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

Friday, April 27, 2007

Quote Of The Day

From James Taranto:

"Giuliani's criticism of Democrats was that their approach to terrorism is to go "on defense," and the Democrats responded by getting all defensive. Kind of proves his point, doesn't it?"

"Best of the Web Today," April 26, 2007

The Do Nothing Congress. Act IX.

For those of you who are holding your breath after having joyously sent all those Democrats to Washington to get that minimum wage increase passed, well, hang in there. It's just that they have more pressing matters:
Panel Seeks Records of Political Briefings at Agencies
By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post Staff Writer

A House committee chairman asked 27 federal departments and agencies yesterday to turn over information related to White House briefings about elections or political candidates, substantially widening the scope of a congressional investigation into the administration's compliance with the law that restricts partisan political activity by government employees.

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, made the requests after the White House acknowledged that ... (link)
Don't worry. The Democrats will get around to substantive matters soon. Like their push to enact that Equal Rights Amendment they launched. Three decades ago.

A Conditioned Response

A letter to the editor of the Roanoke Times this morning highlights the response to the massacre of 32 innocent human beings on the Virginia Tech campus last Monday that I predicted only hours after the horrific event occurred. See "Fewer, not more guns" here. Id est:

● Guns killed all those people.

● Not one mention of the psychopath who pulled the trigger.

Pavlov would be smiling.

A Blast From The Past

Once, long ago, when it was really cool to be a feminist, a large handful of physically-challenged ladies tried to pass an amendment to our constitution that called for equal rights for women. Because they were never quite able to explain what exactly it meant, the vast majority of Americans at the time determined it to be a bit silly, at least, and - in the end - to potentially cause more harm than good, and the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) died a quiet death. Decades ago.

Well, in a nostalgic sort of way, it's good to know that a few of those crazy feminists are apparently still alive (and, with the advancements made in recent years in plastic surgery, hopefully in better spirits). And still beating that long-dead horse:

Why We Need an ERA
The Gender Gap Runs Deep in American Law
By Martha Burk and Eleanor Smeal, writing in the Washington Post

Some members of Congress are looking to do something long overdue: pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Recently renamed the Women's Equality Amendment and introduced by its chief sponsors, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), the amendment would grant equal constitutional rights to women -- something we have yet to achieve. This simple concept had the blessing of both political parties until the Republicans struck it from their platform in 1980, with the Democrats following suit in 2004. (link)

You may remember Martha Burk, one of the persons providing us with this excursion into the past. She's the gal who captured the hearts of the mainstream press when she called for a national march on the Augusta National Golf Club (because it wouldn't admit women as members) a number of years ago and all of five - or so - people showed up to protest.

Well, Martha's still alive and kicking. And she still has her causes. And, I'll bet, the same following. With her, Smeal, Kennedy, and Maloney making four, with just two more to sign on to this ancient notion, her rallying cry will have assembled a gathering of activists that dwarfs her effort at Augusta National. As Randy Jackson would say: You go, dog.

These guys bring back a flood of fond memories: Feminists. Horse and carriage. Gas lights. Top hats and hoop skirts. Ah, the good old days.

When Harry Must Sally

A call for defeatist-in-chief, Democratic Senator Harry Reid, to resign in disgrace:
Resign now
By Barry Casselman, writing in the Washinton Times

In two recently published articles, one by the dean of the nation's political commentators, David Broder, and the other by the independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, the statement by Sen. Harry Reid that "the war [in Iraq] is lost" is revealed both as wrong-headed in the extreme, and mortally wounding his own party as it approaches the upcoming presidential election.

With Mr. Reid's recent declaration that all is lost, he has unilaterally taken on the onus of responsibility by his party for the blame of defeat.

Mr. Reid should resign immediately as majority leader of the Senate. As Mr. Broder has pointed out, there is no way to perceive his comments in a constructive or justifiable way, nor is there the slightest evidence that he will not continue to make blunder after blunder. He just is not up to the job. (link)
It's good to see that I'm not the only person who sees Reid as a lightweight among lightweights.

I'm not, however, ready to call for his resignation. Reid does, after all, represent his party so very well.

You Go, Girl!

How I do wish she'd change her mind and run for president. Condi knows how to deal with the gutter refuse over in the House. She gives them a quick back of her hand, and moves on:
Subpoenaed Rice says panel knows her answers
The Associated Press

Oslo (AP) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that she has already answered the questions that she has been subpoenaed to answer before a congressional committee and suggested that she is not inclined to comply with the order.

Miss Rice said she would respond by mail to questions from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on the Bush administration's prewar claims about Saddam Hussein's seeking weapons of mass destruction, but indicated that she would not appear in person.

"I am more than happy to answer them again in a letter," she told reporters in Oslo, where she is attending a meeting of NATO foreign ministers. (link)
Ms. Rice is not obligated to honor a Congressional subpoena. Especially this one that is a waste of her time - she is, after all, trying to help run the country (not to mention this wasting our time - we pay numbskulls like committee chairman Henry Waxman handsomely to get things done, rather than waste our time and money on issues that were dealt with years ago).

Condi has learned how to deal with the Democrats and their witch-hunts. A lesson that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales needs to absorb. She ignores them, and focuses on that which she was sent to Washington to accomplish.

Condoleezza Rice. My kinda woman.

But Al Qaeda Is THERE

The Democrats have a dilemma. You heard it in the debate that took place yesterday. You hear presidential candidate John Edwards routinely get entwined in it. It involves their "plan" to exit Iraq so that we can more effectively fight our mortal enemy - Al Qaeda.

There's only one problem with that strategery:
U.S. general calls al Qaeda 'public enemy No. 1' in Iraq
By Bill Gertz, The Washington Times

The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said yesterday that al Qaeda terrorists are behind the recent spate of deadly car bombings and are now "public enemy No. 1" in the country.

Army Gen. David H. Petraeus told reporters at the Pentagon that while there is noticeable progress in fighting insurgents and terrorists, the struggle to stabilize the country is difficult and will require a continued commitment of American forces and other resources. Al Qaeda in Iraq is "a very significant enemy," Gen. Petraeus said.

"I think it is probably public enemy No. 1," he said. "It is the enemy whose actions sparked the enormous increase in sectarian violence that did so much damage to Iraq in 2006, the bombing of the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra, the gold-domed mosque there, the third-holiest Shia shrine. And it is the organization that continues to try to reignite not just sectarian violence but ethnic violence, as well, going after Iraqi Kurds in Nineveh province and Kirkuk and areas such as that as well." (link)
John Edwards and his deep-thinking pals in the Democratic Party demand that we pull our troops out of Iraq so that we can focus on Al Qaeda. Leaving Iraq to Al Qaeda.

Suppose these guys have any idea how stupid they come across?

His Oath Had An Expiration Date

I wonder how many people will read this and ask why this Democrat, if he sworn an oath to not divulge national secrets a few years ago, he's willing to divulge them now:
Durbin kept silent on prewar knowledge
By Sean Lengell, The Washington Times

The Senate's No. 2 Democrat says he knew that the American public was being misled into the Iraq war but remained silent because he was sworn to secrecy as a member of the intelligence committee.

"The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it," Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said Wednesday when talking on the Senate floor about the run-up to the Iraq war in 2002.

"I was angry about it. [But] frankly, I couldn't do much about it because, in the intelligence committee, we are sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say the statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that is being given to this Congress."

He cited the White House's claim that Iraq was trying to acquire aluminum tubes needed for a nuclear weapons program -- details of which have since been declassified -- as an example of bad intelligence, saying that there was an ongoing debate within the administration as it was being used in public. (link)
Durbin is, of course, lying through his teeth. But hindsight makes for very clear vision into the past. A past that he swore to keep secret.

So much for Democrats and their promises.

The French Agree With Us

When it comes to those cheese-eating surrender monkeys, nobody knows them better than they do:
Ugh, We're French
New York Post Wire Services

April 27, 2007 -- C'est ne pas possible! The French hate themselves even more than everyone does.

Fourty-four percent of French people think ill of themselves according to a poll by the International Herald Tribune and France 24 TV. Thirty-eight percent of Americans polled had a negative view of them, as did 33 percent of Brits, 29 of Spaniards, 25 of Italians and 14 of Germans. (link)
Says a lot, I think.

If another poll had been conducted however, we'd probably find that the French hate everyone else too. They are, after all, who they are.

The Bloom Comes Off The Rose

As time goes by, I think we'll be reading this headline more often:

Barack 'Disappoints'

There was never any there there.

They'll Never Understand

Two headlines in this morning's New York Times say it all:

General Says Iraq Pullback Would Increase Violence

and ...

Senate Passes Bill Seeking Iraq Exit; Veto Is Expected

They want out. No matter how many get slaughtered.