Who's to Blame?

Well, the Jennifer Porter case has come to an end.

For those of you who haven't followed the case, here are the basics:

On March 31, 2004, (Jennifer) Porter was driving her Toyota Echo through a dimly lit intersection on 22nd Street (Tampa, FL) when she struck four siblings (of the Mother, Lisa Watkins). . . . She said the road was dark and she was afraid to stop.

The two children who were killed were aged 13 and 3.

Yes, it's a tragedy that this poor woman lost two of her children. And the media have gone out of their way to portray the Mother as the victim.

But riddle me this, Batman: How many of you out there were allowed to roam the streets when you were three? I know I wasn't. I don't care if his (13-year-old) brother was with him or not? WHAT WAS A THREE-YEAR-OLD CHILD DOING OUT AT THAT HOUR?

If I were in charge, the "poor" Mother would've been charged with child abuse, or at least child endangerment. Well, she's not poor anymore. She settled out of court, and now has a beautiful home in Land O'Lakes.

Let me get this straight. This woman neglects her children, and she's the one who benefits.

So, Jennifer Porter "gets away" with no jail time. It must be racism, of course. At least, that's what our poor mother has to say about it, among other things.

My advice: fut the shuck up. Relax in the new home you got due to your negligence and count your money.

If only you'd had so much concern for your children before you let them run loose. Let's hope your guilt is equal (IF NOT MORE!!!) to Jennifer Porter's.

Spare me your martyrdom.

I'd write more, but I need to go throw up.

Here's a link to a story about the case, if you can stomach it.

Living A Free Life?

FSU Lives Down to Expectations

What an embarrassment!!

Drew definitely took a few steps backward, maybe more than a few.

Here's my new Mantra: They're a young team.

The Conference Championship game should be a blast.

It's too depressing to write anymore.

FSU Wins . . . In Spite of Itself

We're 7-1, but why do I feel tempted to say wait until next year.

What's happened to our defense? Please, someone, tell me that the only problem is the injuries.

rr

Didja Ever Notice?

When a Republican gets in legal trouble, it's a sure sign of corruption.

But when a Democrat gets in legal trouble, it's a partisan witch hunt by conservatives.

For PETA's Sake

The following story is from This is True dated 17 July 2005. It is Copyright 2005 Randy Cassingham, all rights reserved, and reprinted here with permission:

"Ethical" Defined

After more than 100 dead dogs were dumped in a trash dumpster over four weeks, police in Ahoskie, N.C., kept an eye on the trash receptacle behind a supermarket. Sure enough, a van drove up and officers watched the occupants throw in heavy plastic bags. They detained the two people in the van and found 18 dead dogs in plastic bags in the dumpster, including puppies; 13 more dead dogs were still in the van. Police say the van is registered to the headquarters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and the two occupants, Andrew B. Cook, 24, and Adria Joy Hinkle, 27, identified themselves as PETA employees. An autopsy performed on one of the dogs found it was healthy before it was killed. Police say PETA has been picking up the animals -- alive -- from North Carolina animal shelters, promising to find them good homes. Cook and Hinkle have been charged with 62 felony counts of animal cruelty. In response to the arrests PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said it's against the group's policy for employees to dump animals in the trash, but "that for some animals in North Carolina, there is no kinder option than euthanasia." (Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald) ...Oops, my mistake: that's "Playing God" Defined.

In his author's notes section, Cassingham had more to say about this story:

The more I learn about PETA, the less I think of them. The story of them killing animals isn't even unusual. According to PETA's own filings, in 2004 PETA killed 86.3 percent of the animals entrusted to its care -- a number that's rising, not falling. Meanwhile, the SPCA in PETA's home town (Norfolk, Va.) was able to find loving homes for 73 percent of the animals put in its care. A shortage of funds? Nope: last year PETA took in $29 million in tax-exempt donations. It simply has other priorities for the funds, like funding terrorism (yes, really). But don't take my word for it: I got my figures from http://www.PETAkillsAnimals.com -- and they have copies of PETA's state and federal filings to back it up. The bottom line: if you donate money to PETA because you think they care for and about animals, you need to think some more. PETA literally yells and screams about how others "kill animals" but this is how they operate? Pathetic.

And you know what I wonder? PETA's official count of animals they kill is 86.3 percent. But if they're going around picking up animals, killing them while they drive around and not even giving them a chance to be adopted, and then destroying the evidence by dumping the bodies in the trash, are those deaths being reported? My guess: no. While 86.3 percent is awful, the actual number is probably much, much higher. How dare they lecture anyone about the "ethical" treatment of animals!

(This is True is a weekly column featuring weird-but-true news stories from around the world, and has been published since 1994. Click the link for info about free subscriptions.)

Oprah, Get Over Yourself

Am I the only person outaged by this Oprah Winfrey ego-fest? In case you missed the story, she tried to enter a store to shop after the store was closed. And naturally, the only reason they wouldn't let her in is because she's black.

WHAT A CROCK!!! Could it have possibly been they didn't let her in because the store was closed??!?! Of course not. It's just one more example of racism.

HOW DARE SHE????

Although, considering the size of her ego, she probably wouldn't have fit through the door, anyway.

rr

Your "Humble" Host Is Back

Sorry to have been away so long, but I've been busy . . . and lazy. But I'm back, and that's all that matters.

So, what's been going on?

• My family and I had a safe and happy holiday season. Hope all you readers did, too.


• Dubya was re-elected in resounding fashion, much to the chagrin of the liberals and the Michael Moore types. Sorry, folks, but it's time to get some fresh grapes.


• My beloved Florida State Seminoles lost to the Gators at home for the first time since 1986. To add insult to injury, it was the same night they officially honored Coach Bobby Bowden by naming the field after him. Great timing, guys.
• Those same Seminoles managed to (somewhat) salvage the season by defeating West Virginia in the Gator Bowl. Not exactly the National Championship game, but after the last few seasons, you take all the minor triumphs you can get. On the positive side, QB Chris "Jekyl and Hyde" Rix is gone.


• My hometown team, the Tampa Bay Bucs, had another miserable season.


• My real favorite team, the Pittsburgh Steelers, went 15-1, and then promptly fell on their faces (again) in the conference title game. What is it about teams that I root for choking in big games?

All in all, a busy time. I'll try to write more as the year progresses.

I leave you with this thought. Let's pretend the roles were reversed, and the recent Secretary of State confirmation hearings had involved a female African American candidate who was a Democrat. If Republicans had attacked her with the same vitriol, do you have any doubt the media would have accused the Republicans of racism? No, of course you don't.

Until the next time.

rr

Jeff Bowden Must GO!!!

I think all FSU fans can agree on that point.

What an pathetic offensive performance last night. And what kind of offensive line play was that? It took one of Chris Rix's typical "pull-it-out-of-his-ass" plays just to get us into the end zone. And so much for finding a dependable kicker.

Overall, a disgusting performance by the offense. Thank God for Mickey Andrews and the defense, or it could have been uglier.

rr

Factoid from the Wall Street Journal

The jobless rate stand at 5.4% today, better than under Clinton in November 1996 and "well below the long-term [US] average."

We've had strong economic growth since President Bush's tax cuts kicked in - 4.8%- far exceeding that of Germany, Japan, Canada, and France for example, over the same period of time.

Personal income has grown over 5% in the last twelve months.

The WSJ makes a case that the government figures are in fact undercounting jobs and growth as our economy changes rapidly in this new service sector-dominated information age.

Meanwhile, Democrats bemoan the loss of manufacturing jobs - which actually have increased each month in 2004.

Thought For the Day

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged!"

- President Abraham Lincoln

Going It Alone, huh?

Stupid Liberal Distortion:
George Bush has a “go it alone” foreign policy in Iraq. We have a phony coalition.

Snappy Patriotic Reality:
President Bush built a solid wartime coalition against Saddam Husayn: the UK, Poland, and Australia fought with us. Dozens of Middle East, Asian and European allies allowed US ships, aircraft and support units to operate from their territories against Saddam’s Iraq. In the real world – not John Kerry’s world – this counts as crucial support. We can’t fight effectively in Iraq or Afghanistan without access to foreign bases, airspace, or sometimes cooperative aid arrangements.

Moreover, listening to liberal lies, most Americans don’t know that NATO forces were deployed to protect Turkey and Kuwait during the Iraq war. While these units did not fight with us in Iraq, they helped to protect the bases from which we and our allies launched our operations.

Multinational naval forces also continued to patrol the waters of the Persian Gulf with the US Navy, yet another defensive contribution to the overall Iraq war effort.

If we’re so alone in Iraq, who are all these foreign workers and soldiers being kidnapped and killed by terrorists?

President Bush brought the UN back into Iraq IMMEDIATELY after the war ended in May 2003. The UN re-established a headquarters, but in August 2003 terrorists bombed the building. The UN – which John Kerry relies on so much – turned tail and ran. A UN investigation blamed itself – not the US – for faulty security.

This year, the US asked two special UN teams to establish a presence in Iraq to help establish a transitional government and plan for elections next year. This was accomplished.

President Bush led the way in garnering UN support by successfully passing several UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) on Iraq, including UNSCR 1511 which endorsed the US-led multinational forces currently in Iraq and UNSCR 1441 which authorized the use of force if Saddam did not disarm. Not quite how John Kerry tells it, is it?

There are troops from about 30 countries helping us in Iraq today.

These include the first ever overseas deployment of Japanese combat forces since World War II and the first deployment of South Korean troops bolstering US policy outside of Asia – two major accomplishments by President Bush that will aid us in future multilateral operations.

NATO provides logistics and other support for the Polish multilateral command in Iraq today.

NATO is now providing training for Iraqi forces along with Jordan and the UAE. NATO would have started sooner but the French blocked our efforts for months.

At least 17 countries were part of the former US-led Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq

Kuwait has been providing free fuel for US forces in the region.

Some 70 nations and international organizations attended the October 2003 donors conference organized by President Bush's team, pledging tens of billions of dollars for Iraqi aid and reconstruction.

LIBERALS CAN'T HELP BUT LIE ABOUT WHAT THIS COUNTRY IS DOING ABROAD, AND WHAT WE'VE ACHIEVED SINCE 9-11. What the liberals really hate is that President Bush has backbone and promised that in the post 9-11 world, as our President, he reserves the RIGHT to preemptively strike enemies who threaten to attack our homeland, our citizens, our vital strategic interests abroad, and our allies (See his West Point speech, June 2002). President Bush believes this is his most solemn duty.

This does not mean we are actually acting alone, as Kerry likes to claim. The facts above are proof. However, if we know another 9-11 is in the offing, President Bush will not wait for the UN to deliberate and decide while our enemies launch their attacks.

The American people have to vote this November. Do we want liberals running our military and intelligence abilities into the ground as they did in the 1990s? Do we want our President to protect us, but only on the say so of the UN and the French, as the liberals prefer? Must we meet a "global test" as John kerry stated? And who defines that test? Russia? France? Cuba?

Or do we reserve the right to act IF NECESSARY to strike first before thousands or perhaps millions of us are killed? Do we want a resolute President; one with backbone, or not?

Saddam's Links to Terrorism - and Al Qaeda

Stupid Liberal Distortion:
We found no evidence linking Saddam to terrorism – or no links to Al Qaeda.

Snappy Patriotic Reality:
Saddam had numerous high-level contacts with Al Qaeda. Saddam’s agents provided some training for Al Qaeda; for example, in document forgery. Moreover, Saddam and Bin Laden reached an understanding that Al Qaeda would not target Iraq as it had Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Morocco for example, as both had a common enemy in America.

The terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi ran a terror training camp in Afghanistan and was linked to Al Qaeda. He fled our forces there and set up his network in Iraq, where Saddam gave him shelter and medical treatment.

This is the same terrorist that has beheaded Americans and killed hundreds – mostly civilians – with car bombs since the war.

Before the Iraq war, Zarqawi plotted and directed the October 2002 assassination of a US diplomat in Jordan from his safe-haven in Saddam’s Iraq.

One wonders why Kerry and his liberal media allies, ignore this pre-war Saddam/Zarqawi-Al Qaeda linkage.

Saddam had an agent with a terrorist group training with poisons – including ricin and cyanide – in northern Iraq. Zarqawi was linked to that group. Saddam’s regime admitted to the UN it tested and manufactured ricin.

In January 2003, seven terrorists making ricin were arrested in London.

In February and March 2003, 10 terrorists apparently planning cyanide attacks were arrested in Italy. Others were arrested in France and Spain.

In late March 2003, President Bush put the terrorist’s poison lab in Iraq out of business by going to war against Saddam.

Iraqi agents attempted to commit terrorist attacks in Europe and Asia during the first Gulf War but fortunately did not succeed. Saddam’s operatives, working from Iraqi embassies, continued to be involved with terrorist groups after the first Gulf War.

Saddam was paying suicide bombers attacking Israel. Americans were killed and wounded in several of those attacks.

Saddam had long supported the Abu Nidal Organization, the deadliest global terrorist group before the rise of Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda. Saddam sheltered ANO’s leader, who had killed Americans, until right before the war.

Saddam waged a campaign of assassination and terror bombings against UN personnel, relief workers, and foreign journalists in northern Iraq during the 1990s. Dozens were killed and wounded. The UN did nothing about it.

Saddam’s agents plotted to assassinate – by a car bomb - former President Bush and Kuwaiti leaders in 1993.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/20124.pdf

- 9/11 commission report, chapter 2, pp. 61, 66

WMDs In Iraq

Stupid Liberal Distortion:
There was no WMD in Iraq.

Snappy Patriotic Reality:
We did not find the stockpiled weapons that France, Russia, Germany, the UN, the Clinton administration, AND President Bush believed Saddam had hidden.

We did find hidden laboratory equipment, documents, and biological organisms that Saddam could have used to make biological or chemical weapons in a few weeks or months.

We did find new missile programs that Saddam was pursuing, as well as whole factories dedicated to manufacturing banned missile fuels. We destroyed dozens of prohibited missiles, warheads, missile launchers, launch support vehicles, as well as hundreds of pieces of production and testing equipment.

We did find a handful of banned chemical artillery shells just in the last 4 months – and our troops may yet discover more among the millions of tons of ammunition hidden or scattered around Iraq by Saddam’s forces.

Because President Bush finally removed Saddam from power for 13 years of violating UN sanctions, we have captured many of Saddam’s scientists. They admitted to hiding banned equipment, documents and WMD activities from the UN. Under arrest, they are no longer able to work on weapons in secret.

We found tons of documents related to Saddam’s secret weapons purchases and programs – all of which he hidden from UN inspectors.

We also found evidence that Saddam’s regime destroyed documents and equipment in order to prevent us from discovering the full truth about his WMD programs. Thus, unfortunately, as he had done for 13 years against UN inspections, Saddam may have succeeded in hiding the truth one last time. Unfortunately, rather than holding a brutal dictator responsible, liberals would rather accuse our own President of lying to the world.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html

North Korea

Stupid Liberal Distortion:
Clinton's bilateral engagement with North Korea -giving the dictatorship oil and aid it wanted - stopped its nuclear weapons programs. Because of Bush's policies, North Korea has nuclear weapons.

Snappy Patriotic Reality:
Publicly available US estimates show that the Clinton bilateral approach to North Korea which John Kerry claims he'll use was never 100% verifiable - i.e., all nuclear activity could not be tracked as Kerry asserted.

Such estimates show that North Korea probably had already assembled its first nuclear weapons around the time President Bush first took office. Obviously, that difficult and time consuming effort was on-going by North Korea even as Clinton bragged he had stopped its weapons program.

Why is it liberals are so much more comfortable lying about our own President than expressing outrage that a brutal, dangerous and unstable dictatorship would have lied to America in order to advance its nuclear weapons programs?

http://www.odci.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2001/ddci_speech_04172001.html

PM Allawi says to congress........

that there are three messages for America.

#1 is that Iraq and America are winning the war, and that he is very troubled by the negative coverage he sees by the media in America, it is absolutley not like that over there.

#2 thank you to America.

#3 talks about the atrocities of Saddam Hussein, and that they were not safe. Iraq is better off and world is better off and thank you again.

Surprisingly, this made the evening news.

Not surprisingly, it was tempered by John Kerry informing us it was all lies. Well, I guess he'd know (about lies, that is).

OK, everyone, let's see a show of hands. How many of you think Allawi's speech would be seen as evidence of success in Iraq during a Democratic administration?

How many more anti-American statements do you liberal morons need before you realize what a disaster it would be to elect John Kerry?

Open your eyes, and your ears!!!

FSU Rebounds

OK, maybe we can keep Rix around a bit longer. Providing, of course, we continue to keep getting great rushing totals, and play UAB every week.

Go Noles.

The Difference Between Democrats and Republicans

Perhaps those who are unable to understand the basic difference between the two might appreciate this simplistic but all too accurate comparison:

A Republican and a Democrat were walking down the street when they came to a homeless person. The Republican gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his office for a job. He then took $20.00 out of his pocket and gave it to the homeless person.

The Democrat was very impressed, and when they came to another homeless person, he decided to help. He walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into the Republican's pocket and took $20.00. He kept $15 for administrative fees and gave the homeless person $5.

Now perhaps you understand the difference.

Physicians vs. Gun Owners

Interesting...

Physicians:
a. The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services)

Now think about this:

Guns:
a. The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners. Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!

(Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.)

Lance Armstrong

CNN is reporting that Lance Armstrong may be stripped of his 6th Tour de France title.

In a random check for banned substances, 3 were found in Armstrong's hotel room.

The 3 substances banned by the French that were found in his hotel room were as follows:

(1) Toothpaste
(2) Deodorant
(3) Soap

The French officials also found several other items which they had never seen before, including a testicle and a backbone...

Are you a Democrat, Republican or Southern Republican?

What with elections coming up, we should all decide.

Question:
How do you tell the difference between Democrats, Republicans and Southern Republicans? The answer can be found by posing the following question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges. You are carrying a Glock .40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Democrat's Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or Oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days and try to come to a consensus.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Republican's Answer:

BANG!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Southern Republican's Answer:

BANG!BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click....(sounds of
reloading). BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click
Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips??"