Quote

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Thursday, February 17, 2005

Up Yours, Twirp!

I made mention the other day of a statement made by the feisty New York Republican Party chairman, Stephen Minarik, essentially calling the Democratic Party the party of terrorists. My comment on the matter was that one doesn't normally hear or read candid statements like his from Republicans. They are, by definition, wienies. I was very pleased with his forthright - and accurate - characterization. Mr. Minarik is now my hero.

Well, the Democrats, in the form of the little butterball himself, Howard Dean, have responded.

Dean called on the head of New York's Republican Party to apologize or resign over remarks linking the Democrats to a civil rights lawyer convicted of aiding terrorists.

Dean called Stephen Minarik's comments offensive and said, "The American people deserve better than this type of political character assassination."

On Monday, Minarik said that Dean's election shows that "the Democrats simply have refused to learn the lessons of the past two election cycles, and now they can be accurately called the party of Barbara Boxer, Lynne Stewart and Howard Dean."

Stewart is a New York City lawyer convicted last week of helping terrorists by smuggling messages from one of her imprisoned clients, a radical Egyptian sheik, to his terrorist disciples on the outside. Boxer is a Democratic senator from California.

Among Minarik's critics is Republican New York Gov. George Pataki, who said Tuesday that his remark was not "within the realm of appropriate political discourse." (link)

It is normally routine in instances like this for the Republican to issue an apology, resign from public life, and beg forgiveness from Barbara Walters. So how did Minarik respond to Dean's demand?
Minarik issued a statement Wednesday saying "it is not the Republican Party's problem that these far-left activists have made their home in the Democratic party."
Let me translate: "Howard, stick it up your ..."

My man!

Wieners And Traitorous Dogs

Stephen Minarik, the GOP party chairman in New York, should run up to Vermont and share some of his testosterone with the Republican governor there, James Douglas. Douglas thinks it is just swell that the state has for a United States senator a man who abandoned the Republican Party a few days after the GOP gained a majority in the senate in 2000, giving control back to the Democrats. A more traitorous act performed by a politician the USA hasn't witnessed since Benedict Arnold chose to abandon his country in time of war. I'm referring of course to James Jeffords, a spineless weasel who should have been ridden out of the state on a rail.

Instead, he gets Douglas's wholehearted endorsement.

Vermonters From Both Parties Back Jeffords
NewsMax.com Wires

Thursday, Feb. 17, 2005 MONTPELIER, Vt. -- Sen. James Jeffords may be a man without a party, but he has plenty of high-powered friends. Facing his first re-election bid since leaving the Republican Party, the Vermont independent on Wednesday got an endorsement from Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and a boost from Republican Gov. James Douglas, who said he will not campaign against Jeffords because he "has served the state well."

Jeffords, whose first 26 years in Washington were as a Republican, infuriated GOP leaders four years ago when he became an independent, saying the party had become too conservative for him. The move gave Democrats control of the Senate until the 2002 election. (
link)

When asked about the rumor floating around Montpelier that Jeffords had slept with Douglas's wife, old Jim responded by reiterating once again how Jeffords had served the state well and, for that reason, could do whatever he damn well pleased. Besides, said Douglas, his wife was more than willing to give it up for the cause. She is, after all, a stalwart Republican too.

OK. The last paragraph is to be taken as a metaphor only. But you get the point.

On 'Moderate Republicans' & Other Pigwash

You have no idea how much I love to read news reports of "moderate" Republicans wanting to raise my taxes. Or of "moderate" Republicans who want to keep Roe v Wade undisturbed. Environmentalists. Champions of the AFL-CIO. "Moderates" who are willing to moderate the meaning and application of the Bill of Rights as it relates to gun control, prayer in the public square, campaign finance reform, and on and on.

Here is today's cheery news from the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

Senate Republicans stop rollback
By Michael Hardy and Jeff E. Schapiro, Times-Dispatch Staff Writers

House-passed legislation jump-starting the rollback of the local tax on personal motor vehicles was, in effect, defeated for the year in the Senate Finance Committee.

The committee, dominated by moderate Republicans [my emphasis] who consider the car-tax phaseout a budget-buster, refused to even vote on the bill, sponsored by Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Prince William.

Lingamfelter, in a speech a short time later to the House of Delegates, complained that the finance committee's inaction represented a "sad day [for] the commonwealth."

He continued, "We have added to the cynicism of the voters of the state who expect us to keep our promises." (
link)
These "Republicans" are no more moderate than is the contempt in which I hold each of them.

1. They are cowards for having chosen not to participate in the vote.

2. There is nothing moderate about their desire to confiscate that portion of my income that I set aside for my gandchildrens' birthday gifts. They are liberals by any normal person's standards. They raised my taxes. And they block, in their own cowardly way, an attempt to provide the people of the state of Virginia much-needed tax relief.

So why are they Republicans? And what is the state GOP going to do about these renegades?


I have to hand it to both my elected representatives for one thing. Delegate Benny Keister and Senator Phil Puckett have both voted routinely to raise my taxes - but they proudly proclaim their membership in the Democratic Party. The party of wealth confiscation. They don't run from it. They wear it on their chests as a badge of ... honor. And I may consider them to be contemptible, vile, deceitful politicians, but they are faithful to their party. They are Democrats (and former elected representatives of the people of Southwest Virginia if I have any say in the matter).

They don't hide. They are not cowards. Not like these "moderate" Republicans.

When Is a Terrorist a Terrorist?

Question: If you are heavily armed and have joined a group whose sole purpose on this earth is to slaughter millions of people, are you a terrorist? If your group is widely known to have committed those acts of (euthanasia?) terrorism, are you a terrorist?

Not to the Europeans apparently.
Allies Resisting as U.S. Pushes Terror Label for Hezbollah
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 - As rising instability in Lebanon increases tensions in the Middle East, the Bush administration is arguing with European governments over whether they should designate the Lebanon-based Shiite group Hezbollah a terrorist organization, American and European officials say.

The United States is already stepping up pressure on Iran and Syria, Hezbollah's main sponsors. The American rift with Syria deepened this week, with suspicions that Syria might have been behind the assassination of Lebanon's former prime minister in Beirut on Monday.

The disagreement over Hezbollah presents another challenge for President Bush, who will go to Europe on Sunday on a mission to fix ruptures with Europe over the Iraq war.

In the past two weeks, the officials said, France has rebuffed appeals by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the Israeli foreign minister, Silvan Shalom, to list Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, which would prevent it from raising money in Europe through charity groups. The United States has long called Hezbollah a terrorist organization, but the French, American and European officials said, have opposed doing so, and argue that making such a designation now would be unwise, given the new turbulence in Lebanon. (
link)
France. Again. "... unwise, given the new turbulence ...." So cowardly. So typical.