BigT’s Roundup - Evening Edition (9-26-07)
What the heck, lets go for another round of news.
The title of Halo 3 maybe should be changed to the savior of
Microsoft’s entertainment division thanks to the day it had yesterday. According to Yahoo! the game made $170 million dollars in its first day of release easily outpacing every other videogame and movie ever. Yeah, people don’t like blowing things up and killing.
The Worldwide Standard has an article that has all the links you need to see regarding the brave monks in Myanmar.
Some monks have died, rights have even been more restricted, and
hopefully they will win a victory for themselves and freedom. But not
if China has anything to do with it.
China’s relationship with Burma is the closest of any it
has in Southeast Asia. It views that nation as a strategic ally,
coveting the potential use of its ports on the Indian Ocean and easier
access to oil from Africa and the Middle East. China has provided
economic support key to keeping the dismal economy afloat, and has
built roads, bridges, airport facilities, power stations, factories and
telecommunications networks. It has also modernized Burma’s army,
including an infusion of weaponry valued at over $1.4 billion when the
junta took power.
China is a despicable regime that is at least partially responsible
for propping up many regimes that destroy basic human rights. We need
to call them on the mat for this horrific behavior before too long
because every day that goes by with a monk living in a virtual prison
is another day that humanity loses a bit of its soul.
Hugger, the pathetic website that called attention to the horrible
state of Zimbabwe (with regards to invasive species of plants of
course, not to its brutal dictator), does it again. It is giving plaudits to Cuba for pledging to plant trees.
Sure, killing unborn babies to improve your infant mortality rate is
not great but planting some trees while your citizens starve is a great
thing! Just imagine if liberals got their way and we all lived like
Cubans; VOTE HILLARY!
Another in a long line of liberal hypocrisy about freedom of speech can be found in San Francisco right now. At Columbia it’s alright that Ahmadinejad can have possibly the biggest propaganda win in a generation but the oh so great people of San Francisco won’t let the Marines film a recruitment commercial.
Liberals are patriotic, just not patriotic of America.
Oh, and about Ahmadinejad’s propaganda. Just in case Ahmadinejad’s version of what happened at Columbia didn’t completely stick Chris Matthews is coming to the rescue! Matthews said, according to News Busters,
Didn‘t you hear him allow the fact that there was, in fact, a Holocaust?
Actually, Mr. Matthews, what he said was an obfuscation of his real feelings. Ahmadinejad said
Can you argue that researching a phenomenon is finished, forever done? Can we close the books for good on a historical event?
There are different perspectives that come to light after every
research is done. Why should we stop research at all? Why should we
stop the progress of science and knowledge?
You shouldn’t ask me why I’m asking questions. You should ask
yourselves why you think that that’s questionable? Why do you want to
stop the progress of science and research?
… There has been more research on physics than it has on the
Holocaust, but we still continue to do research on physics. There is
nothing wrong with doing it.
This is what man wants. They want to approach a topic from different points of view. Scientists want to do that.
Is there really a discussion about whether or not the Holocaust
happened? Please, liberals, rush to this guy’s defense even more
because we all know that the only reason you support this maniacs right
to speak is so you get to seem sophisticated and worldly at your
cocktail parties. Ahmadinejad should have had the door shut on his face.
Well, at least no one could ever accuse a liberal of advancing a
cogent argument. As the blogosphere is ripe with such examples I’ll
just decide upon this brilliant piece from Crooks and Liars about how privatizing Social Security is bad:
After long delays, due in part to the refusal of the
White House to cooperate, …a GAO report [was released] assessing the
costs to taxpayers of a 2005 White House initiative to support the
President’s efforts to privatize Social Security.
The initiative included campaign-style events featuring the
President and a roster of top Administration officials as well as the
creation of a “Social Security Information Center” in the Department of
the Treasury. The analysis shows that the White House effort cost more
than $2.8 million, including more than $1.6 million for staging the
events, more than $800,000 for Air Force One and Air Force Two travel,
and more than $200,000 for the creation of the Treasury Department’s
privatization war room and website. The $2.8 million estimate is an
underestimate of the true costs, as it does not include the cost of
staff time, Secret Service protection, and other expenses.
Really, is this the best that you guys can do? No mention of how
retirement is too important to be left to someone looking to make
money? No? Well, maybe they’ll have a better day tomorrow. At least
that’s what right wing bloggers are predicting.
After ticking off a number of reasons why we are in trouble for 2008 a post at Right Wing News has this to say:
Will this situation improve significantly by election
time in 2008? I expect that it will, but probably not enough to allow
the GOP to go on the offensive in 2008. At best, we can hope to hold
the presidency, only lose or gain a handful of seats in the House, and
only lose a seat or two in the Senate.
It probably won’t be long until the bloggers on the right reprise
their premortems that they invented before the elections in ‘06. Even
if they are correct in their predictions I think it is totally
irresponsible for them to do this because that isn’t their job. They
don’t need to be cheerleaders but I think it is appropriate to try and
stress our core values at all times.
After the election is over, sure, figure out what happened. But
throwing in the towel even before the game is over is just rank
defeatism and who wants to vote for that? Well, if this post from The
Corner is correct, not many Hispanics are going to vote for the republican party either.
In an exhaustively researched survey of 145 precincts and 175,000 votes, Richard Nadler of America’s Majority Foundation
concludes that when Republicans talk about enforcement-only,
deportation, and criminalization of illegal immigrants, they get
A big part of me just wants to be reactionary and say tough. But
there is a way that you can tout enforcement of immigration laws while
still touching on issues that appeal to Hispanics as well. Maybe even
introduce a law that would increase the amount of immigration allowed
predicated on the governments ability to enforce our current
immigration laws (i.e. a boarder fence that stems illegal immigration).
The conventional wisdom is that whichever party wins over the
Hispanic vote will be the majority party in the future. The
conventional wisdom is usually wrong but it seems quite probable that
in this instant it might be right.
Here is an instance that republicans might be able to win over
Hispanic voters on the immigration front. Fortunately for us most
Hispanics are not liberals, they aren’t conservatives mostly either but
I think it’s safe to say that their personal politics are tilted to the
right. And one issue that they probably agree with most conservatives
is in the area of protecting this country. So it probably wouldn’t be a
good idea to appoint a man who thinks it would be grand if every person
had to live under Sharia in America. But that’s what Virginia has done.
This is the same Esam Omeish whom I have debated twice
on the Laura Ingraham Show. The first time, he denied that Islamic law
mandates death for apostasy. The second time, he acknowledged that he’d
be happy to see Sharia law come to the US.
And he’s the nominee to be on the immigration board! Heck, if Fred
Thompson just came out against this it would win over a large chunk of
While I think it’s safe to say that Hispanics worry about protecting
our country from terrorists it is also safe to say that liberals will
cry foul at any measure aimed at accomplishing that goal. And that is
what’s going to happen when more find out about a program designed to monitor terrorist’s online activities on discussion boards, chat rooms, and blogs.
I guess this is as good a time as any to explain to people that
there is no way that anyone is ever going to read what you write online
and then go and arrest you. Well, unless you are actually a terrorist.
Do you know how much is written online everyday? Do you know how long
it takes to translate writings? Agencies like the NSA try to monitor as
much as they can, with help from other countries in an effort to
circumvent laws limiting domestic spying, but they are limited due to
the amount of activity on the Internet and the filters they use.
You dope dealing liberals need not worry about this because it is
the government after all and they cannot find illegal immigrants on the
streets, how are they going to find you dealing pot out of your ice
Syria strikes again.
Master Chief in real life.
State gets their own blog, government efficiency at its best no doubt.
What Hillary will do to Bill if she doesn’t win in ‘08.
The pupil becomes the master - India outsourcing to US.
Our space colonists.
New Zealand’s wikilaw experiment. BigT