Pat Sullivan Blog

Mike Huckabee & Chuck Norris

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

It was over a year ago that I nearly had a convulsion while reading Chuck Norris-isms...it's great to see a few of those turned into a political ad. 

Trashing Petraeus - A Shame for Democrats

I have not written much recently about the Iraq war.  I have watched with interest the reports (even by some liberal reporters) about some success of the "surge".  I also noted one Democrat who openly said that it would be "a problem" for Democrats if the surge produced progress.  This is because the Democrats are so invested in America's failure in the Iraq war.  I don't think it is about the war though.  I think it is only about winning the White House and Congress. 

With apologies to the WSJ, I have copied this OpEd because it is so right on.  To accuse Gen. Petraeus of betrayal of his country even before they hear what he has to say is slanderous and a new low in national politics.  This piece says it all as far as I am concerned.   I respect both Lieberman and Biden for disavowing the trashing of this mans integrity for no other reason than political advantage.  Pure slime! 

Trashing Petraeus

September 11, 2007; Page A18

Important as was yesterday's appearance before Congress by General David Petraeus, the events leading up to his testimony may have been more significant. Members of the Democratic leadership and their supporters have now normalized the practice of accusing their opponents of lying. If other members of the Democratic Party don't move quickly to repudiate this turn, the ability of the U.S. political system to function will be impaired in a way no one would wish for.

Well, with one exception. MoveOn.org, the Democratic activist group, bought space in the New York Times yesterday to accuse General Petraeus of "cooking the books for the White House." The ad transmutes the general's name into "General Betray Us."

"Betrayal," as every military officer knows, is a word that through the history of their profession bears the stain of acts that are both dishonorable and unforgivable. That is to say, MoveOn.org didn't stumble upon this word; it was chosen with specific intent, to convey the most serious accusation possible against General Petraeus, that his word is false, that he is a liar and that he is willing to betray his country. The next and obvious word to which this equation with betrayal leads is treason. That it is merely insinuated makes it worse.

MoveOn.org calls itself a "progressive" political group, but it is in fact drawn from the hard left of American politics and a pedigree that sees politics as not so much an ongoing struggle but a final competition. Their Web-based group is new to the political scene, but its politics are not so new. More surprising and troubling are the formerly liberal institutions and politicians who now share this political ethos.

In an editorial on Sunday, the New York Times, after saying that President Bush "isn't looking for the truth, only for ways to confound the public," asserted that "General Petraeus has his own credibility problems." We read this as an elision from George Bush, the oft-accused liar on WMD and all the rest, to David Petraeus, also a liar merely for serving in the chain of command. With this editorial, the Times establishes that the party line is no longer just "Bush lied," but anyone who says anything good about Iraq or our effort there is also lying. As such, the Times enables and ratifies MoveOn.org's rhetoric as common usage for Democrats.

Late last week, for instance, we heard it said of General Petraeus that, "He's made a number of statements over the years that have not proven to be factual." This was from Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate.

The Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Lantos, said Thursday that General Petraeus would not be the author of his report; it would be written "by Administration political operatives." He opened yesterday's hearing, moments before General Petraeus was to speak, by saying, "We cannot take anything this Administration says on Iraq at face value."

So far, only two Democrats that we are aware of have repudiated this political turn. Joe Lieberman, already ostracized from the party for dissent, called the MoveOn ad an "act of slander that every member of the Congress -- Democrat and Republican -- has a solemn responsibility to condemn." And Joe Biden, after the MoveOn ad was read to him on "Meet the Press" Sunday, replied: "I don't buy into that. This is an honorable guy. He's telling the truth."

These are the exceptions. Another of the party's activist groups, Democracy for America, released a statement about the time General Petraeus began to speak: "It is offensive that our commander-in-chief has ordered a four-star general to mislead Congress."

As General Petraeus finished his statement yesterday, Senator Chris Dodd's Presidential campaign spammed an email about "the accuracy" of the report: "The fact that there are questions about General Petraeus's report is not surprising given that it was brought to you by this White House." Thus in Mr. Dodd's view, General Petraeus, returned from the Iraq battlefield, is a complicit ventriloquist's dummy.

Can this really be the new standard of political rhetoric across the Democratic Party? There was a time when the party's institutional elites, such as the Times, would have pulled it back from reducing politics to all or nothing. They would have blown the whistle on such accusations. Now they are leading the charge.

Under these new terms, public policy is no longer subject to debate, discussion and disagreement over competing views and interpretations. Instead, the opposition is reduced to the status of liar. Now the opposition is not merely wrong, but lacks legitimacy and political standing. The goal here is not to debate, but to destroy.

Today General Petraeus testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Its Democratic Members include Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer and Jim Webb. This would be the appropriate setting to apologize to General Petraeus for the MoveOn.org ad. Or let it stand.

Various articles I enjoyed

I don't have time to comment on each:

• Lose weight and be healthier.
• Does Richard Dawkins exist?
• The Peppered Moth
• PZ Meyers
• The Iraq War

9/11 - We Still Remember

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Bush Breaks Campaign Promise

I have said here a few times that I have been disappointed in Bush. He has managed to pretty well piss everyone off at some point.   In my opinion, this one is a big screw up.

He said when running for his 2nd term that he was against using mercury in vaccines. 

"I support the removal of Thimerosal from vaccines on the childhood national vaccine schedule. During a second term as President, I will continue to support increased funding to support a wide variety of research initiatives aimed at seeking definitive causes and/or triggers of autism. It is important to note that while there are many possible theories about causes or triggers of autism, no one material has been definitely included or excluded."

Now he plans to veto a bill specifically because it would have eliminated the use of mercury in flu vaccines. I have written often that we should eliminate the use of mercury in any medical or dental procedure.  It just makes no sense to use such an incredibly toxic heavy metal, especially when we inject it into babies whose brains are still developing.  I imagine it would be a "hardship" on big pharma.  I am sure they have millions of vaccines on the shelf that contain this neurotoxin.  They have no qualms about using it on babies etc.

I hate it when politicians don't do what they say they will do.  This is shameful!

Where Will We Go for Health Care?

I know that the Health Care biz is really screwed up.  But like Democracy, is it the best of the worst?  I am not a fan of Nationalized (socialized?) medicine in American for a lot of reasons.  The number one reason is that the experiment in Canada seems to be a serious failure.

The stories of Canadian citizens coming to America for their health care are well documented.  Here is a great article of one where a man is suing the Canadian government over the issue.

If we are unfortunate to have our right to get our healthcare where we choose, where will we go when we are deathly sick and cannot get treated immediately?

Proof Global Warming Caused by Media Hot Air

I said in a post not long ago that I remember back in the 70's being told by the media we should fear Global Cooling.  I suggested that what actually is going on today with global warming is nothing more than media hype.  The media LOVES controversy and fear.  That is what sells news. 

I also suggested that the climate is constantly changing in cycles and always has.  Looking at the long history of the "news cycle" back and forth between global cooling and global warming it suggests that I am right.

I was more than delighted to find this post from the website at www.businessandmedia.org.  This article documents the continually changing scares coming from the media dating back to the '20s.  It is a really fun read and shows that global warming is in fact created to sell the news.  And perhaps to get big grants from the government and other foundations.

Update: This Should Scare Everyone But Won't

Here is an update to European Scientists trying criminalize Intelligent Design speech.

Here is a shocking article detailing Orwellian type censorship and punishment in Europe.  This kind of thing ought to scare the crap out of everyone including Democrats and Republicans, Evolutionists and IDists, pro-lifers and pro-choicers. 

14% of Americans Happy with Congress; Could pollsters have really found that many lobbyists and illegal immigrants for the survey?

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Some funny commentary by Jon Sanders on a new survey about American's (lack of) confidence in Congress.  Also funny because he compares it to other national surveys, like how many people believe that Elvis is still alive and how many people believe in UFOs.

Two views of Iraq

No one would argue today that mistakes have not been made in the war in Iraq.  I certainly would not.  I have said so before in this blog here.  But is that all there is to talk about?  Certainly the Mainstream Media only portrays one side of the war so we all clearly know the bad side. 

But is there another side to the war?  A friend of mine, Foster Friess, who founded and runs Brandywine Funds, a really great mutual fund company, recently returned from a trip to Iraq.  He met with many Iraqi officials and talked with many of the regular people in the streets while there.  I greatly enjoyed his report of his trip. 

Of note is how peaceful it is now to live in the Northern Kurdish section of Iraq.  Saddam persecuted this area constantly.  He killed hundreds of thousands there.  Needless to say, they are absolutely thrilled with their liberation and love America and George Bush for what we did for them.  But we never hear this in the media.  I thought you would enjoy reading his report.

Why is it that we are not proud of what we did for this people?  We allow Islamic terrorists, intent on blowing up their own people, to drive the news reports we get everyday and cause us to be tempted to believe that nothing good was gained and all is lost.  This is foolishness.  Don't we realize that much of what the terrorists are doing are specifically designed to influence Media coverage and Congressmen?  Our media gladly goes along with this giving them all the more reason to blow more people up.  It is a vicious cycle and our media is very much a part of it.  Congress is guilty as well. 

Congressmen calling for our immediate withdrawal never offer a plan regarding how to prevent massacres if we actually did what they call for. They also don't address the loss of face in the Middle East if we SURRENDER.  They only thing that the Islamists respect is strength. We have only surrendered once before.  We should never do it again.  We have done a lot of good there.  Not the least of which is we have created a magnet for the crazies to come and fight us there, not in NY or Chicago or LA etc.  That seems to me to be a really good unexpected outcome.

Foster also introduces a wonderful Video regarding the history and present danger we face with the radical Islamic groups that are sworn enemies of ours.  Watch the preview of this here.  Clearly, no reasonable person believes that these people are just going to open up deli's if we leave Iraq without helping them to stabilize.  It is awful that we have to have a war but we need to remind ourselves that we did not start this war.  We finally responded to the many attacks over the past 15 years.  We cannot stand idly by.  To do so would be tragic.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

A few weeks ago I posted on Global Warming and got a number of comments.  I came across a TV  documentary created in England called the "Great Global Warming Swindle" when I read an Op Ed piece by Thomas Sowell (one of the smartest people on the planet I think)

The film runs 1hr and 13 mins.  I found it fascinating and very well done.  It enforced my sense that what we are dealing with when we talk about Global Warming may well be simply hysteria ala Paul Erlich's "Population Bomb" which back in the late 60's made all sorts of dire and outlandish predictions that simply did not happen!  Back then I was on the side of hysteria.  I really believed what Erlich was preaching.

One of the humorous points made in the documentary was that in the 70's, all the environmentalists were yelling about Global Cooling and making dire predictions about civilization freezing to death.  The global temperatures were falling at the time.  When they began to rise again, they switched to Global Warming.  The fact is the earth temperature is cyclical.  The cycles are totally driven by the rise and fall of sun spots and other natural phenomena, but NOT CO2 gases.   

The film also makes the point that massive amounts of monies are in play for funding for scientific study.  If you want to get funded you have to be politically correct and say you are studying something that may play a part in Global Warming.  Any studies to the contrary are simply never funded.  I always say, "follow the money."  Many thousands of jobs and huge bureaucracies are totally dependent upon Global Warming being true including the jobs of "Environmental Reporters" who will ONLY report something that is radical and alarming; preferably more alarming than the last report that came out.  Any scientist who reports that small changes in temperature have been happening for eons is simply ignored because it does not sell newspapers.

The documentary is worth watching regardless of which side you are on in this important debate.  I encourage you to take the time and enjoy it. 

Both Sides of the Global Warming Debate

Global warming is in the headlines again.  No one disagrees that warming is actually happening.  There is a scientific debate however, as to the actual cause and the possible results of global warming.  Here is a great summary of BOTH sides of the debate.  We almost NEVER hear the other side in mainstream media.  They prefer the more alarmist's view and yet there is a large group of scientists who don't agree with that view.  Good to know both sides of any argument.  I especially like this one.

Personally, I remember Paul Ehrlich's doomsday predictions regarding population growth in his book called "Population Bomb."  None of his alarmists predictions proved true.  None.  I feel the dire predictions of global warming may well fall into the same category as Ehrlich's.  I guess wild predictions sell papers!

Bergergate

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Which is worse, Watergate or Bergergate?

Where we're really at in Iraq in 700 words

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Victor Davis Hanson just penned the 700 (give or take) best words on the situation in Iraq that I have read from anyone.  There's no way to excerpt it.  Just go read the essay. 

If the Left can pause the "Bush lied" chanting, I think they might actually agree with Davis' assessment.

Minimum Wage

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

George Will pulls out some interesting stats that I had never seen before with minimum wage in his article, Raising the minimum wage is still a bad idea:

Most of the working poor earn more than the minimum wage, and most of the 0.6 percent (479,000 in 2005) of America's wage workers earning the minimum wage are not poor. Only one in five workers earning the federal minimum live in families with household earnings below the poverty line. Sixty percent work part-time and their average household income is well over $40,000. (The average and median household incomes are $63,344 and $46,326 respectively.)

Forty percent of American workers are salaried. Of the 75.6 million paid by the hour, 1.9 million earn the federal minimum or less, and of these, more than half are under 25 and more than a quarter are between 16 and 19. Many are students or other part-time workers. Sixty percent of those earning the federal minimum or less work in restaurants and bars and are earning tips -- often untaxed, perhaps -- in addition to their wages. Two-thirds of those earning the federal minimum today will, a year from now, have been promoted and be earning 10 percent more.

I had heard this argument before -- minimum wage doesn't do anything to help the poor because no one can live on $5 or $7 an hour -- but I had never seen this data.

Solstice Barn

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Saw this while watching Brit Hume and the Grapevine tonight.  Pretty hilarious.  Check out the Nativity Scene Solstice Barn.

Iraq War - Bad Dude!!

You may have seen this. A friend emailed it. It checks out as true on Snopes.com. I am glad we are on these guys side!! Bad dudes!

SEMPER FI !

Leading the fight is Gunnery Sgt Michael Burghardt, known as "Iron Mike" or just "Gunny". He is on his third tour in Iraq. He had become a legend in the bomb disposal world after winning the Bronze S tar for disabling 64 IEDs and destroying 1,548 pieces of ordnance during his second tour. Then, on September 19, he got blown up. He had arrived at a chaotic scene after a bomb had killed four US soldiers. He chose not to wear the bulky bomb protection suit. "You can't react to any sniper fire and you get tunnel-vision," he explains. So, protected by just a helmet and = standard-issue flak jacket, he began what bomb disposal officers term "the longest walk", stepping gingerly into a 5ft deep and 8ft wide crater.
The earth shifted slightly and he saw a Senao base station with a wire leading from it. He cut the wire and used his 7in knife t o probe the ground. "I found a piece of red detonating cord between my legs," he says. "That's when I knew I was screwed."

Realizing he had been sucked into a trap, Sgt Burghardt, 35, yelled at everyone to stay back. At that moment, an insurgent, probably watching through binoculars, pressed a button on his mobile phone to detonate the secondary device below the sergeant's feet. "A chill went up the back of my neck and then the bomb exploded," he recalls. "As I was in the air I remember thinking, 'I don't believe they got me.' I was just ticked off they were able to do it. Then I was lying on the road, not able to feel anything from the waist down."

His colleagues cut off his trousers to see how badly he was hurt. None could believe his legs were still there. "My dad's a Vietnam vet who's paralyzed from the waist down," says Sgt Burghardt. "I was lying there thinking I didn't want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad and for him to see me like that. They started to cut away my pants and I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down. Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, 'Good, I'm in business.' "As a stretcher was brought over, adrenaline and anger kicked in. "I decided to walk to the helicopter. I wasn't going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher." He stood and gave the insurgents who had blown him up a one-fingered salute. "I flipped them one. It was like, 'OK, I lost that round but I'll be back next week'."

Copies of a photograph depicting his defiance, taken by Jeff Bundy for the Omaha World-Herald, adorn the walls of homes across America and that of Col John Gronski, the brigade commander in Ramadi, who has hailed the image as an exemplar of the warrior spirit. Sgt Burghardt's injuries - burns and wounds to his legs and buttocks - kept him off duty for nearly a month and could have earned him a ticket home. But, like his father - who was awarded a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for being wounded in action in Vietnam - he stayed in Ramadi to engage in the battle against insurgents who are forever coming up with more ingenious ways of killing Americans.

Freedom of Speech - Not always

Chase Harper. a high school student is going to the Supreme Court.  Good for Chase!

Chase Harper – who wore a T-shirt to school expressing his religious viewpoint on homosexual behavior. Chase was closely questioned by an armed deputy and prohibited by school officials from wearing his shirt, telling him to "keep his faith in the car" – all the while the school welcomed messages advocating homosexual behavior.

Chase and his parents took the school to court defending his First Amendment rights, first in federal district court, and then before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

In one of its most "creative" opinions ever – citing the movie Brokeback Mountain - Judge Stephen Reinhardt (the most overturned judge in the country), and another 9th Circuit judge ruled that Chase's biblical speech was not protected.

Despite the uproar the opinion created on the left and the right with regard to free speech rights, the 9th Circuit would not re-hear the case.

So,  Chase's case is now being appealed to the highest court in the land: the United States Supreme Court. The High Court was asked to hear this case to protect the rights of Christian students to express their views at school. You can read the petition for review at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HarperPetition.pdf.

Attorney Kevin Theriot says: "School officials do not have the right to engage in viewpoint discrimination, and this case is very important for those who support true 'tolerance and diversity' in public schools. The core of the First Amendment is all about the right of Americans to express their sincerely held beliefs. In appealing this case to the U.S. Supreme Court, we hope the justices reverse the 9th Circuit's terrible ruling."

Tolerance cuts both ways.  Everybody wants to have the right to express their opinions but are not quite as anxious to let everyone else express an opposing viewpoint, especially on HOT TOPICS like homosexuality and Intelligent Design.  America has always thrived on debate.  Keep the debate in schools and the marketplace.  It is healthy.  Chase deserves the right to express his opinion.

Happy Thanksgiving!!

Islamists

This interesting piece was sent to me by a friend.  It is an interview of Dr. Tawfik Hamid, a former Islamic terrorist.

Here is a quote that speaks volumes.

"Stop asking what you have done wrong. Stop it! They're slaughtering you like sheep and you still look within. You criticize your history, your institutions, your churches. Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."

I find it maddening they many Americans, blame America for being hated and attacked by the Islamists.  Logically and historically, it is just not true.  They want to kill us for many reasons, most of which have nothing to do with us.  It is about them!!

Purple Cows and Politics (UPDATED)

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Purple cows stand out from the pack.  Seth Godin wrote an excellent book about it and how it applies to marketing principles.  Extremes to one end or the other are what make products worth telling your friends about.  "I just saw a purple cow!"  The products in the middle of the pack are either dead or dying.

So why did so many centerist-moderates win this election?

In my state of Arizona, I can't figure out the incongruence in the electorate when it comes to illegal immigration.

• Prop 102 prohibits illegal aliens from receiving punitive damages in AZ courts.  More than 70% agreed.
• Prop 103 makes English as the official language.  More than 70% agreed.
• Prop 300 stops illegal immigrants from receiving government funded services.  More than 70% agreed.  (Prop 102, 103, 300 results.)
• Len Munsil, the Republican gubernatorial candidate's entire campaign was based around securing the border.  He lost in a landslide. 63% vs 35%. Democrat incumbent Janet Napalitano has done nothing to secure the Arizona border.  She passes it off as a Federal problem.  This is legally correct, but with a billion dollar surplus (created by Republican dominated state legislature and the roaring economy), why not do more protect the citizens of Arizona since the bulk of violent crimes are committed by illegal immigrants?  Napalitano cringed every time Munsil mentioned the word "border."
• J.D. Hayworth, 4-time incumbent in district 5 (my district) went publicly on record against President Bush over and over again this summer during the attempt to pass "comprehensive immigration reform."  Hayworth pushed for "protect the border first!"  Surprising (and disappointing) upset for him losing by a few percentage points to Harry Mitchel who I know literally nothing about, other than that he was/is mayor of Tempe and looks very "grandfatherly."
• Most surprisingly enough, in AZ district 8, right along the Mexican border, Minute Man Republican Randy Graf lost to Democrat Gabrielle Giffords.  District 8 is a very Republican district that is one of the most, if not the most effected by illegal immigration in the entire country.

So...we don't want illegal immigrants to get any sort of governmental services or punitive damages, we do want English to be spoken, but we don't want any of the candidates that were fighting the hardest for those things?  I don't get it.

So much for being a purple cow in politics and going either far right (Len Munsil) or far left (Ned Lamont).  Moving to the middle during election season is the way to win. 

Why is that and what the heck is "the middle?"

UPDATE: Michael Savage on his radio show last night pointed out that the electorate nationwide has not abandoned conservative principles, as evidenced by all the state propositions (no on gay marriage, English as official language, no oil company tax in California, etc.). 

But the electorate has abandoned Republicans, who have for the most part abandoned conservatism!

The scariest of all being President Bush who sounded excited about the possibility for amnesty for illegals as a part of comprehensive immigration "reform" working in partnership with a Democratic controlled congress.  Bush has abandoned conservatism. 

This does not bode well for this country.

Dennis Miller and Iraq

Dennis says what I believe much better than I can say it.  Watch it.

The End of Mercury Fillings?

Here is a great post at the Huffington Post entitled "The Beginning of the End of Mercury in Dentistry."

I applaud Rep. Diane Watson (D) for her courageous and longtime stance against the ADA and FDA and their insistence that this incredibly stupid and untested use of mercury in humans was safe.  It is NOT safe.  At least it has never been proven safe by either the ADA or the FDA. 

Someday the use of mercury in dentistry will end just like the use of Asbestos ended.  Imagine though if the same approach used for Asbestos was applied to Mercury Fillings.  Laws were passed making it necessary to remove Asbestos from the buildings that contained it.  Yikes!! 

Removing amalgams from the mouths of over 70% of the entire population of America (200+ million people)  would be quite a task.  Especially if dentists have to do it right.  (You can't just drill the damn stuff out!!  You will make tens of millions even more poisoned and sick.)  And WHO is going to pay for it??  The ADA?  The US taxpayers?

Would it improve the health of America?  Absolutely!!  Even with the small sample group that Jigsaw Foundation has, we are seeing that getting mercury amalgams can dramatically effect the health of many.   If you can, please donate to the Foundation so that we can help more very sick people get started on the road to health by removing this terrible poison!

Thoughts on Iraq

Iraq is now like Vietnam or the Tet offensive according the press and it seems even the Bush admin is buying into that thinking.  Interesting.

Quickly, for what it is worth (probably not much), here is what I think.

1.)  Regardless of the messiness of the Iraq situation it is a VERY good thing that we have managed to attract most of the crazy Islamists to Iraq to fight us there instead of allowing them to spread out and fight us everywhere else, especially here on our soil.  There is no question in my mind that one of the reasons we have not been attacked again here, is that we are there.  They have come to fight us there.  That is a very positive thing.  They are going to fight us somewhere and it is far better for us that it is there, not NY or LA or wherever in the US.

2.)  Over the years I have talked to many soldiers who were on the ground in Vietnam and all were sooo frustrated that they were never allowed to really fight to win!  Political issues prevented them from kicking North Vietnam's ass.  They could have.  They should have.  If we are going to go to the trouble to fight a war, we ought to fight to win or stay the hell out of it.  War is never won with a half assed, politically correct approach.  Either commit all out, no holds barred or surrender.  The French at least learned to surrender early!

3.) Bush needs to fire some Generals and get someone new to run this thing.  At the end of the day, if there is blame for what happens on the ground it is the generals who call the shots.  Not Bush.  Unless of course he or Rumsfield (who I don't care much for for many reasons) is not listening to his Generals.  It appears to me that he is listening to them.  I think they have run a crummy clean up operation.  The initial war was run brilliantly.  The aftermath has proven to be a disaster.  He needs a new general in charge.  Fire somebody W!!  Fire em today!!  Get pissed and win the damn war!!  As my dad used to say, "stop pussyfooting around."

4.) Commit totally to overwhelm the terrorists even if you have to put a million troops on the ground.  Kill every terrorist you can find everywhere they are in Iraq.  Secure it and then turn it over to the Iraqi government and military.  Then get the hell out of there.  You have done the best you can do.  If they then lose what we have given them, it is not our fault.  If they are crazy enough (and they likely are) to continue to kill each other because of all the religious factions there then let em.  But get the job done.  Do it with all the force required to bring peace and then get out in a rational, planned manner.

5.)  Realize that it is soo easy to be a Monday morning quarterback.  When you are a leader you NEVER have enough information.  You do the best you can to make a decision and then you go all out to win, making adjustments as you go.  I have never been involved in a planned business startup where things went as planned.  You just cannot know beforehand what the situation is really going to be like or what your competitors will do to respond to your campaign.  All of this carping in the press and from politicians is just a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks who don't have a clue what leadership is.  For all his faults Bush has led and done many things right.  Now he needs to lead all the way and win the damn war, not just contain the people who want to kill us.  He needs to win this no matter the cost.  We must win.  To lose would cost us way too much. 

And that is all I have to say about that.

Cal Thomas says it better than anyone

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

From Cal Thomas in the article Bush's undeclared war:

God and relationships must be freely chosen to be meaningful and herein lies the fundamental difference in world views. One sees their God as an angry enforcer who needs goon squads to whip people into line. The other sees God giving humanity free will with blessings and consequences for each choice, but with ultimate judgment reserved for Himself.

This is the great chasm that confronts the world.

I don't think it's possible to say it any better than that.

Pope Benedict and Islam

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Well, there's much ado about Pope Benedict's speech.  Spengler,in a rather long but interesting post article, summarizes it all down to this:

To ask Islam to become moderate, to reform, to become a peaceful religion of personal conscience is the precise equivalent of asking Catholics to abolish Mass.

Islam, I have argued for years, faces an existential crisis in the modern world, which has ripped its adherents out of their traditional existence and thrust them into deadly conflicts. What was always latent in Islam has now come to the surface: the practice of Islam now expresses itself uniquely in jihad. Benedict XVI has had the courage to call things by their true names. Everything else is hypocrisy and self-delusion.

So I suppose this is WWIII after all.

OpEd by Path to 9/11 screenwriter

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

I found this OpEd by Cyrus Nowrasteh, the screenwriter of "The Path to 9/11" to be really interesting.

The Path to Hysteria
My sin was to write a screenplay accurately depicting Bill Clinton's record on terrorism.

Sicko, Michael Moore's new movie

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Michael Moore is doing a new moive called Sicko about the problem with medicine in the US.  As a conservative, I'm no fan of Michael Moore at all.  But as an avid reader of all things alternative health, I think he's tackling a subject that needs a billion-candle spotlight pointed on it.

Sadly, because it's Michael Moore doing this film, most if not all from the Right will automatically discredit HUGE problems that do exist in the NIH, CDC, FDA, Big Pharma, et al because of patent law, rules for "health claims", conflicts of interest, shareholder value, hidden bias, and status quo. 

If Hippocrates said, "Let food be your medicine," would that make, "The wrong food is your poison" true?

H/T: Fit & Healthy.  More on Digg.

There are people who want to kill us

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

An email from Townhall.com:

Do you remember? It’s been five years since the brutal terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Many seem to have forgotten the evil these terrorists have waged on our country throughout the past decade, including September 11, the first World Trade Center bombing and the USS Cole. We must remember why we are fighting these terrorists.

This week Progress For America launched an issue campaign that places a sharp focus on the War on Terror. Never forget why we are fighting this important war. Never forget the evil terrorists have waged on Americans.

              Visit www.progressforamerica.org today, watch the new one minute video and send it to your friends.

 

                             

Yeah, I remember.

Btw, is the voice the guy from "Real men of genius" commercials?  Sure sounds like it to me.

Federal Employee Salaries

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Looking for a better paying job?  I would have never guessed that Uncle Sam would be the place to turn.  But AZ 12 local news just flashed a chart with these numbers, quoting "the magazine of human events" as the source.  (I think they mean HumanEvents.com, but I couldn't find the article they were referrencing.)

MEDIAN SALARIES:

Federal Employees
$54,054 - Men
$46,849 - Women

Private Employees
$41,038 - Men
$30,824 - Women

No kidding!  That's sort of a wide discrepancy, don't you think?

The Path to 9/11 (UPDATED)

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

The Path to 9/11 looks like it's going to be rather interesting.  Plus, how can you not like Harvey Keitel?  :)

UPDATE: I can't believe all the whining coming from Democrats today.  Chuck Shumer said, "You can't take a film that is supposed to report on something that is so real and so close and make it into fiction.  That's beneath ABC's dignity."  Harry Reid said, "It will be a gross miscarriage of ABC's corporate and civic responsibilites if they go forward with this movie." 

Are you kidding me?? Did any of these guys say anything remotely close to this about Michael Moore and Farenheit 911?  OF COURSE NOT!  This free speech should not be defended since it isn't child pornography.  The hypocrisy is disgusting. 

Frankly, I think their childish actions are only going to help the ratings for Path to 9/11 and make people watch more closely for the scenes in question.  But it sounds like if these guys would have all kept their mouth shut, no one would have noticed.  Dennis Prager this morning said on his radio show that as you watch it, it's unlikely that you'll find yourself angry at the Clintonistas, but rather, you're angry at the terrorists -- WHICH IS WHO WE SHOULD BE ANGRY AT!

Universal Healthcare (Updated)

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

This post on NewsTarget.com today about yet more troubles at the FDA -- and the fact that I had been thinking about this for a few days --  prompted me to post the following comment.  The post is all about how the FDA is driving the healthcare of our nation off a cliff.  My comment:

Not to get Left vs. Right political here, but don't Dems realize that universal healthcare coverage for all Americans is something that Big Pharma -- who Dems despise -- would absolutely love!!  Universal healthcare would only mean more drugs and needless surgeries for all Americans.

Conversely, wouldn't healthcare coverage limited to catastrophic events (car wreck, etc.) FORCE people to find cost-effective solutions to their health problems?  And having to pay their own money to fix their own problems, wouldn't those people turn to the internet and find great websites like NewsTarget.com, Mercola.com, etc?

I'm a conservative Republican (borderline Libertarian) that believes the American dream is LIMITED to the right to life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness.  Not ALL social programs are bad, but universal health care would be DISASTROUS.  The Fed has grown much too large and we as the citizens of this country have to do something.

Patrick Sullivan Jr.
President of Jigsaw Health
www.JigsawHealth.com

Jigsaw Health Foundation:  www.JigsawHealth.org
Pat Sullivan Blog:  www.PatSullivan.com

Honestly, this riff is still just a thought.  I haven't done any sort of research on facts and figures or read any other opinion pieces.  Not like that would really make things crystal clear anyways.  What I just find so odd is that with my position on alternative health, activism against mercury amalgams, and my conservative politics, I don't seem to find that many friends. 

But Big Pharma will most assuredly get bigger -- MUCH bigger -- with universal healthcare than without. 

Btw, it takes up to 2 days for them to approve and post comments, and they have editorial control, so my comment might not ever show up.

UPDATE: Another Newstarget article laments the fact that 46.6 million Americans don't have insurance.

And since insurance does NOT pay for fish oil, organic foods, dietary supplements, WHO CARES!!!  Think of the irony -- "All Americans should have health insurance!", and yet insurance covers what?  Colonoscopies?  Yes.  Probiotics?  No.  Chemotherapy?  Yes.  Blueberries?  No.  Doctors and hospitals take insurance, which happen to be the 4th (3rd?) leading cause of death. 

I vote for less people having $5 copays for Vioxx.  Big Pharma certainly votes YES on health care for all Americans. 

And since when did health care become a right?  That's bogus! 

Patrick Sullivan Jr., president of JigsawHealth.com

I'm reminded of one of my favorite words...incongruent.

Wonder how many of the 46.6 million are illegal immigrants?  How many of them are young adults?  Young adults feed catastrophic, high-deductible insurance.  That's about it.  Which is exactly what you get from an HSA.  I've been enrolled for over a year now.  I buy all my Jigsaw supplements with my HSA card.  (Yes, I do BUY supplements from my company.  No handouts here!  :)

Photo Fraud in Lebanon

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

I was reading lots of LGF yesterday, and the post about how world television media APTN pretty much decides who gets to see what from an office in London.  I hadn't read that before and thought it was interesting in light of all the fauxtography scandals coming out.

My mom sent me a link to a short video summarizing the fauxtography.  The Mark Twain quote at the end is a chuckler.

Cherries: A Dangerous Drug? (UPDATED)

My friend, David Gumpert, who writes a very good column for Business Week Online, comments about the ominous threat of the FDA.  His comments are very insightful.    I wrote something similar a few months ago.

In their marketing, cherry farmers used studies showing that cherries were actually healthy to eat. (now that is shocking news, yes?)  Well, they got Nastygrams from the FDA telling them that they had to stop telling Americans that cherries were healthy.  The FDA told them that to claim health benefits for cherries they would have to do drug studies on the cherries.  Now keep in mind these studies typically cost over $300 million dollars to do to FDA standards. 

The scary thing is that the FDA could shut all these cherry growers down if they wanted to do so.  No due process is needed.  Pretty scary isn't it.  The FDA helped put out drugs like Vioxx which KILLED somewhere between 25,000 and 100,000 people.  Now they have time to threaten cherry growers with lawsuits?  How many people died from eating cherries??  We would all do good to eat a lot more cherries.  We don't need the FDA to regulate cherries!! I just wish they would keep dangerous drugs like Vioxx off the market.

UPDATE (by Patrick Sullivan Jr.):  More updates on David's blog, including the ever-charming Steven Barrett finding a new friend in cherry grower John King.  (Since I have to point it out for new readers, I'm being facetious.)

Internet SAFETY Act

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

This is repulsive.

In 2003, an estimated 20,000 images of child pornography were posted on the Internet every week. Between 1998 and 2004, child-pornography reports made to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children increased from 3,267 to 106,119 - a 30-fold increase over a six-year period. The Justice Department also noted that there has been an escalation in the severity of abuse depicted in child pornography in recent years, “with the images found today more frequently involving younger children - including toddlers and even infants.”

This is from Senator John Kyl's weekly newsletter.  And the rest of the story ain't any better.  Absolutely sickening.

ACLU Opposes Free Speech

I have written a number of posts about the ACLU's selective free speech policies and litigation work.  Anything they are in favor of is OK to talk about.  Anything they oppose is NOT OK to talk about.  Free speech is only free for those they agree with.

Here is a great John Leo editorial about this same topic. 

Hating America

I have written here before about the fact that Europe and others seem to hate America.  A friend sent me an article out if the National Review by Victor David Hanson that is very good.

The opening sentence, "How does the United States deal with a corrupt world in which we are blamed even for the good we do, while others are praised when they do wrong or remain indifferent to suffering?"   This asks a question I have felt and asked many times.  There seems to be such a double standard.  Great discussion about this double standard.  Enjoy.

ActivistCash.com

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

I was surfing around this morning and came across ActivistCash.com.  "We follow the money -- for you."

Should be an interesting tool for future games of follow the money.

Senator Kyl, "Pain at the Pump"

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

Here's what seems to be some good ol' common sense from Senator John Kyl of my homestate, Arizona. 

Pain at the Pump
By U.S. Senator Jon Kyl

There is an old saying: For every complex problem, there is a simple-and wrong-solution. So it is with gas prices. Beware of the politicians who claim there’s a simple answer to this complex problem.

Finding credible solutions means first understanding why gas prices are so high. Experts say the single biggest factor is the price of crude oil. Over the last 15 years, fluctuations in crude oil prices explain 97 percent of fluctuations in gas prices.

And what influences crude oil prices? International events, for starters. The Iranian nuclear crisis, supply disruptions in Norway and Nigeria, and political uncertainty in Venezuela are key factors. Then, too, rising global demand, spurred in part by economic growth in China and India, decreases the global supply of crude oil and this pushes prices up for everyone.

Domestic conditions play a role, too. Continued recovery from hurricane damage, federally mandated changes to fuel specifications, limitations on U.S. oil-refinery capacity, and restrictions on new domestic oil and gas exploration, have stressed already tight fuel markets.

Bottom line: the supply of oil is limited, threatened by international events, and subject to domestic constrictions that aggravate the problem of high gas prices.

So what can be done?

First of all, the idea of issuing a $100 or a $150 “rebate” to offset high gas prices isn’t a solution, it’s a gimmick. It produces not one drop of new oil, nor does anything to bring down prices.

There are short-range and long-range things Congress can do. The governmental requirement for fuel blends -- known as “boutique fuels” -- has increased costs and strained the capacity of U.S. refineries and distribution systems. Congress ought to suspend its boutique fuel-blending requirements.

Other actions for the short term: Congress should reduce or suspend the ethanol additive mandate and repeal the 54-cent-per-gallon tariff on imported ethanol from overseas (primarily Brazil). I have introduced a bill with Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California that would eliminate the import tariff. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 required refiners to increase their use of ethanol in gasoline by 7.5 billion gallons a year by 2012 (in 2006 alone, consumers will be forced to use four billion gallons nationwide). The problem is that ethanol production has not been able to meet this artificially imposed demand. As we all know, when demand outpaces supply, the price goes up.

Of course, increasing the supplies of additives to gasoline only gives a limited amount of relief, and would only have an impact in the immediate future. Unless we want to find ourselves in the same position next year, we must increase our domestic oil supply in the long term.

Deep water oil production off our coastal areas and finally recovering the available oil in Alaska are two places to start. Both can be done without damage to the environment and could substantially increase our domestic supply of oil and gas. In the case of ANWR, there are up to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil (equal to 30 years of imports from Saudi Arabia). Had President Clinton not vetoed this action a decade ago, that oil could be flowing today and gas prices would be lower.

And some solutions are in our own hands. To help reduce demand, people now have the option of driving vehicles that yield far better fuel mileage, including hybrids. Simply taking the time to monitor tire pressure and carry out service maintenance of our existing vehicles can boost the mileage we get from our cars. And people should consider carpooling when the option is available.

While there is no single silver bullet that will reduce gas prices, the immediate and long-term measures that I’ve mentioned here can help. I’ll keep working to support sensible policies, and I solicit your ideas as well.

Thank you Senator Kyl for calling out Senator Frist's idiotic "let's give everyone $100" plan to lower gas prices.  How is the world did Dr. Frist become Senate majority leader anyways?

My Reply to Skeptics

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

On Friday, I posted this link to Mike Adams somewhat satircal look at skeptics of natural/alternative health.  As I should have guessed, I had some comments from skeptics.  Dad of Cameron wrote:

Hi Pat. Thanks for the link, that was a very well-written essay. Of course it's a classic fallacious appeal to Other Ways Of Knowing - pretty vacuous too.

"A chicken can still run with its head cut off, but that doesn't mean it knows where it's going."

A chicken can run with its head intact, but that doesn't mean it "knows" where it's going.

...

I wrote this reply and decided I wanted to pull it up into a blog post on it's own:

...

Dad of Cameron, I think maybe you misinterpretted what Mike Adams wrote. (Or maybe I did?) The scientific method HAS been applied to MUCH of the natural/alternative health.

Are you familiar with the "Natural Health Bible" by Steven Bratman, M.D.? It's had several different names over the years, including "The Natural Pharmacist", "The Natural Health Encyclopedia", and "Natural and Alternative Treatments." Here's an online version of it. I am a BIG fan of it because it is fair and balanced, and rooted in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

The Complementary Therapies Natural Health Encyclopedia contains detailed information on more than 180 different conditions and the conventional and natural treatments used to treat them, over 200 herbs and supplements, plus drug-herb and drug-supplement interactions for more than 75 drug categories.

Interestingly enough, Dr. Bratman even gets a thumbs up from a self-professed quackbuster.

Steven Bratman, MD is a national expert on alternative medicine. He is both a strong proponent and vocal critic of alternative treatments. This even-handed approach has made him a trusted party on both sides of the debate.

Regardless, it somewhat amuzes me, but mostly just frustrates me, when self-avowed skeptics stifle what would appear to be common sense in the name of "scientific method."

The most pertinent example of this are the few hundred autistic kids that in the last 2 - 3 years have had their autistic symptoms abate, either partially or totally, and the most logical, most straight-forward, most obvious, in your face answer is that they used chelation therapy to remove heavy metals, mainly mercury.

Now, every time I bring this up, NOT ONE SKEPTIC DEALS WITH THIS HEAD ON. You probably remember the exhange I had with Orac last year where I practically begged him and his readers to say anything about these kids. Dr. Gorski is by no means dumb, but he knows if he acknowledges them, he's got to deal with the fact that they would disprove his own belief.

But it's as if the autism/mercury skeptics have blinders to this simple cause and effect. Yes, Orac et al have said in passing that they'd review a published, peer-reviewed paper on the subject. But then and only then will they conceed that autism/mercury thing could even be a remote possibility.

So when Orac writes paragraph upon paragraph upon paragraph for why autism could never be caused by mercury at all, without caveat, is that what you call using "scientific method?"

The skeptical community's insistence that this information remain secret is partically what what drives groups like GenerationRescue to do massive PR/advertising to generalize that ALL autism is caused by mercury poisoning, which I personally disagree with on the basis of reading arguments from the other side.

But I still can't get over the kids that have gotten better by removing heavy metals...

So I really don't understand why no one on your side has ever said, "If a few hundred autistic kids had lots of heavy metals, namely mercury, come out of their body, and their adverse symptoms got better at the same time, well then, it seems like there very well could be something there. Let's dig deeper!" Instead, every excuse under the sun is used to justify -- without caveat -- why this could never, ever possibly be true!

Blatant disregard of empirical evidence is itellectually dishonest. And if that is a part of the "scientific method", then someone needs to redefine this term. My suggestion would be, "scientifically correct", ala "Politically correct."

Because frankly, "scientific method" has become political. Think about it, what part of science is free from political and/or monetary consequences?

Autism is caused by mercury?
Global warming?
Intelligent design vs. evolution?
HIV causes AIDS?
Cancer?
Dietary supplements?
Chiropractics?

None of the above says I.

To pretend that science is free from politcal/capitalistic fall out would be dishonest. And to our detriment, (all?) science is HEAVILY entrenched in politics. To our own peril? Probably.

(Maybe I need to write an essay about how science is capitalism's weak link, because it sure seems that way. Not that I'm advocating socialism, communism, etc as that form of fairness has only killed about 30 million people in Russia and China alone.)

Double Standards

Double standards exist everywhere in our world today.  Here is another perfect example of a double standard.  On one hand, University Professors protest to protect the free speech rights of a leftist professor who was caught plagiarizing.  On the other hand University Professors want to crucify a Christian librarian who had the nerve to suggest that incoming freshman read a few books that were more traditional in their worldview.  Hypocrisy, whether it be on the Right or on the Left is ugly.