Imagine the day when people who have suffered a traumatic injury which today would cause permanent paralysis could have those injuries repaired by a simple procedure. That day has been imagined by many who have been advocating the use of embryonic stem cells for research to take us to that day. The argument that most of us have made is that there has been no significant studies that show adult stem cells would be any less affective.
But imagine if that day came and stem cells weren’t the reason for it. Imagine that in one part of your own body there was a source for regenerating cells that could be harmlessly harvested and implanted in the damaged area. Those cells would grow and regenerate and form a bridge over the damaged nerve tissue and allow feeling and possibly motor control to return for the patient.
In 1985, neuroscientist Professor Geoffrey Raisman discovered that cells from the lining of the nose constantly regenerate themselves. He has been doing research using these cells for the last 20 years in search of a way to use them as a treatment to repair these very injuries. He has had success with laboratory animals. Paralyzed lab rats were treated with these cells which “… mend the break in the pathway that nerve fibres need to take if they are to rejoin. When a nerve is severed, it tries to regrow, but the pathway has been disrupted. The transplanted cells have the capacity to integrate with the pathway cells, laying a “bridge” across the gap and enabling the nerve fibres to reconnect. The transplants enabled animals that had been paralysed to reach with a paw and to climb. They also restored the ability to breathe.”
The Professor and his team have been given permission to conduct 2 human trials. The humans selected for the trials will have the same injuries to the same area of the body in order to verify results. If successful, this may open up the use of nose lining cells to repair other damaged parts of the human body.
The donor, would be the patient him/herself so there would be no rejection. So imagine the day.
“This is not the most popular way of attempting to heal spinal injuries. That would be to produce patented chemicals, which drug companies can make and sell. What we’re proposing could be carried out by any very modestly equipped hospital with neurosurgery. There are no patents. It makes it a very unpopular form of research,”said Raisman.
“We’re producing a procedure where the patient is their own cure. You can’t patent a patient’s own cells, thank God.”
“I don’t know that it will work, but I think it will work,” Prof Raisman said. “If you forced me to bet, I would bet on it working.”
This would be the biggest advancement to medical science since the discovery of penicillin. And the best part, it doesn’t depend upon the death of another life. The stem cell community are probably worried that their grant monies are going to dry up.
Send all hate mail to Gribbit.
Said Gribbit @ 12:29 am Comments (4) | Permalink
Note: All due respect to Rick, but this is my take on the situation.
The blogosphere is aflurry with the Weblog Awards, the OSM scandal, and the typical interblog chatter and clique drama that seems to never stop. Now on the scene are the Bad Blog Awards, hosted by Beth of MVRWC.
Some of the categories include “Worst email spamming link whore”, “Worst comment link-dropping link whore”, “Most self-worshipping blogger, “Blogger who takes him/herself MUCH too seriously”, and “Blogger who picks the most fights with other bloggers”. There’s more, but those are the main categories.
All due respect to Beth, who I would guess was simply trying to bring some levity to the blogosphere–and apparently a few bloggers got the point and treated it like the joke it apparently was. But for the most part it seems that her idea has been used by some to just air their own personal grievances, insult and demean others, most of whom are on our side of the fence as conservative bloggers.
It’s like this. Would you like to know why we’ll never replace the MSM as America’s primary source of news and commentary? This is why. And this. And this. We can’t seem to act like adults.
It’s one thing to poke harmless fun at ourselves. To turn a joke into a mean-spirited insultfest is just immature.
Maybe I’ll catch flak for “taking myself too seriously”. Well, you know what? I do take blogging seriously. I know Heidi does too. I think we all should. It’s a big responsibility. Sure, it’s fun and sometimes exciting, and sometimes we talk about harmless, amusing topics. But when the guns come out, the bottom line is that we owe more to our readership than rampant immaturity and personal attacks on bloggers that in all actuality are allies. It’s one thing to smack down trolls or take on liberals. But this kind of commenting is contradictory to everything we say we are for. How can we laugh at the libs eating their own over at DU when we’re doing it ourselves? We’re supposed to be the mature ones.
My apologies to Beth, since I’m not trying to “target” her. My complaint isn’t even with her at all. It’s with the bloggers who have such an enlarged sense of self-importance that they’re forgetting we’re all working toward the same goal. Regardless of your feelings on certain blogs, have some class. If you have a problem with them, be an adult and take your issue up with them personally.
MSM reporters have interpersonal conflicts. They have snipe fests and problems and nasty little dramas. But you don’t see them on the front page of the Washington Post, as a rule. The good thing about blogs–the freedom to say what you like, show your own personality, and just ‘have a voice’–is also the bad thing about blogging. We have a responsibility to temper our freedom and voice with something better than “LaShawn Barber [is a] Sanctimonious Bitch.” I’m not saying we should not call a spade a spade. I’m saying when talking about the people who are on our side, working toward the same goals we are, there are better ways to conduct ourselves.
If you want to know why we’ll never have the respect we “deserve”, there’s your answer. When people act like that, we don’t deserve it.
Crossposted at Euphoric Reality
Said Kit Jarrell @ 10:05 pm Comments (2) | Permalink
While we are bombarded by the dominant media about low poll numbers on President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq, we never hear what the people think about the Democrats on this matter. Just because people may give low approval numbers to Bush doesn’t translate into support for Democrats. As an example, when I’ve expressed criticism about Bush, I mentioned that at least he isn’t Al Gore or John Kerry. So, it was interesting to see what a recent Cook poll had to say about public perceptions of Democrats, as reported in the Washington Post.
Seventy percent of people surveyed said that criticism of the war by Democratic senators hurts troop morale — with 44 percent saying morale is hurt “a lot,” according to a poll taken by RT Strategies. Even self-identified Democrats agree: 55 percent believe criticism hurts morale, while 21 percent say it helps morale.
…Their poll also indicates many Americans are skeptical of Democratic complaints about the war. Just three of 10 adults accept that Democrats are leveling criticism because they believe this will help U.S. efforts in Iraq. A majority believes the motive is really to “gain a partisan political advantage.”
The Cook poll was conducted by RT Strategies, a new polling firm headed by both Democratic and Republican pollsters. This polling service is now included in the commentaries and analyses of Real Clear Politics.
Found at Eu Rota
(Unrelated Poll of Interest on 2008: A different poll by the same firm covers the chances of John McCain and Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential election. You may go to this currently linked commentary covering the results of these questions. One finding of the poll is that forty-two percent believe that Hillary Clinton would be a good candidate for president while fifty-two percent say that she would not. Put me in that last category.)
Authored by Woody and xposted at GM’s Corner
Said GM @ 6:00 pm Comments (0) | Permalink
Courtesy of Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, (Beautiful, brilliant, bitchy - but in a Maureen “O’Hara vs. John Wayne in The Quiet Man sort of way), we have the ultimate contrarian antidote to the madness that has become the Weblog Awards. Beth calls her anti-blog prize the 2005 BadBlog Awards.
First, let me say that Paul at Wizbang, who puts an extraordinary amount of effort into the Weblog Awards, is doing a great service to blogs by putting on this contest. My beef is not with him but rather the attitude of some bloggers (and they know who they are) who hit their readers every damn day during the voting with a post pleading for you to vote for them. It gets to the point I stop visiting those sites just because I get sick of having to scroll past that twaddle.
But leave it to our Beth to give us the perfect antidote for such self absorption. Here are a few of the award categories:
Most self-worshiping blogger
Blogger who takes him/herself MUCH too seriously
Worst “blog fight” of the year
Blogger who picks the most fights with other bloggers
Worst Post of the Year
Worst Right-wing Blog
Worst Left-wing Blog
Worst Center/Libertarian Blog
Most Overrated Blog
Worst Blog Design/Template
Come to think of it, yours truly fits perfectly into three or four of those categories. Good thing no one reads my site. Otherwise, I may end up being nominated for “Worst Blog Fight,” or perhaps “Worst Blog Post,” or perhaps even “Blogger who takes himself much too seriously.”
Be that as it may, I thought I’d take a crack at a few of these categories. You know, run a few names up the flag pole and see if any start waving…or de-linking as the case may be.
MOST SELF WORSHIPING BLOGGER
And the winner is, hands down, James Wolcott. A few bloggers have a caricature of themselves at the top of their blog. But no one has the temerity to actually post a caricature that is so wildly different from what they actually look like. Obviously, Mr. Wolcott slipped the artist an extra $10 (or something much smaller and much more personal) just so that he would ignore the short, stubby, balding, fat faced, jowly person sitting in front of him.
BLOGGER WHO TAKES THEMSELVES MUCH TOO SERIOUSLY
Wolcott would be a finalist there also but I’d have to give the nod to Oliver Willis. “Like Kryptonite to Stupid” doesn’t begin to reveal how banal, how ponderous, and how utterly devoid of humor Oliver is. Not to mention his steadfast belief that people anywhere care what he has to say about anything.
WORST POST OF THE YEAR
Oh my! So many to choose from (including my own that I linked to above). However, this post from Jeff Harrell at Shape of Days qualifies as the worst simply because it is so over the top. The title of the post says it all: “Anyone who uses drugs should be dragged out into the street and beaten slowly to death before a warmly applauding audience.”
WORST RIGHT WING BLOG
This is a toughie. Worst written? Looniest ideas? Most sanctimonious? I’ve got nominees for each. However, for making it two out of three, I have to go with LaShawn Barber. I actually think that she’s got a fine evangelical blog there, but for political commentary (out there) and sanctimony, she can’t be beat.
WORST LEFT WING BLOG
Another toughie. Most ill informed? Least connected to reality? Most anti-American? Oh, let’s just go with Kos and be done with it.
MOST OVERRATED BLOG
This is an easy one. By far and away the most overrated blog on the internet is Duncan Black’s Eschaton. The guy has so many open posts he should probably just hand the keys of his site over to his army of degenerate commenters. He doesn’t blog, he burps.
For a spot-on takedown of his site, goto Ace of Spades and read this post and then goto “November 22″ on Ace’s blog and start scrolling. Hysterically funny.
Why not pay Beth a visit and leave your nominees in the comments?
Said Rick Moran @ 6:29 am Comments (1) | Permalink
Holiday Sales up 22% From Last Year
Which is it? Both can’t be true at the same time. Either sales are up or sales are down. Looking at the articles and all the associated articles, it appears that sales are up (20+%) across the entire market. The negative numbers are specific sectors or sub-sections (enclosed malls). It appears that the negative articles are written such as to indicate that the market and economy are doing much worse than they really are. This isn’t the first time.
There is a significant amount of “talking down” of the economy. You can see this in the housing bubble theories, companies not doing enough, and the dire predictions of a weak holiday season (since proven untrue).
Unemployment is at 5.0%, despite two hurricanes. This is roughly half the rate of unemployment throughout most of Europe. Current income is up, GDP is growing (3.8%), and the stock market is up. Despite this, pundits insist that doom and gloom is coming even though economic indicators will continue to show increases.
Let’s be honest a moment, it isn’t the Republicans campaigning on a bad economy, it’s the Democrats. It’s in their campaigns that the economy is in the tank and everyone is suffering despite the complete lack of any evidence to support it. Income is up. Home ownership is up. Unemployment is down. Home values are up. Almost every traditional indicator shows that the economy is growing, yet the perception is fostered that we are heading towards the Great Depression.
This trend in reporting shows two things. Democrats are beyond using facts to scaremonger voters about the economy. Instead of coming up with a platform to better America, they spend their time telling America how bad things are. Facts be damned. Second, it shows that the press, once again, is in the tank with the Democrats agenda and is carrying the water for them. The story is a roaring economy, but they search and scour for some shred of evidence to talk it down. Objective reporting or campaigning? I think the answer is clear.
Said jcb @ 12:27 pm Comments (5) | Permalink
As you know (or maybe not if you are here for the first time) I recently published several reports on Mr. John Daly (here, here and here), an adjunct professor at Warren County Community College in which he lambasted a conservative student for her politics and said “Real freedom will come when [U.S.] soldiers in Iraq turn their guns on their superiors.” Daly, under pressure from around the nation resigned just a little while before the Board of the College met to decide what to do. Dr. William Austin President of the college promised that faculty and staff of the college would receive “sensitivity training” as to the rights of students to speak out and to hold political beliefs different from their professors.
Now comes news via Breitbart from the state of the Peoples Republic of Vermont (full disclosure, my wife has family that resides in Vermont) of an English and Social Studies teacher that used quizzes to poke at President Bush and those of us on the right. The headline is “Vt. Teacher Accused of Anti-Bush Quiz.” The headline is incorrect as it turns out, it’s admitted (but excused of course.)
A sample quiz question:
I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes.” [emphasis added] ( For you lefties the correct answer is “coherent” - in case you went to a public school.)
Now, I don’t know about you, but perhaps the question needs a significant re-write. How about:
“I wish the left would stop using their (lecturn and syllabi OR position and automobile) to advance their leftish causes and proclivities.”(again, for you lefties, the correct answer is lecturn and syllabi)
The Principal, Sue Maguire noted that teachers “don’t have a license to hold forth on a particular standpoint.” She also noted that she is taking the complaint seriously.
The teacher, one Mr. Bret Chenkin, who has been teaching about 7 years states:
The kids know it’s hyperbolic, so-to-speak,” he said. “They know it’s tongue in cheek.” But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned.”
Let me see if I have this correct, the teacher will change his teaching methods if some are concerned? He didn’t know that they would be? Hell no he didn’t, he is a lefty and leftys always think that what they do is OK; well, for the most part, no doubt Bill Clinton knew he was doing wrong, otherwise he wouldn’t have spent so much time and capital covering it up.
Oh, and while I’m at it the phrase “below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes” is insulting in the extreme. Not only to republican students in his class, but to me personally, I’ll stack my IQ against his any day of the week. Creep!
Daly resigned, will Chenkin have the decency to do the same, or even the huevos to admit that he was flat out wrong? Don’t hold your breath!
Xposted at GM’s Corner
Said GM @ 8:30 pm Comments (3) | Permalink
Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution is one of the most respected and influential conservative intellectuals in America today. He has a must-read opinion column and writes something like one book a year. In fact, reading his 1995 work The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy (on the urgings of my father) was probably the most significant event that ripped me from my political limbo and plunged me into conservative thought and activism.
If for some reason you haven’t heard of Mr. Sowell, here’s a brief introduction from Fox News Channel’s Fred Barnes:
One of the reasons for Tom Sowell’s continued influence is that, even though he’s been called one of America’s most eminent intellectuals, there’s nothing stuffy about him or his writing. He tells it the way he sees it, presenting his thoughts in ways everyone can understand.
Here’s a tidbit you might not know: Sowell was once a Marxist, even while studying under Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago. What happened? Quite simply, Sowell got a job in the federal government. That was enough to cure him, if studying under Milton Friedman wasn’t.
FNC is airing a two-part interview by Mr. Barnes of Thomas Sowell this weekend. If you missed the first part on Saturday night, you can still see Part II of the interview tonight at 5:30 PM Eastern.
Cross-posted at TMH’s Bacon Bits
Said The MaryHunter @ 2:19 pm Comments (10) | Permalink
Ok, you’ve got this guy who’s been held as an enemy combatant although he’s a US citizen, with the ACLU screaming bloody hell about his “rights” being denied.
Listen. When you join the forces of the enemy, you’ve waived your rights as US citizen because you’ve joined the enemy!
Now you’ve got the fact that he was indicted, but…now it seems as though they’re going to rule out the testimony of two Al Qaeda terrorists because the two whiners were ’subjected to harsh questioning.’ Well booohoo!
The Qaeda members were Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, believed to be the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and Abu Zubaydah, a top recruiter, who gave their accounts to American questioners in 2002 and 2003. The two continue to be held in secret prisons by the CIA, whose internal reviews have raised questions about their treatment and credibility, the officials said.
One review, completed in the spring of 2004 by the CIA inspector general, found that Mohammed had been subjected to excessive use of a technique involving near-drowning [known as waterboarding] in the first months after his capture, according to US intelligence officials.
To my way of thinking, terrorists deserve to be taken into the back and shot in the head. We are AT WAR. War is a war of attrition where you KILL THE ENEMY. Padilla identifies with the enemy, that much is clear. So what’s the problem?
From the Superpatriots website:
Terrorists don’t wear uniforms, have ID Cards, carry their weapons openly, wear unit patches (what would it say? AQ Killer Group with two burning towers as a logo?), or any of the other things required by Rule 4, except that they might be subordinate to a commander (like bin Laden, Hekmatyar, Mullah Omar, etc). But being subordinate to a madman does give rise to Geneva Conventions protections, you need to follow all of the requirements of Rule 4.
Some people say that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Cute saying, but not legally correct. Freedom fighters and guerillas, historically, wear uniforms- no matter how ragged or mismatched, they carry their arms openly, rarely target civilian women and children, have military ranks and often have Identity Cards. Examples include; Tito’s resistance in WWII, Cuba- 1950’s, Dominican Republic- 1960’s, Nicaraguan Sandinistas- 1970’s, the Salvadoran FMLN and the US backed Contras in the 1980’s, Karen Rebels-1990’s, and Commander Massoud’s Mujahadeen resistance against the Soviets between 1980 and 1989, and Massoud’s Northern Alliance resistance against he Taliban between 1996-2005.
On the flip side, you have the Taliban, al-Qaida, and other terrorist organizations, which do none of these things. Nor do they abide by or follow the Rules of Land Warfare {GC Article 4 ß 2 (d)}. Terrorists indiscriminately kill women and children through acts of terror. Terrorists behead their hostages (as compared to Jack, who was denounced by the Taliban Judge/bomber he captured for failing to allow the terrorist to use the bathroom for a full twelve hours). Terrorists are defined as people who engage in “the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are general political, religious, or ideological (US Army Special Forces Force Protection Handbook; Joint Pub 1-02 dated March 23, 1994)
The Detroit Free Press reported that the charges against Padilla did include conspiring to murder, kidnap, and maim Americans overseas and of providing material support to terrorists. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Padilla had traveled overseas for training to fight in “violent jihad” and was part of a terrorist support cell that operated in the United States.
Oh, but they were subjected to “harsh questioning”. Give me a freakin’ break.
I suppose we should give them an ice cream cone and take them to a movie. We’re already treating the terrorists at Gitmo better than we treat our own soldiers–their meals on average per day cost $4 a day to $3.60–the average meal cost per day for convicts costs $2.78 per day. The average cost of meals served the terrorists at Gitmo costs $12.68 per day.
Since when do we give preferential treatment to TERRORISTS? This is absolutely astonishing…but there are many more examples of it. They get a brand new Qu’ran, they get 24 hour access to an Imam, they get a new prayer rug, they get a sign in their cell that points to mecca, they get a prayer cap, etc., etc.. It’s ridiculous!
This reminds me of the terrorists that supposedly were “hanging upside down” in the basement of Jack’s safe house. Interesting that the journalists who reported the lies of these terrorists forgot to mention that there was no basement in that house. Also interesting that they didn’t report that Specats and SF Ops have about 50 of those safehouses in and around Kabul.
When all was said and done, these people admitted that no torture occurred, but still maintained that Jack didn’t allow them to pee for 12 hours, so they whined about THAT. That’s just a wee bit different than being electrocuted, or having boiling water poured on you, like they originally claimed. That is, in fact, what happened to Jack and his men at Saderat immediately after they were taken into custody, but I don’t hear the human rights activists complaining about THOSE injustices.
Idema was tortured with boiling water, starvation, threats of death, and assault with various implements (such as wire cables and rubber whips), resulting in broken ribs, a separated sternum, torn rotator cuffs, hemorrhaged eyes, multiple concussions, lacerations, contusions, and bruises. Although the U.S. Embassy later had medical reports indicating the extent of the torture, Sandra Ingram, Assistant U.S. Consul DOS Kabul, ordered the reports rewritten to tone down the extent of the injuries.
And let’s not forget how they were treated at Thanksgiving:
Thanksgiving for Jack Idema, Captain Bennett, Lt Banderas, and Journalist Carabello went like this: Ten US Special Operations Soldiers were threatened by the Dept of State with Article 15’s (low level court martials) if they brought Turkey to Pulacharke Prison on Thanksgiving.
If that’s not enough,
US Consul Addie Harchick visted them, refused them mail, and then tried to drive away with the water the Marines sent them, until an Afghan General had his bodyguards block the Embassy car and force them to deliver the water. One of the State Dept Security officers told the story at bar last night, and it made the boys sitting there listening f***ing sick. We treated Nazi POWs better than this.
Something’s terribly wrong here, and part if it has to do with the leftists who are supporting the rights of the enemy versus truly supporting our troops and the people who are fighting the WOT on our behalf.
X Posted at Kender’s Musings, Cao’s Blog
Said Cao @ 9:23 am Comments (6) | Permalink
If you’re looking for pieces on Jack Idema and his team, please click on this link.
While many Americans stayed at home with the tantalizing aroma of home-made pies, turkey and fixings wafting through the air, or some families went out to be with family for Thanksgiving, the boys at Pulacharke remain prisoners in the most infamous prison in the world. On top of that, the American government continues to taunt them.
Thanksgiving for Jack Idema, Captain Bennett, Lt Banderas, and Journalist Carabello went like this: Ten US Special Operations Soldiers were threatened by the Dept of State with Article 15’s (low level court martials) if they brought Turkey to Pulacharke Prison on Thanksgiving.
Previously, reports were coming in that the America Red Cross were delivering water to the Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners at Pulacharke, but were denying it to the American prisoners–Jack Idema, Brent Bennett and Ed Caraballo.
Yesterday, US Consul Addie Harchick visted them, refused them mail, and then tried to drive away with the water the Marines sent them, until an Afghan General had his bodyguards block the Embassy car and force them to deliver the water. One of the State Dept Security officers told the story at bar last night, and it made the boys sitting there listening f***ing sick. We treated Nazi POWs better than this.
Without water, they will be forced to drink local water which contains microorganisms and bacteria fatal to American citizens and forces in Central West Asia. Although ciprofloxacin can be administered to combat the severe dysentery, vomiting, and eventually death* that will occur as the result of the denial of drinking water, two problems make this solution untenable. First, ciprofloxacin is not readily available, the US Embassy has already refused to supply drugs to them, and the FBI confiscated the medical and surgical kits they possessed to avoid any link to the United States government.** Second, because Idema has operated in Afghanistan for more than three years, he has already used ciprofloxacin extensively and is not a suitable candidate for continued long-term use. The same situation would apply to Bennett and Caraballo if they were to be forced into long-term use of ciprofloxacin. Therefore, the denial of water is not only completely retaliatory and nefarious, but brutally vindictive and unwarranted.
It is no wonder that many operators on the ground are saying they love their country but hate their government, particularly Condoleeza Rice. She should not only be aware of this situation but should be doing something to put a stop to this kind of reprehensible behavior IMMEDIATELY.
These boys celebrated Thanksgiving–but with chickens brought to them by the Afghan Generals.
***********************
The US government, specifically Lieutenant General David Barno, stated that he could care less if Idema, Caraballo and Bennett were killed in order to “end the problem” with them. LTG Barno was quoted as stating the murders of the Americans at Pulacharke would “be a good thing.”
*The US government has already made it clear that they would like to see each of the Americans at Pulcharke dead. See previous footnote.
**The medical kits contained extensive US government issued surgical equipment and narcotics, such as Atchkinson Chest Valves, Quick Clot, Staple Guns & Suture Kits, and extensive antibiotics.
tip o’ me tam to sfops2kabul
**********************
Contact the US Embassy in Kabul and voice your outrage:
Welcome to the Consular Section of the U.S. Embassy Kabul. If you are based in the U.S., the Overseas Citizen Services hotline is 1-888-407-4747. Callers who are unable to use toll-free numbers, such as those calling from overseas, may reach the hotline by calling 1-317-472-2328. Your messages should be directed to US Consul Addie Harchick. I tried sending an email and it came back to me undeliverable.
Said Cao @ 7:37 am Comments (0) | Permalink
A commenter over at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, MCPO Airdale, used a phrase harkening back to the Civil War days of this great country’s history. He used the term “Copperheads” when referring to today’s Democratic Party. For those of you who are not familiar with U.S. Civil War history, here is a brief description:
Copperheads opposed turning the Civil War into a total war to destroy the South, and questioned whether it would be worthwhile to restore the Union if this could only be accomplished with a large loss of life and destruction of property. They were especially hostile to the idea that the war should be fought to emancipate slaves (rather than for the exclusive and sole purpose of restoring the Union), and so were generally strongly opposed to risking their lives in — or having their dollars taxed for — a war which they perceived was being fought for the benefit of blacks. For this reason, the Copperheads often opposed the emancipation of American slaves, especially proposals for emancipation that went beyond the pre-war constitutional status quo (which forbade the United States federal government from interfering with slavery inside slave states)
(snip)
A main Copperhead political demand was for the quick opening of serious peace negotiations with the Confederacy. They often accused Lincoln of being a tyrant who was destroying democracy with his despotic and arbitrary actions.
Some Copperheads formed groups to persuade Union soldiers to desert, and helped Confederate prisoners of war escape. They sometimes met with Confederates, aiming at restoring peace. Greatly benefited by the Copperheads, the Confederacy encouraged their activities whenever possible.
From the Encyclopedia Britannica:
At the 1864 Democratic national convention, Copperheads gained control of the party platform and inserted a plank calling the war a failure and advocating immediate peace negotiations.
(emphasis mine)
Goodness. Sounds like today’s Democratic Party, and especially many of their supporters. You know, those people who are trying to force recruiters out of schools and for soldiers to desert through “conscientious objector” status. I emphasized some other areas in those descriptions of the Copperheads. I really enjoy the parts about Lincoln being a despotic tyrant (suspending habeas corpus and all). That bastard was so bad he’s on the 5 dollar bill. Or that the leftists Copperheads actually went over and tried to negotiate with the terrorists Confederates. Not only that, but the Confederates supported the Copperheads because their actions were beneficial to the South. Much like tha ACLU and the left that supports the terrorists down in Gitmo and their attempts to use the American Civilian court system.
Copperheads. That is exactly what we should call them.
The word Copperhead was first so used by the New York Tribune on July 20, 1861, in reference to the snake that sneaks and strikes without warning.
And snakes they truly are.
Cross-posted over at Parrot Check.
Said Duncan Avatar @ 10:17 pm Comments (0) | Permalink
It seems today that more and more people are attacking all things Christian. On this day where we give thanks for all of our freedoms and rights, we must also remember the sacrifices that our forefathers made and that our military men and women are making still today. We must also remember that this country was founded so as to be a place of freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. I won’t bore ya’all more today, but remember as you eat and fellowship with your friends and family today to be thankful for everything you have. God Bless!
Said The Smoke Eater @ 11:02 am Comments (3) | Permalink
GBlagg: Hello, Ted.
Ted Kennedy: GBlagg…
GBlagg: ‘Bout time you got here.
Ted K.: Wouldn’t miss it for the world.
GBlagg: Damn, ‘cuz I’d of offered the world.
Ted K.: How can you say that? Don’t you remember the time we had last year?
GBlagg: I’ve been trying to forget. Still can’t get those water stains out of the interior of my Oldsmobile.
Ted K.: Sorry ’bout that one…
GBlagg: You promised we’d float…
Ted K.: Thought I’d finally got that figured out. Oh well, I’m here now. And guess what? I brought some friends.
GBlagg: Oh, boy…
Ted K.: So, should we get started?
GBlagg: Already have. The oil’s up to temperature and the birds already in.
Ted K.: You started without me?
GBlagg: Don’t you remember? You just called me and agreed I could drop the turkey in the oil…
Ted K.: Sure that’s what I said, but you know I meant we should do it as a coalition.
John Kerry: I told you Ted, it’s the wrong bird at the wrong time.
Ted K.: But you agreed we should start the frying too…
John K.: OK, but now I’m saying we shouldn’t have.
GBlagg: So what you’re saying, John, is you voted for frying the turkey before you voted against it.
John K.: Your words, not mine.
GBlagg: So your saying I should take the turkey out, then?
Ted K.: Don’t put words in our mouths. We support the turkey, just not the cooking of it.
GBlagg: I’m getting a headache. Ted, can you please tell Ms. Sheehan she can come in. She looks pathetic out there by the side of the road and she’s depressing the folks in the Bipolar Ward next door.
Ted K.: Hey Cindy, the Universe called, it wants you in here.
Cindy Sheehan: Why won’t he just talk to me? Doesn’t he see my loss?
GBlagg: What the hell is she doing?
Ted K.: I think she’s talking to a plant.
Bill Maher: Cindy, you moron. That’s a rose bush, not George Bush!
GBlagg: I need an Advil…
Bill M.: Hey, dude, what ‘cha cookin’ the carcass in?
GBlagg: Peanut oil.
Bill M.: Smells good, who makes it?
GBlagg: I don’t friggin’ know, look on the box.
Bill M.: Hey this crap comes from the Middle East.
GBlagg: Here we go…
Bill M.: I knew it, I was right all along, it was a war for oil! Peanut oil! That damn Rove, he doesn’t miss a trick.
GBlagg: Ted, can you do something with Maher? Otherwise his pasty face is gonna enter the boiling quagmire right next to the Butterball.
Ted K.: Bill, why don’t you go sit in the livingroom for awhile. They’re showing young boys dancing in tights on the LOGO channel.
Bill M.: Whoo hoo!
Dick Durbin: Hey, GBlagg.
GBlagg: Well hello, Dick.
Dick D.: You know you can call me Richard.
GBlagg: Oh, that’s OK. I much prefer Dick, Dick.
Dick D.: Quite a bird you’ve got there. It’s a free range, I hope.
GBlagg: Don’t know, don’t care…it’s a Butterball.
Dick D.: ‘Cuz those turkey farms are like Gulags, you know. In fact, I recently received an e-mail from one of those unfortunate birds speaking of the horrors of being force fed, never getting any exercise, and being forced to see other turkeys naked.
GBlagg: Just shut up, Dick.
Laurie David: You mean that’s a real turkey? Oh my God, I’m going to be sick. Ted, you told me we would be having Tofurkey!
Ted K.: Truth is, Laurie, at that moment I’d have told you anything…
Laurie D.: And how hot is that oil? 350 degrees? Don’t you know a thing about Global Warming? Every degree hotter your oil is , is that much warmer the climate becomes. Hold on a minute, I think I’ve got the statistics in a handout out in the stretch we drove up from Vegas. I’ll go grab it…
GBlagg: Don’t bother…Now who the hell is that?
Ted K.: Oh that’s just Emeril Mertha, he’s here to tell you when to take the turkey out.
GBlagg: He’s what?!?
Emeril Mertha: You must take the bird out immediately! This just isn’t working.
GBlagg: What are you an idiot? It’s not done yet.
Ted K.: How dare you question Emeril’s judgement. He’s a chef. Have you ever been a chef, GBlagg? No, of course not, damn turkeyhawk.
GBlagg: Ted, I’d call you an ass, but my respect for asses forbids it. If we take the turkey out now, it will be dangerous to eat it. It’ll be full of salmonella.
Al Franken: GBlagg, you’re a liar. That turkey is making more salmonella sitting there boiling in oil.
GBlagg: Hello, Stuart. Remember that whole ‘and gosh darn it people like me’ routine? ‘Bout time to rethink it, I’d say.
Al F.: You think you’re so funny, but I’ll do the comedy here, thank you.
GBlagg: Well, you’re half right.
Al F.: Liar.
GBlagg: Hey, look at the time…birds about done.
John K.: Let me take it out, I’m a Viet Nam veteran.
GBlagg: Ok, but…John, look out you idiot, you gonna knock over the boiling oil…
John K.: Oh God, there it goes!!!
GBlagg: Kerry, you moron, there’s hot oil everywhere…
Ted K.: It’s a disaster!!! Where is FEMA? Where the hell is FEMA?
GBlagg: It’s OK, Ted. The turkeys fine. I’ll just carve it and we can sit down and eat.
Katie Couric: How can we eat poultry with the bird flu pandemic looming above our heads?
GBlagg: It’ll be alright, Katie, pull up a high chair and fill your plate. OK, now who wants to say grace…Ted? Bill? Hillary? Michael Newdow? ANYONE?!? Fine, I’ll do it. Thank you, Father, for those riches of which we have been endowed. For our most blessed country. For the wisdom of our forefathers. For our non-living Constitution. For our unparalleled freedoms. For the valor and the daily sacrifice of our soldiers. For the gift of free will, in both it’s triumphs and responsibilities. For the ability to discern good from evil. And for the will to do something about it. And thank you, too, for ‘thankfulness’ itself. For it shields us from the evils of envy, greed, and jealousy. For how can we be envious, greedy, or jealous when we are thankful for what we ourselves have? And lastly, thank you Father for the bounty of this feast before us and for the gift of ultimate patience to endure my dinner mates. Amen.
Ted K.: Damn superstitious bastard…
John K.: Chickenhawk…
Bill M.: Red state Christian Fascist…
Al F.: Liar…
Laurie D.: Nazi…
Cindy S.: Neocon…
GBlagg: What are you people whispering about? Hey, Ted, wait a second there. Let’s let the children go first.
Ted K.: Greedy little runts…
GBlagg: My God, Ted, they’re the children…What about the children?
Crossposted @ Sticks and Stones
Said Glen @ 8:24 am Comments (3) | Permalink
Commentator Tony Blankley is concerned. Perhaps we all should be.
In a recent column, he looked at recent poll numbers — 54 percent of Americans favor an exit strategy from Iraq over a success strategy — and sees our nation moving headlong toward an exit from Iraq in failure. Naturally, the sagging support for the Iraq effort comes as President Bush has been weakened by such negatives as the Plamegate/Libby story, high fuel prices (which of course are now down to pre-Katrina levels, but where’s the coverage on that?), an irrationally negative perception of our robust economy, and the crisis of illegal immigration. Mr. Blankley observes:
For those of us who are convinced that the Iraq war must be fought until a successful outcome is obtained, the next three to six months are a critical period to rebuild public support. The task is substantial, but not overwhelming. Forty-five percent of the public still support success in Iraq. The challenge is to stop the decline in support, and regain 5 percent to 10 percent of public support — which is only part of a larger group of current war doubters who only six months ago shared our strong support for sticking until the job is done.
We face three challenges. First, the president’s current unpopularity is distorting support for the war downward (just as his prior popularity distorted it upwards).
Second, the news from the front is so murky that virtually no one (including members of Congress and the Washington media, as well as the public) can have any fact-based confidence that they know whether things are going well or poorly in Iraq. Those of us in Washington can find Pentagon sources and “experts” to match our desired results — but objectivity is seemingly impossible to come by. We can’t follow in the news the trail of battles won or lost — as we could during World War II following Gen. MacArthur’s Pacific islands advance or Ike’s progress through France and the Low Countries in 1944.
Third, there is little attention being paid to the consequences of failure.
Mr. Blankley is author of The West’s Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations? He has also commented on the lessons we must learn from l’Intifada in France through negative example, as regards our own approach to radical Islam. But in the current environment of MSM-dominant press resistance to fair presentation of the Bush Doctrine and Iraqi successes, plus the liberal leftist elite’s abject refusal to accept that victory is the ONLY exit strategy for Iraq, Mr. Blankley is not very optimistic. He feels it is time to press for a full-blown congressional debate, and soon.
Given the current low esteem in which most of the senior Bush administration officials are held by the doubting 54 percent of the electorate, it is unlikely that they can win back many of the doubters merely on their word and argument (or on the argument of its supporters in the media). Thus, while I am generally doubtful of the utility of congressional hearings these days — with their high propensity to become partisan slugfests — we must take our chances and have substantial congressional hearings on points two and three, above.
[…]
Public opinion (and the elected politicians who both lead and follow it) is moving toward an exit cliff, the rocks beneath on which we will shatter our national interest and our national security. We will have one last chance late this winter or early spring to make the case for not jumping.
Air the laundry, get the word out. Preach the sermon of survival. Too little and too late from the Bush administration and the congressional Republicans (even with their recent display of large cohones) might not be enough to turn the tide of public opinion toward utter defeat of Islamofascism in this Global War on Terrorism. Wake up, people: our very future as a civil and free society is at stake. We simply cannot risk a Vietnam redux on the domestic front.
This is no domino-effect Cold War spin-off. This war is Blazing. Who doesn’t get this? Fifty-four percent of Americans can be wrong.
Cross-posted at TMH’s Bacon Bits
Said The MaryHunter @ 5:45 pm Comments (0) | Permalink
For a few weeks now, I’ve written about the illegal imprisonment and torture suffered by U.S. special forces soldier Jack Idema and his men. While it’s outrageous that any U.S. soldier should be treated in this way, in Idema’s case this is a double-blow because men with his skills are needed, and needed desperately, if we’re to stand a chance of winning the War On Terror.
Now, certainly, we must be able to deploy the kind of massed force that actually took down regimes like Saddam’s. But, because of the nature of our enemy and its ability to function inside even the most stable of countries, what we also need are people who can operate at a local level in places like Afghanistan, gaining the trust and respect of Muslims in these countries in order to help us root out terrorists before they have a chance to strike.
It should go without saying that people with these skills are few and far between. It is, frankly, ludicrous that sections of the U.S.’s intelligence community have conspired to imprison one of the very people who can get this job done on our behalf.
Earlier this week, Idema managed to get to a satellite-phone in order to do an interview on Mike Levine’s Expert Witness radio show. Here he is, describing how he arrived in Taleban-held Afghanistan:
Well I flew into Afghanistan, I was one of the very first Americans in Afghanistan. I packed my bags just a week after 9/11. Hit the ground in October, we started bombing on October 12th. I joined with the permission of the Northern Alliance, commissioned as an officer in the Northern alliance, which is the United Front Military forces. I brought a team in to bring in air drops, one of the guys Lt. Col of Defense Intelligence agency was wounded in the first few days, critically wounded. One of the other guys was critically wounded, I medivac’d them out, I came back in. I stayed with the Northern alliance for one straight year–from the north all the way from Kalikata (sp?) the very north of Afghanistan all the way to the south we took the country over.
[This is from a transcript of the show available at Cao’s Blog. You can also listen to the whole broadcast here.]
In the kind of world where military commanders seek assurances from lawyers before going into battle (as actually happened with the British Army prior to the invasion of Iraq), it shouldn’t be difficult to work out that men like Jack Idema are a major asset.
Here is someone who can hit the ground running barely three weeks after the outbreak of hostilities, hook up with local forces, and start killing our enemies. And let us not forget the extent to which special forces operatives like Idema were responsible for bringing about the downfall of the Taleban — Without their efforts, it would have taken the conventional military far longer to organise a full-scale invasion along the lines of the force that eventually removed Saddam Hussein. To say that such operations involve great risks for the people involved is an understatement, and it seems almost surreal that Idema should find himself imprisoned at the behest of the FBI after his great service to the U.S., to Afghanistan and to all the free world.
The cause of the problem, of course, is what Idema derides as ‘our new policy of appeasement and let’s all shake hands and kiss each other again’; a policy that has resulted in someone like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar being removed from terrorist watch-lists. For anyone unfamiliar with the name, Hekmatyar is the Islamofascist who was forced to flee Afghanistan during the Taleban era because his brutality was actually worse than theirs. Hekmatyar is now one of the people the U.S. wish to include in the new Afghanistan.
Idema, though, has a better idea of how to deal with hardcore head-choppers:
People forget about the fact that people were diving out windows on 911 to avoid being burned to death. This war is a war of attrition — That means you kill the enemy. You don’t make peace with ‘em, you don’t make nice with ‘em, you don’t take ‘em out for a steak dinner — You kill ‘em. And believe me, these people deserve to die. They are the worst terrorists on the face of the earth. Look what they did on 911, and that is only one, small part of what they want to do to us.
Yes. Exactly right. And yet the FBI have conspired to keep a man like Jack Idema imprisoned so they can make deals with scum like Hekmatyar.Unbelievable.
[Anyone wishing to get involved with the campaign to free Jack Idema should contact Cao at this address. There’s also a great deal more information on the subject at Cao’s Blog and SuperPatriots.]
(Cross-posted at Rottweiler Puppy)
Said RottyPup @ 5:24 am Comments (4) | Permalink
The Democrats tell us that they are the true moral compress of this nation. They cry about the injustices that the American people are subjected to on a daily basis by the Republican Party and its evil leader, President George W. Bush, but offer no ideas or vision only constant complaining and petty bitching. Well, I am going to lay out the case for why the Democrats have forgotten their roots and serve no one but themselves and as a result of selfish path they walk, they are actively working to destroy this country for all.
The Democrats were handed a golden opportunity last Friday by a Republican led House of Representatives that honestly was out to embarrass them. But as they have done time and time again they showed exactly how weak they are, how without any core values they are, and how desperate they are to stay elected, they simply took the bait like a good rat and died the proverbial quick death. I will explain this opinion in depth shortly but let’s detail the overwhelming position of Democrats on the war in
The Democrats “believe” the following when discussing
1) We should never have gone to
2) The Iraqi WMD program was shut down through sanctions and did not exist at time prior to the war.
3) The President lied and manipulated pre-war intelligence to make the case for the war stronger.
4) No terrorist ties existed between
5) With our presence in
6) The war in
If I am leaving out any leftist talking points I am sure that I will be corrected in short order by those that practice drive-by commenting. Let me take these talking points one by one and show how the Democrats never mean what they say and most certainly do not believe anything they tell us.
I am going to address points one and two together, no threat from
September 25, 1997
· UNSCOM inspects an Iraqi “food laboratory”. One of the inspectors, Dr. Diane Seaman, enters the building through the back door and catches several men running out with suitcases. The suitcases contained log books for the creation of illegal bacteria and chemicals. The letterhead comes from the president’s office and from the Special Security Office (SSO).
- UNSCOM attempts to inspect the SSO headquarters but is blocked.
October 1997
· UNSCOM destroys large quantities of illegal chemical weapons and related equipment.
February 1998
· US President Bill Clinton remarks “(Hussein’s) regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us. Some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal. Let there be no doubt, we are prepared to act.” Senate Democrats also passed Resolution 71, which urged President Clinton to “take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by
Spring 1998
- An UNSCOM inspection team discovers a dump full of destroyed Iraqi missiles. Analysis of the missile parts proves that
Iraq had made a weapon containing VX.
July 1998
· UNSCOM discovers documents, at Iraqi Air Force headquarters, showing that
August 26th, 1998
· Scott Ritter resigns from UNSCOM, sharply criticized the
September 28th, 1998
· The United States Congress passes the “Iraq Liberation Act”, which states that the
November 30th, 1998
·
December 13th, 1998
·
December 16th-19th, 1998
- UNSCOM withdraws all weapons inspectors from
Iraq . - Saddam Hussein’s failure to provide unfettered access to UN arms inspectors led
Washington andLondon to hit 100 Iraqi targets in four days of bombing as part of Operation Desert Fox. The US government urged UNSCOM executive chairman Richard Butler to withdraw, and “[a] few hours before the attack began, 125 UN personnel were hurriedly evacuated from Baghdad to Bahrain, including inspectors from the UN Special Commission on Iraq and the International Atomic Energy Agency.”
Ok, I know that it’s a little bit of over kill but I wanted to show how the Democrats in most cases during the Clinton Administration and the run up to the current war in
Point three, the President lied about the pre-war intelligence and overstated the threat so as to “trick” the American people, Congress, and our allies into going to war when no valid reason existed. I have to say that this Democrat “talking point” is my favorite, not because it is the most repeated and some leftist have practically tattooed it to their foreheads but because it is the most obvious, outright, and complete falsehood in the entire Democrat arsenal of revising history. The same intelligence data that they claim the President lied about is the same intelligence data that Democrat after Democrat used to justify their votes to give the President the ability to wage the war. The constant revising of history to suit their needs is nothing more than a symptom of their collective inability to stick to a belief or an ideal. This behavior is simply the high of hypocrisy and should not be tolerated by the American people regardless of the politician’s political affiliation.
The fourth talking point by most Democrats is that no terrorist ties existed between
It just occurred to me that as I address these leftist “talking points”, they mostly likely are culling more from the wonderful people over at Democratic Underground. The work of the righteous is never done, on to point five. Our presence in
Of the world’s current armed conflicts, over 80% of them involve radical Islam. Why is it that we must bend to the deranged view of these radicals when clearly they cannot even live in the same country as others of a different faith? Furthermore, why is it the platform of the current Democratic Party to try and understand and treat these murderers with respect? I for the life of me cannot figure it out. Let me lay this nugget on you. If a dog of any breed attacks anyone in that liberal stronghold of
The sixth “talking point” is that we are a complete failure in
Now that I had taken the Democrats to task over their much beloved Iraqi “talking points”, let’s address their latest example of how they hold no core beliefs and simply don’t even believe what they tell the American people. On Friday after many weeks and months of bitching and moaning about how there is no exit strategy, the Democrats were given a golden opportunity to show the world of exactly how they felt about the war and how soon we should leave Iraq. Contrary to the MSM reporting, the issue was not about Congressmen Murtha; it was about whether or not we would finish the job before us and give the Iraqi people the gift of freedom or cut and run as many in the Democratic Party think. Well when given the opportunity to express the opinion that many have been pushing on the MSM news programs and in Op-Ed pieces in leftist newspapers, they blinked. If they truly believed that we should leave
Said the_mad_tech @ 5:00 pm Comments (4) | Permalink
