightly, media-friendly 55-year-old is not perturbed, however, that his face is no longer number one item on the US networks. As he said last week, where Iraq is concerned, “No news is good news.”

Today, we put him in the spotlight again by naming Gen Petraeus as The Sunday Telegraph’s Person of the Year, a new annual accolade to recognise outstanding individual achievement.

He has been the man behind the US troop surge over the past 10 months, the last-ditch effort to end Iraq’s escalating civil war by putting an extra 28,000 American troops on the ground.

So far, it has achieved what many feared was impossible. Sectarian killings are down. Al-Qaeda is on the run. And the two million Iraqis who fled the country are slowly returning. Progress in Iraq is relative – 538 civilians died last month. But compared with the 3,000 peak of December last year, it offers at least a glimmer of hope.

Nonetheless, why should we choose to nominate Petraeus

There has, after all, been no shortage of other candidates this year. President Nicolas Sarkozy has impressed many with his determination to reform France, while George Osborne reinvigorated politics in this country by daring to put tax cuts back on the agenda – though both men still have much to prove.

There are plenty of brave figures thrust into the limelight who handled themselves with dignity, such as Gillian Gibbons, the teacher jailed in Sudan; the Glasgow airport luggage-handler John Smeaton; and Kate and Gerry McCann. Sporting stars such as Paula Radcliffe and Lewis Hamilton have inspired millions of fans.

There has also been great British military leadership and bravery on display this year, not least in Helmand, where British troops are now fighting a Taliban foe as fierce as anything their American counterparts encountered in Baghdad or Fallujah.

But the reason for picking Petraeus is simple. Iraq, whatever the current crises in Afghanistan and Pakistan, remains the West’s biggest foreign policy challenge of this decade, and if he can halt its slide into all-out anarchy, Gen Petraeus may save more than Iraqi lives.

A failed Iraq would not just be a second Vietnam, nor would it just be America’s problem.

It would be a symbolic victory for al-Qaeda, a safe haven for jihadists to plot future September 11s and July 7s, and a battleground for a Shia-Sunni struggle that could draw in the entire Middle East. Our future peace and prosperity depend, in part, on fixing this mess. And, a year ago, few had much hope.

To appreciate the scale of the task Gen Petraeus took on, it is necessary to go back to February 22, 2006. Or, as Iraqis now refer to it, their own September 11. That was when Sunni-led terrorists from al-Qaeda blew up the Shia shrine in the city of Samarra, an act of provocation that finally achieved their goal of igniting sectarian civil war.

A year on, an estimated 34,000 people had been killed on either side – some of them members of the warring Sunni and Shia militias, but most innocents tortured and killed at random. US casualties continued to rise, too, but increasingly American troops became the bystanders in a religious conflict that many believed they could no longer tame.

Except, that is, for Gen Petraeus. Despite his well-documented obsession with fitness – he starts his 18-hour days with a five-mile run – he is the opposite of the brawn-over-brain image that has dogged the US military mission in Iraq.

Top of the class of 1974 at West Point Military Academy and the holder of a PhD in international relations, he is the co author of the US military’s manual on counter-insurgency, a “warrior monk” for whom the messy intrigues of asymmetric warfare hold more interest than the straightforward challenges of 2003’s invasion.

Simply being the best and brightest soldier of his generation, however, would not be enough for Iraq in 2007, where a major part of the “surge” involves reconciling Iraq’s warring political tribes.

When the White House called, confirming him for the job, President Bush was looking not just for an outstanding leader but also a diplomat, a politician and a negotiator. It seems he got them all.

“Petraeus has a rare combination of great geopolitical skills as well as tactical and military ones,” says retired General Jack Keane, a fellow architect of the surge strategy. “He is good at working with ambassadors, with the Iraqi government, and he also knows how to cope with uncertainty and failure, which is what you get in an environment like Iraq.”

Lest Gen Keane seem a little biased, it should be pointed out that British commanders hold Gen Petraeus in similarly high regard.

Several Northern Ireland veterans who worked with him in Baghdad this year came away with the opinion that it is now America, not Britain, that is the world leader in counter-insurgency.

As Petraeus toured some of Baghdad’s abandoned, bullet-scarred Sunni neighbourhoods last February, his own comrades were not the only ones predicting he might fail spectacularly.

Among the US public, the clamour grew for the troops to be brought home altogether, and Iraq to be declared a lost cause unworthy of further American sacrifice.

The surge’s “boots on the ground” strategy would simply force the militias into temporary hiding, critics said, wasting thousands more Americans lives in the process.

The strategy’s chances of success were commonly put at only one in three – and those were the odds quoted by its supporters. Indeed, when The Sunday Telegraph visited Baghdad in the spring, US troops were candid about their expectations.

“Sure, the bad guys will go into hiding,” said one commander in Jamia, an al-Qaeda-infested neighbourhood with 30 murders a month. “All we can hope is that things will have improved by the time they come back, so they’re no longer welcome.”

Nine months on, things do seem to have improved, thanks largely to Petraeus’s extraordinary coup of turning Sunni insurgents against their extremist allies in al-Qaeda.

With the chief accelerant in the civil war gone, Shia militias such as the Mehdi Army have also been deprived of their main raison d’être, and with extra US troops on the streets, Iraqis who had previously felt vulnerable to the gunmen now feel safe enough to return home.

Things are far from perfect but, after four years in which events did nothing but get worse, the sight of a souk re-opening, or a Shia family being welcomed back home by their Sunni neighbours, has remarkable morale-boosting power.

Where once Iraqis saw the glass as virtually empty, now they can see a day when it might at least be half full.

True, post-Saddam Iraq has had a habit of confounding even the most cautious of optimists.

Iraq’s Shia-dominated government is not alone in worrying that the most controversial of Gen Petraeus’s policies – the co-opting of former Sunni insurgents into “concerned local citizens” schemes to fend off Shia militias – may create new, better-organised forces for a renewed civil war once the US finally departs.

Many coalition officials fear such a scenario. Were it to occur, it would confirm the charges of Petraeus’s critics that at best he has secured only a hiatus in the collapse of Iraq.

Ultimately, that may prove to be the case.

But it should not overshadow his achievement this year: he has given another last chance to a country that had long since ceased to expect one. And for that, Gen Petraeus is Person of the Year.

Pat Sajak Questions Man-Made Global Warming

 Amusing  Comments Off on Pat Sajak Questions Man-Made Global Warming
Dec 312007

Pat Sajak proves that he is much more than a game show host with his analytical, common sense questioning of Man-Made Global Warming. Now, He is not a scientist — and he doesn’t even play one on TV — but there are some gaps in the logic of it all that make him skeptical.

Man-Made Global Warming: 10 Questions

The subject of man-made global warming is almost impossible to discuss without a descent into virulent name-calling (especially on the Internet, where anonymity breeds a special kind of vicious reaction to almost any social or political question), but I’ll try anyway. I consider myself to be relatively well-read on the matter, and I’ve still come down on the skeptical side, because there are aspects of the issue that don’t make a lot of sense to me. Though I confess to have written none-too-reverentially on the subject, I want to try to put all that aside and ask ten serious questions to which I have been unable to find definitive answers:

1. What is the perfect temperature?

If we are to embark on a lifestyle-altering quest to lower the temperature (or at least minimize its rise), what is our goal? I don’t ask this flippantly. Can we demonstrate that one setting on the global thermostat is preferable over another? If so, what is it, and how do we get there? And, once there, how do we maintain it? Will we ever have to “heat things up” again if it drops below that point?

2. Just what is the average temperature of the earth?

At any one time there are temperature extremes all over the planet. How do we come up with an average, and how do those variations fit in with our desire to slow global warming?

3. What factors have led to global warming in the past, and how do we know they aren’t the causes of the current warming trend?

Again, I don’t ask this in a judgmental way. There is no argument that warming cycles (or cooling, for that matter) have been a part of earth’s history. Why are we so sure this one is different?

4. Why is there such a strong effort to stifle discussion and dissent?

I’m always troubled by arguments that begin, “Everybody agrees…” or “Everyone knows…” In fact, there is a good deal of dissent in the scientific world about the theory of man-made global warming. A large (and growing) segment of those who study such things are questioning some of the basic premises of the theory. Why should there be anything wrong with that? Again, this is a big deal, and we should have the best information and opinion from the best minds.

5. Why are there such dramatically different warnings about the effects of man-made global warming?

Predictions of 20-foot rises in ocean levels have given way to talk of a few inches over time. In many cases, those predictions are less than the rises of the past few centuries. Whatever the case, why the scare tactics?

6. Are there potential benefits to global warming?

Again, I don’t ask this mockingly. Would a warmer climate in some areas actually improve living conditions? Would such improvement (health, crop production, lifestyle) balance any negative impact from the phenomenon?

7. Should such drastic changes in public policy be based on a “what if?” proposition?

There are some who say we can’t afford to wait, and, even if there’s some doubt, we should move ahead with altering the way we live. While there are good arguments for changing some of our environmental policies, should they be based on “what it?”

8. What will be the impact on the people of the world if we change the way we live based on man-made global warming concerns?

Nothing happens in a vacuum; there are always unintended consequences to our actions. For example, if we were to dramatically reduce our need for international oil, what happens to the economies of the Middle East and the populations that rely on oil income? There are thousands of other implications, some good and some bad. What are they? Shouldn’t we be thinking about them and talking about them?

9. How will we measure our successes?

Is the measuring stick going to be temperature, sea level, number of annual hurricanes, rainfall, or a combination of all those things? Again, do we have a goal in mind? What happens when we get there?

10. How has this movement gained such momentum?

We’ve faced environmental issues throughout our history, but it’s difficult to remember one which has gained such “status” in such a short time. To a skeptic, there seems to be a religious fervor that makes one wary. A gradual “ramping down” of the dire predictions has not led to a diminution of the doomsday rhetoric. Are these warning signs that the movement has become more of an activist cause than a scientific reality?

Just asking.

Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians”

 Amusing  Comments Off on Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians”
Dec 302007

It is not surprising, the Top Ten includes a total of 4 candidates currently running for the office of President of the United States. I can think of more than ten corrupt Politicians! How about dumping 99% of the House and Senate?

Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians”

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, released its 2007 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” The list, in alphabetical order, includes:

1. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY): In addition to her long and sordid ethics record, Senator Hillary Clinton took a lot of heat in 2007 – and rightly so – for blocking the release her official White House records. Many suspect these records contain a treasure trove of information related to her role in a number of serious Clinton-era scandals. Moreover, in March 2007, Judicial Watch filed an ethics complaint against Senator Clinton for filing false financial disclosure forms with the U.S. Senate (again). And Hillary’s top campaign contributor, Norman Hsu, was exposed as a felon and a fugitive from justice in 2007. Hsu pleaded guilt to one count of grand theft for defrauding investors as part of a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme.

2. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI): Conyers reportedly repeatedly violated the law and House ethics rules, forcing his staff to serve as his personal servants, babysitters, valets and campaign workers while on the government payroll. While the House Ethics Committee investigated these allegations in 2006, and substantiated a number of the accusations against Conyers, the committee blamed the staff and required additional administrative record-keeping and employee training. Judicial Watch obtained documentation in 2007 from a former Conyers staffer that sheds new light on the activities and conduct on the part of the Michigan congressman, which appear to be at a minimum inappropriate and likely unlawful. Judicial Watch called on the Attorney General in 2007 to investigate the matter.

3. Senator Larry Craig (R-ID): In one of the most shocking scandals of 2007, Senator Craig was caught by police attempting to solicit sex in a Minneapolis International Airport men’s bathroom during the summer. Senator Craig reportedly “sent signals” to a police officer in an adjacent stall that he wanted to engage in sexual activity. When the police officer showed Craig his police identification under the bathroom stall divider and pointed toward the exit, the senator reportedly exclaimed ‘No!’” When asked to produce identification, Craig presented police his U.S. Senate business card and said, “What do you think of that?” The power play didn’t work. Craig was arrested, charged and entered a guilty plea. Despite enormous pressure from his Republican colleagues to resign from the Senate, Craig refused.

4. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA): As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee’s subcommittee on military construction, Feinstein reviewed military construction government contracts, some of which were ultimately awarded to URS Corporation and Perini, companies then owned by Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum. While the Pentagon ultimately awards military contracts, there is a reason for the review process. The Senate’s subcommittee on Military Construction’s approval carries weight. Sen. Feinstein, therefore, likely had influence over the decision making process. Senator Feinstein also attempted to undermine ethics reform in 2007, arguing in favor of a perk that allows members of Congress to book multiple airline flights and then cancel them without financial penalty. Judicial Watch’s investigation into this matter is ongoing.

5. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R-NY): Giuliani came under fire in late 2007 after it was discovered the former New York mayor’s office “billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons…” ABC News also reported that Giuliani provided Nathan with a police vehicle and a city driver at taxpayer expense. All of this news came on the heels of the federal indictment on corruption charges of Giuliani’s former Police Chief and business partner Bernard Kerik, who pleaded guilty in 2006 to accepting a $165,000 bribe in the form of renovations to his Bronx apartment from a construction company attempting to land city contracts.

6. Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR): Governor Huckabee enjoyed a meteoric rise in the polls in December 2007, which prompted a more thorough review of his ethics record. According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down.

7. I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby: Libby, former Chief of Staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was sentenced to 30 months in prison and fined $250,000 for lying and obstructing the Valerie Plame CIA leak investigation. Libby was found guilty of four felonies — two counts of perjury, one count of making false statements to the FBI and one count of obstructing justice – all serious crimes. Unfortunately, Libby was largely let off the hook. In an appalling lack of judgment, President Bush issued “Executive Clemency” to Libby and commuted the sentence.

8. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL): A “Dishonorable Mention” last year, Senator Obama moves onto the “ten most wanted” list in 2007. In 2006, it was discovered that Obama was involved in a suspicious real estate deal with an indicted political fundraiser, Antoin “Tony” Rezko. In 2007, more reports surfaced of deeper and suspicious business and political connections It was reported that just two months after he joined the Senate, Obama purchased $50,000 worth of stock in speculative companies whose major investors were his biggest campaign contributors. One of the companies was a biotech concern that benefited from legislation Obama pushed just two weeks after the senator purchased $5,000 of the company’s shares. Obama was also nabbed conducting campaign business in his Senate office, a violation of federal law.

9. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who promised a new era of ethics enforcement in the House of Representatives, snuck a $25 million gift to her husband, Paul Pelosi, in a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act recently passed by Congress. The pet project involved renovating ports in Speaker Pelosi’s home base of San Francisco. Pelosi just happens to own apartment buildings near the areas targeted for improvement, and will almost certainly experience a significant boost in property value as a result of Pelosi’s earmark. Earlier in the year, Pelosi found herself in hot water for demanding access to a luxury Air Force jet to ferry the Speaker and her entourage back and forth from San Francisco non-stop, in unprecedented request which was wisely rejected by the Pentagon. And under Pelosi’s leadership, the House ethics process remains essentially shut down – which protects members in both parties from accountability.

10. Senator Harry Reid (D-NV): Over the last few years, Reid has been embroiled in a series of scandals that cast serious doubt on his credibility as a self-professed champion of government ethics, and 2007 was no different. According to The Los Angeles Times, over the last four years, Reid has used his influence in Washington to help a developer, Havey Whittemore, clear obstacles for a profitable real estate deal. As the project advanced, the Times reported, “Reid received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Whittemore.” Whittemore also hired one of Reid’s sons (Leif) as his personal lawyer and then promptly handed the junior Reid the responsibility of negotiating the real estate deal with federal officials. Leif Reid even called his father’s office to talk about how to obtain the proper EPA permits, a clear conflict of interest.

Tips For Terrorists Hiding In Caves: Winning At Rock, Paper, Scissors

 Amusing  Comments Off on Tips For Terrorists Hiding In Caves: Winning At Rock, Paper, Scissors
Dec 292007

Here is a little something for Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahri and the boys to help pass the time while they wait for their eventual demise.

Scissors is the ‘psychological winner’ out of rock and paper in playground game, scientists say

Most of us know that stone blunts scissors, scissors cut paper and paper covers stone.

What is less well-known, however, is how to win the popular playground game.

Now stalwart players have come up with a strategy: Start with scissors.

Research shows that stone is the most popular of the three possible moves in the game of quickfire hand gestures.

If your opponent expects you to pick stone, they will choose paper to outwit you.

Therefore, by going with scissors, you will win, because scissors beat paper.

The scissors strategy is so successful that it secured auction house Christie’s a £10million deal in 2005.

A wealthy Japanese art collector could not decide which firm of auctioneers should sell his cache of Impressionist paintings.

Torn between Christie’s and rival auction house Sotheby’s, he asked them to play stone, paper, scissors to decide.

Christie’s consulted its employees for strategies and settled on scissors on the advice of a director’s 11-year-old daughters.

The girls, who regularly played the game – known as rock, paper, scissors in the U.S. – at school, reasoned that “everybody expects you to choose rock”.

This would lead to Sotheby’s choosing paper, to beat rock, meaning Christie’s should opt for scissors.

As predicted, Sotheby’s went for paper – and lost the deal to Christie’s and its scissors.

While scissors may be the best move to start a game, there are various ways of securing success once play has got going.

This week’s New Scientist magazine suggests: “You could try the double bluff, where you tell your opponent what you are going to throw – then do it.

“No one believes you’ll do it, so they won’t play the throw that beats the throw you are playing.”

Alternatively, you could go for the move that would have been beaten by your opponent’s previous move.

The logic here is that players tend to subconsciously try to beat their own previous move.

Therefore, if your opponent had played scissors, they are likely to try to beat it by going for stone next time round.

By choosing paper – which would have been beaten by scissors – you will ward off stone.

Osama Bin Laden’s Son House Hunting In England

 Amusing  Comments Off on Osama Bin Laden’s Son House Hunting In England
Dec 292007

I wonder if his dad will come to the house warming party.

Bin Ladens hunting for a house

OSAMA Bin Laden’s son could be coming to live in a street near you. Omar Bin Laden, 26, married former Calderdale resident Jane Felix-Browne, 52, earlier this year and the couple are now house-hunting.

In an exclusive interview with the Courier, Jane – now known as Zaina Muhammad – re-vealed the pair are wanting to settle in England, possibly in Calderdale.

“We’d like to set up home in England,” she said, speaking from a secret location outside Britain. “I’ve got family here and that’s where we want to be,” she said. “We might move back to Calderdale.”

Zaina used to live in Fellside, Lee Bottom Road, Todmorden. The world’s most-wanted terrorist’s son is her sixth husband.

Despite reports that Zaina was divorcing her husband because she feared they would be murdered, the couple say they are enjoying married life and want to campaign for peace.

“We want peace. We both want peace,” she said. “Omar wants to be an ambassador for peace and I’m behind him.”

They say they do not know where Osama bin Laden is. Omar talks about his father but has not spoken to him since the 2001 terrorist attacks in the US.

When she lived in Calderdale, Zaina was married to Cornholme biker John Metcalfe, but says the marriage lasted only six weeks.

She said she lived a quiet life during her time in Calderdale, while working as an interior designer at Manchester Airport.

She has suffered multiple sclerosis since she was 11 and says she raised a lot of money for charity while she lived in Britain.

Zaina claims many media reports about her since she married Omar are untrue and slammed a recent BBC documentary about the couple. She said: “They filmed about 300 hours but it was edited so much, it was unbelievable.” She added: “We’re filming another one for Al Jazeera and that will be accurate.”

Zaina – also known as Paula Joy Hanson – says her three sons and five grandchildren have met Omar and have a good relationship with him.

“One of my sons has spent a lot of time with him. They get on great,” she said.

Liberal Fantasy: Global Warming Will Save America from the Right

 Amusing  Comments Off on Liberal Fantasy: Global Warming Will Save America from the Right
Dec 282007

Dave Lindorff forgets a few things in this liberal wet dream. The red states happen to control the lion’s share of America’s food, weapons, fuel, and real estate. The typical liberal mind-set always tends to exclude vital elements from the equation.

Here is another thing for this cat loving girly man to consider, I hear Liberals taste just like chicken. In the event of societal collapse and mass hysteria I would not want to be a tofu-eating, tree-hugging, sissy.

This commentary is evidence that Mr. Lindorff isn’t in the 38% of Democrats that report having excellent mental health.

Global Warming Will Save America from the Right…Eventually

Say what you will about the looming catastrophe facing the world as the pace of global heating and polar melting accelerates. There is a silver lining.

Look at a map of the US.

The area that will by completely inundated by the rising ocean—and not in a century but in the lifetime of my two cats—are the American southeast, including the most populated area of Texas, almost all of Florida, most of Louisiana, and half of Alabama and Mississippi, as well as goodly portions of eastern Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina. While the northeast will also see some coastal flooding, its geography is such that that aside from a few projecting sandbars like Long Island and Cape Cod, the land rises fairly quickly to well above sea level. Sure, Boston, New York and Philadelphia will be threatened, but these are geographically confined areas that could lend themselves to protection by Dutch-style dikes. The West Coast too tends to rise rapidly to well above sea level in most places. Only down in Southern California towards the San Diego area is the ground closer to sea level.

So what we see is that huge swaths of conservative America are set to face a biblical deluge in a few more presidential cycles.

Then there’s the matter of the Midwest, which climate experts say is likely to face a permanent condition of unprecedented drought, making the place largely unlivable, and certainly unfarmable. The agribusinesses and conservative farmers that have been growing corn and wheat may be able to stretch out this doomsday scenario by deep well drilling, but west of the Mississippi, the vast Ogallala Aquifer that has allowed for such irrigation is already being tapped out. It will not be replaced.

So again, we will see the decline and depopulation of the nation’s vast midsection—noted for its consistent conservatism. Only in the northernmost area, around the Great Lakes (which will be not so great anymore), and along the Canadian border, will there still be enough rain for farming and continued large population concentrations, but those regions, like Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois, are also more liberal in their politics.

Finally, in the Southwest, already parched and stiflingly hot, the rise in energy costs and the soaring temperatures will put an end to right-wing retirement communities like Phoenix, Tucson and Palm Springs. Already the Salton Sea is fading away and putting Palm Springs on notice that the good times are coming to an end. Another right-wing haven soon to be gone.

So the future political map of America is likely to look as different as the much shrunken geographical map, with much of the so-called “red” state region either gone or depopulated.

There is a poetic justice to this of course. It is conservatives who are giving us the candidates who steadfastly refuse to have the nation take steps that could slow the pace of climate change, so it is appropriate that they should bear the brunt of its impact.

The important thing is that we, on the higher ground both actually and figuratively, need to remember that, when they begin their historic migration from their doomed regions, we not give them the keys to the city. They certainly should be offered assistance in their time of need, but we need to keep a firm grip on our political systems, making sure that these guilty throngs who allowed the world to go to hell are gerrymandered into political impotence in their new homes.

There will be much work to be done to help the earth and its residents—human and non-human—survive this man-made catastrophe, and we can’t have these future refugee troglodytes, should their personal disasters still fail to make them recognize reality, mucking things up again.

It should be considered acceptable, in this stifling new world, to say, “Shut up. We told you this would happen.”

Evil Eye Baby

 Amusing  Comments Off on Evil Eye Baby
Dec 272007

I thought this was good for a laugh. This baby has the amazing ability to give the evil eye on command.

Palestinian Terrorists New Mission To Protect President Bush

 Amusing  Comments Off on Palestinian Terrorists New Mission To Protect President Bush
Dec 272007

I find it hard to believe that the Secret Service has turned the life of President Bush over to Palestinian terrorists. Why would the Secret Service do such a thing? I’m not buying it.

Terrorists’ new mission: Protect President Bush

According to Israeli security officials coordinating deployments of forces with the PA for Bush’s Ramallah visit, members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah’s declared military wing, have been called upon by the PA to participate in the protection of Bush’s convoy and in securing the parameter during the meeting with Abbas.

Trace Bundy Performs Carol Of The Bells

 Amusing  Comments Off on Trace Bundy Performs Carol Of The Bells
Dec 262007

I thought that it would be fitting to close out the Holiday posts with performance by Trace Bundy. In case you don’t know who he is or have never heard of him, Trace is an instrumental acoustic guitar player who lives and performs in Boulder, Colorado. He is specially known as “The Acoustic Ninja” for his finger tapping skills.

All Paths Lead To Bacon

 Amusing  Comments Off on All Paths Lead To Bacon
Dec 232007

This is possibly the greatest flow chart in the history of the world.

click to enlarge

Remember if you don’t eat bacon the terrorists win.

Speaking of terrorists… this would be the perfect gift for any radical Muslim this Christmas. It’s a bacon scented candle.

Flow Chart courtesy of Fark

Under The Cover Of Darkness: The Democratic Congress Removes The Secure Fence Act

 Amusing  Comments Off on Under The Cover Of Darkness: The Democratic Congress Removes The Secure Fence Act
Dec 232007

The Liberal elites in Washington have repeatedly shown their disdain for the wishes of the American people. The only explanation is that they are all totally corrupt. Next year, 2008 promises to see a number of incumbents seeking new employment, and this is just the beginning. When our leaders can’t agree that English is the official language of the USA you can tell they just do not live on the same plane of existence that the common working man does.

It is time to close the door on them. Perhaps they’d all find Mexico more to their liking.

De-Fence, De-Fence

Congressional Democrats, and some Republicans, gut the Secure Fence Act in the omnibus spending bill against the wishes of the American people. In a bill with 9,000 earmarks, border security takes a back seat.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of border fence, modeled on the success of the border barriers in the San Diego sector of the U.S. border. The operative word is “secure.”

That legislation specifically called for “two layers of reinforced fencing” and listed five specific sections of the border where it should be built. The omnibus spending bill removes the requirement for two tiers and the specific list of locations.

The two-tier fence in San Diego runs 14 miles along the border with Tijuana, Mexico. The first layer is a high steel fence, with an inner high anti-climb fence with a no-man’s land in between.

It has been amazingly effective. According to a 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, illegal alien apprehensions in the San Diego sector dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 2004.

As local congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter notes, “The success of the San Diego Border Fence demonstrates the overall effectiveness of the double-layered approach and the importance of extending this infrastructure across the southern land border.”

It is that very success, we suspect, that frightens the open-border crowd and their representatives in Congress. How else to explain that, as the citizen watchdog group Grassfire (grassfire.org) notes, just five miles of fence that meets specifications has been built in the first year after the Secure Fence Act was passed.

The spending bill was written by Democrats and passed 253-154 with mostly their votes. Democrats say they weren’t deliberately dropping the two-tiered fence or the locations specified. They say they were merely adopting language that passed the Senate several times this year.

Indeed, in the Senate version is a curious amendment by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, that was added on a voice vote. Her amendment reads:

“Nothing in this paragraph shall require the secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads lighting, cameras and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location.”

Hutchinson’s office says the amendment merely gives DHS flexibility. What it provides, however, is an excuse to do nothing at all and a license for open-border politicians to pressure DHS.

DHS is on record as preferring in many instances “pedestrian fences” or “virtual fences” that are essentially a look-but-can’t-touch version of border security.

“By eliminating the double-fence requirement, the Democratic Congress is going to make it easier for drug and human smugglers to cross our southern land border,” said Hunter.

“This goes against the interests of any family that has been touched by illegal drugs or any American who has seen their job taken by an illegal alien.”

Congress has also made it easier for terrorists to sneak their operatives into the U.S.

This is in a nation that won two world wars and put men on the moon. The border fence would have been farther along if we’d just given the Minutemen a federal grant in the form of a gift certificate to Home Depot. (NYSE:HD)

So the next time you hear candidates for any office say they support border security, give them a post-hole digger and point 20hem toward Mexico.

A Soldier’s Silent Night

 Amusing  Comments Off on A Soldier’s Silent Night
Dec 222007

This piece is generally credited to a Marine stationed in Okinawa, Japan. However, the original version, entitled “Merry Christmas, My Friend,” was written by Lance Corporal James M. Schmidt in 1986. It was later published in Leatherneck (Magazine of the Marines) in December, 1991. As usual, Urban Legends Reference Pages is the place to go when you need something cleared up.

Here is the link to the MP3 audio version (3.5MB) of “A Soldier’s Silent Night” – you can either stream it or right click and save as.

Twas the night before Christmas, he lived all alone,
In a one bedroom house made of plaster & stone.
I had come down the chimney with presents to give
And to see just who in this home did live.

I looked all about a strange sight I did see,
No tinsel, no presents, not even a tree.
No stocking by the fire, just boots filled with sand,
On the wall hung pictures of far distant lands.

With medals and badges, awards of all kind
A sober thought came through my mind.
For this house was different, so dark and dreary,
I knew I had found the home of a soldier, once I could see clearly.

I heard stories about them, I had to see more
So I walked down the hall and pushed open the door.
And there he lay sleeping silent alone,
Curled up on the floor in his one bedroom home.

His face so gentle, his room in such disorder,
Not how I pictured a United States soldier.
Was this the hero of whom I’d just read?
Curled up in his poncho, a floor for his bed?

His head was clean shaven, his weathered face tan,
I soon understood this was more than a man.
For I realized the families that I saw that night
Owed their lives to these men who were willing to fight.

Soon ‘round the world, the children would play,
And grownups would celebrate on a bright Christmas day.
They all enjoyed freedom each month of the year,
Because of soldiers like this one lying here.

I couldn’t help wonder how many lay alone
On a cold Christmas Eve in a land far from home.
Just the very thought brought a tear to my eye,
I dropped to my knees and started to cry.

The soldier awakened and I heard a rough voice,
“Santa don’t cry, this life is my choice;
I fight for freedom, I don’t ask for more,
my life is my God, my country, my Corps.”

With that he rolled over and drifted off into sleep,
I couldn’t control it, I continued to weep.
I watched him for hours, so silent and still,
I noticed he shivered from the cold night’s chill.

So I took off my jacket, the one made of red,
And I covered this Soldier from his toes to his head.
And I put on his T-shirt of gray and black,
With an eagle and an Army patch embroidered on back.

And although it barely fit me, I began to swell with pride,
And for a shining moment, I was United States Army deep inside.
I didn’t want to leave him on that cold dark night,
This guardian of honor so willing to fight.

Then the soldier rolled over, whispered with a voice so clean and pure,
“Carry on Santa, it’s Christmas Day, all is secure.”
One look at my watch, and I knew he was right,
Merry Christmas my friend, and to all a good night!

God Bless America again!

Dec 222007

The song Blue Christmas was originally recorded by Elvis but I would like to present a much better version, sung by one Porky Pig.


This song was actually recorded by North Carolina disc jockey Denny Brownlee. When he was threatened by Warner Brothers with a lawsuit, the song was re-released and attributed to “Seymour Swine and the Squealers.”




The Jingle Cats Perform White Christmas

 Amusing  Comments Off on The Jingle Cats Perform White Christmas
Dec 222007

And now for your viewing pleasure… This weekend’s entertainment The Jingle Cats.

This is quite possibly the most terrifying music video ever made.