There a bit of controversy brewing tonight over some comments made by President Bush. Here is what President Bush said,

“Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along

…

We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history”

Did he name names? No. Did he imply any particular U.S. Senator, Representative, or anyone else? No. He didn’t mention anyone by name and he gave no example of what he was speaking about, but what he said was true. He simply made a statement of fact.

Some people do seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists. Some people at the time, including U.S. Senators, also thought we should have sat down and talked to Hitler. Don’t get your political panties in a bunch. What President Bush said was the truth.

So why did a number of Democrats get all bent out of shape this afternoon?

Barack Obama accused the President of a “false political attack”. How? Even though President Bush never mentioned Barack Obama by name, Mr. Obama has said that part of his strategy of “change” and “inspiration” was to sit down at the table to talk to terrorists and the countries that sponsor them. I’ve heard him make that statement. He said it. So why is he upset? Even if President Bush was aiming his statements at Mr. Obama, how was his statement false?

Nancy Pelosi said President Bush’s comments were “beneath the dignity of the office of the president and unworthy of our representation”. President Bush spoke the truth, is that something she’s unfamiliar with? Who is she to talk about dignity? If I remember correctly, Nancy Pelosi visited Syria herself in April of 2007 even though it was against official U.S. policy. Maybe she’s taking offense because she thought of herself when President Bush was speaking?

Of course, seeing the opportunity to jump on the official Democratic Party “I’m Offended” bandwagon, Senator Joe Biden said,

This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset … and make this kind of ridiculous statement

Ridiculous statement? How was his statement ridiculous? Several people in our government, candidates and non-candidates alike, have said they would sit down and talk to terrorists, or the governments which sponsor them. If anyone can understand being on the negative end of appeasement, it’s the Jews, so why not make those statements during the 60th anniversary of Israel? Of course, Joe Biden pipes up everytime there is something for Democrats to feign offense at so this is no big surprise to me.

Not being one to be left out of the conversation, Hillary Clinton said,

President Bush’s comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is both offensive and outrageous on the face of it, especially in light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address and certainly to use an important moment like the 60th anniversary celebration of Israel to make a political point seems terribly misplaced. Unfortunately, this is what we’ve come to expect from President Bush.

Again, why not make those statements during the 60th anniversary of Israel? Why are Democrats so “offended” by the facts? Whether they are historical facts (the statement about the American Senator wishing he could have spoken to Hitler) or current facts (some people do want to sit down and talk to the terrorists), why are Democracts so offended by them?

Personally, I think President Bush’s comments were right on the money, especially in light of Former President Jimmy Carter’s recent trip to visit with the leaders of Hamas. Jimmy Carter has said time and time again that the only road to peace is to sit down and talk with the terrorists and the countries that sponsor them. So, once again I ask, where was the falseness, unworthiness, or outrageousness in President Bush’s statement?

Republicans and Democrats both have done some really stupid things lately, and there are many different things we can and should be offended at. I don’t think the truth should be one of them.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

I knew it was just a matter of time before Bob Barr tossed his hat in the ring. I am less than thrilled though.

Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, dismissing the major party candidates for failing to offer dramatic change, announced Monday he is seeking the Libertarian Party nomination for president.

Voters “want a choice,” Barr told a gathering of about 40 journalists and supporters in a small room at the National Press Club.

He’s right, we do want a choice, but we would prefer a choice of people we could actually support for President rather than a wide field of those to vote against.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged
in the land which the LORD your God gives you.
Exodus 20:12

My son, observe the commandment of your father,
and do not forsake the teaching of your mother;
Proverbs 6:20

Happy Mother’s Day Mom!

– Powered By Stuffr! –

In 2006, Democrats told us to vote for change. People voted, Democrats took over the Congress, and things have changed. They have changed dramatically.

Since the Democrats took over the price of gas has risen from just over to $2 per gallon to more than $3.50 per gallon. Unemployment has risen from 4.5% to 5.0% and consumer confidence, which was at a 2 1/2 year high, is falling faster than property values. More people are facing foreclosure now than at any other time, and things don’t look like they’ll be getting better any time soon.

Yep. Americans wanted change in 2006, and we got it, didn’t we?

Today, Newt Gingrich said,

If a majority of the House Republicans vote for real change, they should instruct Republican Leader John Boehner and his team to come back with a new plan by the Wednesday before the Memorial Day recess.

…

This plan should involve real change in legislative, communications, and campaign strategy and involve immediate, real action, including a complete overhaul of the Congressional Campaign Committee

Honestly, at this point, it won’t take much to be seen as the party of change and reform, the question is, which party will portray themselves as the one that can accomplish those goals?

Personally, no one inside either party has given me any hope that things will change or that reform is in the air. No one. That is sad. In every election I have always voted for someone, this will be the first election where I specifically vote against someone. I feel horrible, but I have no confidence in any of the current candidates.

There is no doubt that things need to change in Washington. There is no doubt that many different government agencies need to be reformed. We just need to be careful who we put in charge of those changes.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

On April 28th, Former President Jimmy Carter wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times. I found a few items within the article quite interesting and I would like to point them out to you.

Mr. Carter says,

Although I knew that official United States policy was to boycott the government of Syria and leaders of Hamas, I did not receive any negative or cautionary messages about the trip, except that it might be dangerous to visit Gaza.

Not only does he admit that he knew the current U.S. policy and knowingly defied it for all the world to see, but he lies about the fact that he was not contacted by the State Department. On April 22nd, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said,

“I just don’t want there to be any confusion, the United States is not going to deal with Hamas and we had certainly told President Carter that we did not think meeting with Hamas was going to help”

Mr. Carter does not stop there. He flat out lies again just a few paragraphs down.

Hamas will accept any agreement negotiated by Mr. Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel provided it is approved either in a Palestinian referendum or by an elected government. Hamas’s leader, Khaled Meshal, has reconfirmed this, although some subordinates have denied it to the press.

Remember, this op-ed was published on April 28th. Now, let’s look back to April 21st, when Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal said, and I quote,

We accept a Palestinian state within the June 4 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital — a sovereign state without settlements — as well as the right of Palestinian refugees to return, but without recognition of Israel

Meshaal said that himself. There was no subordinate, there was no mistake in the message he was delivering. Yet, Mr. Carter is yet again trying to re-write history and whitewash another failed attempt at diplomacy.

At the end of his op-ed he has the audacity to say that more meetings are needed with the “outlawed” leaders in order to expedite the stalemated peace talks. That’s a load of crap and he knows it.

Everyone knows he accomplished nothing in his talks with Hamas, well, other than posing as a propaganda tool for a group of terrorists, that is.

I’m not the only one who thinks he accomplished nothing. If you don’t believe me, just listen to the Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki, who said,

President Carter came to the region thinking he could achieve something. Unfortunately president Carter left without anything concrete. The only thing he achieved was permission on the part of Khaled Meshaal of Hamas to deliver a letter from a detained Israeli soldier to his family. Nothing else. Hamas offered nothing to president Carter. They reiterated the same positions. There was no change on the part of Hamas.

I find it quite ironic that Mr. Carter titled his op-ed, “Pariah Diplomacy”. Mr. Carter knowingly met with terrorists, against current U.S. policy, then he went on in this op-ed to try and mislead the American people about the results of those meetings. In fact, it appears the only person involved in the meetings who felt the need to lie about their results, was Mr. Carter. How sad is it when you can believe the words coming out the of the mouths of terrorists before you can believe the words coming from a former U.S. President? When it comes to diplomacy and being labeled a pariah, Mr. Carter seems to be in good company.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

All week long all I have heard about is Miley Cyrus and her Vanity Fair photoshoot. From everything I have heard, Disney is not happy at all about her posing for that one particular pose. They have made it very clear that the star of “Hannah Montana” did something terribly wrong. Just about every pundit in the industry has barked about her parents, or “handlers”, or Annie Leibovitz, and Miley Cyrus has begun backpedaling because of Disney’s disapproval.

I miss Walt Disney. Not the company. The man. I bet he is turning somersaults in his grave knowing what the company is up to these days. The Walt Disney Company and the executives who run it are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites with no respect for the youth of the world. In fact, in my opinion they aren’t much better than child pornographers.

Why would I think such a thing? How could I compare them to child pornographers? It’s pretty simple when you look at the photos that accompany this article on TMZ.

Apparently Disney uses underaged models clad only in lacy, sexy lingerie to market their products in China. So why is it okay for them to support such racy ad campaigns but act completely “shocked” and “surprised” by the photo of Miley Cyrus?

The answer is simple. It’s easy to exploit cute, attractive, underage models that no one knows. It’s not so nice to see your major cash cow doing the same thing is it? Especially when you know parents nationwide will be phoning, faxing, and emailing in complaints the moment they see Miley in the satin bed sheet.

Disney makes a boatload of money from the Hannah Montana brand, and that is the only reason they have feigned shock at the actions of Miley Cyrus, her parents, her handlers, and Annie Leibovitz.

Shame on you Disney.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

I received an email from Gizmo today. Gizmo5 is a wanna be replacement for Skype that, to be honest, doesn’t work nearly as reliably as Skype. I still receive email from them because I signed up to use their service many months ago when Vinny and I were having trouble with Skype during our podcasts. We ended up sticking with Skype, and I haven’t really given much more thought to Gizmo. To be honest, I didn’t like their service before I received this email. Every call I placed with their service had low quality, and it took several attempts to place the calls in the first place.

Click the image to view it full size.

According to their email, if I install Gizmo5 on my phone or my computer, I can vote 25 times for my favorite American Idol contestant with just one call through Gizmo. Is it me, or are they admitting to gaming the American Idol voting system? If you or I use our phones to call, we register just one vote. How does Gizmo get 25 votes in to the system with just one call? That sounds a little bit fishy to me.

More importantly, however, is the fact that they are actively recruiting international calls, which are prohibited by American Idol. They are actively endorsing cheating while promoting their product.

Do you live outside the United States? Now you can vote too. The show blocks international calls, but by using Gizmo5 your calls will go through and your votes will be counted!

Not only are they gaming the voting system on American Idol, but they are trying to engage international viewers to use Gizmo5 to place their votes and bypass the fact that such calls are prohibited by American Idol. I wonder how the producers of American Idol will view this? I think it’s pretty sad when the only way you can promote your product is to encourage people to use it in an unethical way.

While I find it very natural for any company to try and attach themselves to the American Idol popularity train, I also find it disgusting that they are trying to do so by breaking the rules and encouraging people to cheat while doing so.

It’s clear they are trying to appeal to the international market by giving international users a reason to try their service. It’s also clear where they stand on ethics as a company, and I’m certainly not going to lose any sleep while boycotting Gizmo.

[Crossposted at The Alligator Pit]

– Powered By Stuffr! –

This whole story is a complete waste of time.

Miley Cyrus took part in a photo shoot for Vanity Fair. At the time of the shoot, she said the photo looked artsy and she loved it. Miley’s family (or her “handlers”) were with her on the shoot and everyone involved loved the results.

Now, parents are complaining to Disney and because of this, Miley is backpedaling on the whole issue. Only now is she “embarassed” by the photoshoot.

Miley Cyrus is taking issue with a photo of herself that’s going around, and it’s not another amateur, truth-or-dare Internet snapshot — it’s the handiwork of Annie Leibovitz.

“I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed,” Cyrus said Sunday in a statement through her publicist. “I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about.”

The photos, appearing in the upcoming issue of Vanity Fair, were taken by Leibovitz, a renowned celebrity photographer whose edgy, silver-toned portraits have included subjects such as Angelina Jolie, Scarlett Johansson and a naked, pregnant Demi Moore.

This is ridiculous.

First of all, it was ridiculous for Vanity Fair and Annie Leibovitz to conduct a photoshoot of a 15 year old clad only in a silk sheet.

Secondly, it was ridiculous for Miley Cyrus, and her parents (or “handlers”) to agree to participate in a photoshoot of a 15 year old clad only in a silk sheet.

Everyone involved knew this photoshoot was going to have an adverse effect on her “G-rated” image. If they didn’t, then they are all a bunch of morons.

On a sidenote, every article I have seen about this issue claims it is a topless photo. While I admit it appears she is not wearing a top, you can hardly call it a “topless” photo.

Miley Cyrus knew exactly what she was doing. So did her parents (or “handlers”). She can’t be Hannah Montana forever, and she doesn’t want to get stuck in the “child actor” genre for the rest of her life, so it only makes sense that she would eventually want to be seen as a little more “grown up”.

Again, the matter is ridiculous and a total waste of everyone’s time. Anyone with a good pair of eyeglasses can see that.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

Vinny sent me a link to an article today that made me laugh so hard I almost peed my pants. Apparently a Chinese school teacher and a beautician have filed a lawsuit against CNN, Turner Broadcasting, and Jack Cafferty, because of the comments Jack Cafferty made earlier this month.

They are asking for $1.3 billion in compensation for violating the dignity and reputation of the Chinese people. A similar suit was filed by 14 lawyers in Beijing as well. The lawsuit filed by the two women was filed in New York. Six lawyers are handling the case for the women.

If you remember, Cafferty said,

The United States imported Chinese-made “junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food” and added: “They’re basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they’ve been for the last 50 years.”

I am not going to rehash the comments Jack Cafferty made, or my support of them. The point here is that Jack Cafferty stated his opinions on the air and they took offense to it. It’s not so hard to believe that people get so easily offended these days. Just look out your window. I bet three out every five people you see get offended at something someone does at least once per day.

I, personally, am offended at the lawyers who are involved in these cases. All twenty of them, but especially the six who are representing the women in the second case.

That’s right. I am highly offended. Why, you ask? It’s simple.

Six lawyers filed a lawsuit in New York over an incident where a news reporter vocalizes his opinion on the air. Don’t any of those six lawyers realize that Jack Cafferty had a constitutional right to say what he said? It’s called freedom of speech. He has a right to his opinion, and the right to state it, no matter how much the Chinese didn’t like it.

Six lawyers filed a lawsuit in New York over an incident where a cable news network chose to air the opinion of one of it’s star reporters. Don’t any of those six lawyers realize that CNN had a constitutional right to air what he said? It’s called freedom of the press. They had a right to air his comments, no matter how much the Chinese didn’t like them.

It’s a shame that six lawyers, who practice law in the United States, could overlook such important rights. Unless of course they have spending a lot of their time in China where those rights and just about every other right we enjoy here in the United States simply don’t exist. Maybe it just slipped their mind.

Maybe they should consider hiring new lawyers. No, that wouldn’t work. I’m not sure, but I don’t think you can sue someone simply for being stupid. Maybe they should just stick to representing people who are in desperate need of drug rehab. They might have better luck.

– Powered By Stuffr! –

I received a “breaking news” alert at 4 o’clock this morning. It read,

Former President Jimmy Carter says Hamas is prepared to accept the right of Israel to “live as neighbor next door in peace.”

Then, at 11:30 this morning I received another one. It read a bit differently,

Hamas’ leader Khaled Mashaal says the militant Islamic group will not recognize Israel.

I was quite shocked at the stark difference between the two, so I decided to do a little investigation to see what exactly was going on. It turns out that only one is true. Can you guess which one was true?

It’s a sad day when a known terrorist can tell the truth with ease but a former U.S. President can’t let words leave his lips without stretching them to their very limit.

Jimmy Carter did say that Hamas was prepared to accept the right of the Jewish state to “live as a neighbor next door in peace”, but he failed to mention that the leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal also said,

“We accept a Palestinian state within the June 4 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital — a sovereign state without settlements — as well as the right of Palestinian refugees to return, but without recognition of Israel.”

He also said that Hamas was willing to offer Israel a 10-year truce if the Israeli’s withdraw from all lands it seized in 1967.

Did you catch that? I’ll wait while you re-read everything up to this point…

Okay, now did it sink in? Hamas still won’t recognize Israel (wow, big shock there) and they’re only offering a 10-year truce for “peace”. What happens when the 10 years is up? Do they start sending suicide bombers into Israel again in order to “drive them from the face of the Earth”. Duh. Do you really think Hamas would keep peace for 10 years, when the very day they offer this truce they also say they will never recognize Israel?

How do you offer a truce to a country you fail to recognize? How does that work?

Great job, Mr. Carter! Where are you off to next? I hear there’s a small disturbance in the farce in a little country called Sudan. May the farce be with you!

In the words of the wise men of the internet, EPIC FAIL.

– Powered By Stuffr! –