A review of prison conditions in Guantanamo ordered by Prez O as step one in his process to shut down the Worlds Best Place for Top Jihadists has determined that the prison complies fully with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions. It is not, as the rabid Left complains, a torture chamber … but Obama continues to pursue closing it nonetheless.

The study, prepared by Adm. Patrick M. Walsh, vice chief of naval operations, suggested that the top jihadists held there, like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, should get some social time with other top prisoners for prayer and talk. Other than that shortfall – which not even the most rabid leftist could define as torture – Walsh gave Gitmo a clean bill.

Not surprisingly, radicals who bought into the Obama spiel were disappointed:

“We do think conditions are in violation of U.S. obligations to treat prisoners humanely, and prisoners are at a physical and mental breaking point. These are not the conclusions we had hoped for under Obama. It’s very disappointing.” – Pardiss Kebriaei, a staff lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Rights [for Terrorists].

Kebriaei and his/her? icky ilk need not be too upset – Obama remains on a path to close the Worlds Best Place for Top Jihadists. A team led by Matthew G. Olsen, acting assistant attorney general for national security, is reviewing each of the approximately 245 detainees’ cases to determine “whether it is possible to transfer or release detained individuals consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States; evaluate whether the government should seek to prosecute detained individuals for crimes they may have committed; and, if none of those options are possible, the Task Force will recommend other lawful means for disposition of the detained individuals,” according to the Justice Department. (WaPo)

Good luck with that.  Where else but Guantanamo – or knocking futilely on the doors of paradise – would you want Khalid Sheik Mohammed?  Closing Guantanamo will open a can of worms for the Prez.

Meanwhile, more bad news for those who would have constitutional rights for terrorists jihadists who want to destroy our nation:

Detainees being held at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan cannot use US courts to challenge their detention, the US says.

The justice department ruled that some 600 so-called enemy combatants at Bagram have no constitutional rights.

Most have been arrested in Afghanistan on suspicion of waging a terrorist war against the US.

The move has disappointed human rights lawyers who had hoped the Obama administration would take a different line to that of George W Bush. (BBC)

Boo hoo for the poor, poor human rights lawyers. No reports from the BBC on the reaction from saner folks.

No Comments yet »

So, it turns out Steven Chu’s Nobel laureate isn’t worth all that much. You’d think with Chu being so smart and all, it would be a piece of cake for him to be a stand-out Energy Secretary for Rhambama.

But c’mon, an academic actually doing real-world work and taking responsibility? Whatever gave you that idea?

At a forum with reporters on Thursday, (Chu) the head of the department that has traditionally taken the lead on global oil-market policy, was asked what message the Obama administration had for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries at its meeting next month.

“I’m not the administration,” the Cabinet secretary replied. “I will be speaking and learning more about this in order to figure out what the U.S. position should be and what the president’s position is.”

…The day before, reporters asked him about OPEC output levels after a speech to a group of utility regulators. He responded that the issue was “not in my domain.” (source)

If OPEC is not the domain of the U.S. Secretary of Energy, we must already have successfully and completely made the conversion to alternative, green fuels. Why didn’t anyone tell me? I just wasted a whole tank of gas on my car yesterday!

hat-tip: Ace of Spades

No Comments yet »

O

ne week too late, the New York Times has finally published a story on the brutal beheading of Aasiya Hassan by her husband, owner of a TV network dedicated to proving that Islam is indeed moderate, a faith that’s ready for prime time in a civilized world.

The coverage starts off well, but rapidly deteriorates. Here’s the lead:

A man who founded a Muslim-American television station to help fight Muslim stereotypes is to appear on Wednesday in a suburban Buffalo court on charges that he decapitated his wife last week.

Kudos to the NYT; they put the newsworthy significance – beheadings and Muslim stereotypes – right in the lead, casting the story as it should be cast.  But then the story breaks down into a senseless defense of positive Muslim stereotypes:

The gruesome death of Ms. Hassan prompted outrage from Muslim leaders after suggestions that it had been some kind of “honor killing” based on religious or cultural beliefs.

Dr. Sawsan Tabbaa, a Muslim community leader who teaches orthodontia at the State University at Buffalo, said, “This is not an honor killing, no way.”

Dr. Tabbaa added, “It has nothing to do with his faith.”

They are not outraged that she was beheaded. They are not outraged that Islam tolerates such behavior – it is, after all, the only religion in the world whose followers routinely behead people in the name of its god. They are merely outraged that someone would consider Aasiya Hassan’s death an honor killing.

But let’s look at it, shall we?  Aasiya was divorcing Muzzammil, and that’s just not allowed in enlightened Islam.  Men can divorce women easy as pie, but women divorce men? No way.  So she – she, a mere woman – was bringing shame to Muzzammil.

Now, he could have shot her, or strangled her, or crushed her skull with a tire iron or done any of a number of other well established American ways to kill in a fit of passion.  But instead, he did something almost unique to Islam – he beheaded her.  This is no easy feat.  It’s time-consuming, difficult, and very, very personal.

You behead someone not to kill them, but to send a message.  And the message Mazzammil Hassan was sending was simple:  I will not be dishonored!

The NYT, after waiting a week to cover the story, has made itself complicit in covering up the true nature of the crime.

10 Comments »

My inside-the-beltway mom and former ambassador step-dad are visiting, and much as I love them (unquatifiably), I was fearing the visit.  Politics of course.  It seemed I just couldn’t prepare myself for them being all bouncy and bright about how great Obama is; how could I bite my tongue and not show my fear, disgust and anger over the course Rahmbama is steering, the actions they’ve taken?

But a curious thing happened.  My mom is terribly disappointed in her rock star candidate, and worried about the future. Paraphrasing:

“We had such hope for him.  Of course we thought anything would be better after Bush, and he had such promise.  He was what America needed, half black, half white, with a message of hope that was so well delivered.”

Now she’s terribly worried about the long-term effect the stimulus spending bill will have on America’s economy and strength, she’s disgusted with how it was rushed through without meaningful public or Congressional debate and she is appalled by his desire to move the Census to the White House.

How many folks across America are having the same rude awakening, do you suppose?  How many are shaking their heads and asking themselves, “How could I have been so foolish?”  And no, I did not say, “I told you so.”  This is my mom, folks!

Also of note: She had not heard of the NY Times refusal to carry the Aasiya Hassan beheading story. (The paper finally ran it this morning.) She had not heard the news and at first deferred to the NYT, but after she read the initial Fox News report and understood hubby Muzzamil’s role as a “defender of moderate Islam,” she – a career journalist with creds as long as your arm – concluded that of course the story is newsworthy, and of course the NYT should have run it.

2 Comments »

J

ust in time for a Friday night of popcorn and dancing electrons, National Review asked its readers to nominate their favorite conservative movies, and from the comments they received, has compiled a list of the the 25 cbest onservative movies of all time. What, you ask, makes a movie conservative?

We do not claim that the writers, directors, producers, gaffers, and key grips involved with these films are conservative. We certainly make no such assertion about the actors. Yet the results are indisputable: Conservatives enjoy these films because they are great movies that offer compelling messages about freedom, families, patriotism, traditions, and more.

With some of the movies on the list, like Team America, World Police, I found myself thinking, “Conservative? You call that conservative?” But the commentary provided made sense:

This marionette movie from South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone is hard to categorize as conservative. It’s amazingly vulgar and depicts Americans as wildly overzealous in fighting terror. Yet the film’s utter disgust with air-headed, left-wing celebrity activism remains unmatched in popular culture. As the heroes move to stop a WMD apocalypse, they clash with Alec Baldwin, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, and a host of others, whom they take out with gunfire, sword, and martial arts before saving the day. The movie, like South Park itself, reveals Parker and Stone as the two-headed George Grosz of American satire.

Some old favorites, like Ghostbusters and Groundhog Day, are on the list, causing me to think, “Yeah, I liked those, but was it because they were conservative – and again, a fresh consideration makes it clear they celebrate ideals – and bash the less than ideal – in a way we conservatives understand.  

So boot up your Netflix, check out the list, and place some orders.

Then, if you want to have some fun, check out HuffPo’s snakry/witty counter list - including “Thelma and Louise – Susan Sarandon drives off a cliff” – and have some fun with your own lists.

1 Comment »

I’m giving you this quote direct from the Prez – and it’s not provided in the context of the utterly opaque process the Porkasaurus stimulus spending bill went through:

Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use.

Sure, Obama puked all over that central element of his core beliefs (heh!) with his very first legislative initiative, but what I’m talking about here is RAT, a little hidden surprise tucked away, out of sight, within the Porkasaurus bill.  Fortunately, Byron York uncovered the scam:

The provision, which attracted virtually no attention in the debate over the 1,073-page stimulus bill, creates something called the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board — the RAT Board, as it’s known by the few insiders who are aware of it. The board would oversee the in-house watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose job is to independently investigate allegations of wrongdoing at various federal agencies, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.

In the name of accountability and transparency [heh!], Congress has given the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.” If the inspector general doesn’t want to follow the wishes of the RAT Board, he’ll have to write a report explaining his decision to the board, as well as to the head of his agency (from whom he is supposedly independent) and to Congress. In the end, a determined inspector general can probably get his way, but only after jumping through bureaucratic hoops that will inevitably make him hesitate to go forward.

Why would Obama want something in his very first legislative initiative that would politicize the oversight function, thereby clouding transparency?  After all, as York points out, the “conduct or refrain from conducting” language means the RAT board, whose chairman will be appointed by the president (Natch!), will be able to “reach deep inside a federal agency and tell an inspector general to lay off some particularly sensitive subject. Or, conversely, it can tell the inspector general to go after a tempting political target.”

So again, why would Pres. Transparency want such a thing as a RAT Board?  Maybe he didn’t read the 1.073 pages; maybe he just didn’t know.  Not on your life!  York asked a Dem Congressman about it and was told the RAT Board was “something the Obama administration wanted included in this bill.”

We await the outrage from the Left, which we know is terribly concerned about presidential manipulation of due process.

No Comments yet »

G

rassroots protests against the Rhambama stealth stimulus, like this one in Arizona yesterday, are breaking out all over – Denver, Seattle, Overland Park KS.

This is good stuff – telegenic as all get-out, hard for the media to ignore, and excellent point-making.  Michelle Malkin’s been beating this drum hard (with lots more photos!), and needs more drum-bangers.  Talk radio hosts, GOP electeds and staffers, bloggers, citizens:  Can you organize a protest like this in your town?

And can you do it again next week and the week after?

The best way to save America from Obama’s brand of European Democratic Socialism is to win big in 2010, and make him a one-termer in 2012.  This sort of protest early on, and continuing, and growing, is a critical first step in executing that plan.

5 Comments »

T

he quietest scandal in Washington continues – Rahmbama’s outrageous effort to fold the 2010 U.S. Census into the White House.  Inquiring minds in the mainly marginalized media – if there were any – would be asking what would be gained from such a move, but few are questioning the move because they know the answer:  Rahmbama wants to turn the Census into crass Chicago ward politics for the long-term benefit of the Dems.

Former Census Director Bruce Chapman continues to update the situation at Discovery Blog, and you can tell he’s getting nervous.  After relaying the upcoming pressure points – hearings on the nominees for Commerce Sec. #3, Deputy Sec. and Census Director – Chapman pleads:

Meanwhile, the danger for Republicans is that they merely will vent and gesture when the confirmation and oversight hearings come. If they don’t prepare themselves they are likely to be rendered ineffectual in the end. To put it bluntly, the Senate and House staffs need to be doing their homework now. (Emphasis in original)

Chapman is a believer in the science of statistics and believes it should be applied purely to the Census, without the very real threat of political influence that could come from over-sampling and modeling. He laments the silence of other scientists on the controversy:

Liberal Democrats and their allies in the media and the sciences have been lamentably quiet about this subject since it surfaced two weeks ago. There hasn’t been a peep out of the National Academy of Sciences that I have heard. (I’ll be happy to be shown that there has been one if I have missed it.) Some of these folks have strong opinions–which they present as facts–on other matters bearing on science policy, but they apparently have trouble standing up for the scientific discipline of statistics when it is being given a political arm-twist.

The NY Times finally got around to covering the story today, presenting it as all rather ho-hum, despite a pretty clear statement of the politics at play:

While most Americans do not think much about the census, it looms large in the lives of the nation’s political leaders, with the next decennial nose-count due next year. The constitutionally mandated “enumeration” determines how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives, and helps to determine where the district lines are drawn within each state. It will also shift billions upon billions of federal dollars over the next decade from some parts of the country to others because of population-driven financing formulas.

For years, the story points out, Dems have been trying to force the Census away from actual counts, fearing that the poor and minority populations are under-counted. The Supreme Court ruled against their position 5-4 in 1999, saying that under the current law, the Census cannot use sampling techniques to reapportion House seats from one state to another.

Karl Rove points out that policy can do that, anyway, citing the Clinton-run 2000 Census when missionary counts from overseas were not ascribed to their states, which made a difference in the assignment of House seats in North Carolina and Utah.

Still, the Census could use modeling to draw district lines within states and to determine which districts get more money.

Chapman argues that the problems with undersampling the poor are overstated, thanks to hard work by the science-driven statisticians at the Bureau, and recommends that Congress consider making it a separate bureau, away from the influence of both the Sec. of Commerce and the White House.

Fat chance Rahmbama will consider that option.

No Comments yet »

Ooh-wee!  The Watcher of Weasels is really in a snit this week … and it just might have been all the snitty entries submitted by the Watcher’s Council that did it.  It seems the current entries into this weekly review of blogatory excellence are a sour bunch.  Trillion-dollar stick-ups will do that to you … especially if you’re not the sticker-upper. Quoth the Weasel:

Now that our government has signed the biggest fraud into law the officials that some people elected into office have left the country on European junkets. Meanwhile the rug was pulled out from under the stock market and liars such as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pat themselves on the back for a scam well done.

Now the President is on the stump targeting “predatory lenders”, seeking to blame them for the problems caused by the elected crooks in Congress (that means you Barney). Worse, President Obama is including a new scheme to prop up people that should have never received home loans in the first place. It seems that the people that played by the rules, the real victims of this national fraud, will continue to take it on the chin; paying their mortgages as their home values decrease below the cost of the loan. No longer are Americans supposed to expect that their homes will be a long term investment. Instead it is a commodity, used by banks for speculation and then nationalized by the very same government that ushered in the policies that allowed mandated everyone to play fast and free with loans.

Whatever happened to just holding onto your house until the value builds back up?  Incredible Wife and I have been through that drill before, and we’ll be holding onto our current house for quite a while. (God willing.)

Anyway, here are the exceptionally sweet posts that helped get the Watcher in such a sour mood:

Council Submissions

• The Razor - Conversation with a Marine
• Cheat-Seeking Missiles - MSM Yawns As NY Muslim Beheads Wife
• Mere Rhetoric - Figures: Obama’s List Of Pre-Screened Questioners Emerges One Day After Media Celebrations Of How Obama Doesn’t Pre-Screen Questioners
• The Glittering Eye - Stacking the Deck
• Rhymes With Right - A Double Standard
• Soccer Dad - What could be worse than Hamas?
• Right Truth - Unwillingness of the good to serve evil
• Joshuapundit - Obama’s Model – And No, It’s Not FDR
• The Provocateur - A Battle For Small Government in Cheboygan County, Mi.

Non-Council Submissions

• Submitted By: The Razor – Brian Doherty, Reasononline - Libertarianism in an Age of Economic Crisis
• Submitted By: Cheat-Seeking Missiles – Discovery Blog - Gregg Withdrawal Increases Census Stakes
• Submitted By: Mere Rhetoric – Counterterrorism Blog - Iran’s New Satellites: The Pasdaran in Space
• Submitted By: The Glittering Eye – American Digest - A House Divided A Century and a Half Later: What Lincoln Would Say Were He Speaking Today
• Submitted By: Rhymes With Right – NewsBusters - Left-Wing Radio Host Mike Malloy: Republicans are ‘Domestic Terrorists’
• Submitted By: Soccer Dad – Doug Ross’s Journal - Star Trek: The Stimulus Doomsday Machine
• Submitted By: Right Truth – Truthout - Stop Baby Boomer Bashing: Protect Social Security and Medicare
• Submitted By: Joshuapundit – Bat Yeor in the NRO - Geert Wilders and the Fight for Europe
• Submitted By: The Provocateur – The New Ledger - Deconstructing Paul Krugman

See, there’s so much more to worry about than the pending economic conflagration!  We Council members will take our Paxils and plod through this stuff, voting tomorrow evening so the Watcher can tally up the votes and post the winners Friday.  You can see them here.

Hey, Watcher!  I’m running a bit short of anti-depressants.  Can you email me a few?

1 Comment »

T

he Cerritos Auto Square, self-billed as the world’s largest auto square – 26 brands in 15 dealerships – is a festival of capitalism, and traditionally a huge generator of sales tax revenues for the SoCal city of Cerritos, which sports a spiffy arts center as a result.  So what’s it doing in the stimulus package?

But there it is:

Replacement of Auto Square Signage: upgrade of existing Cerritos Auto Square full-color display signage with LED technology; estimated 60% reduction in energy usage

Project Cost: $500,000.00 – 4 jobs – Energy Program

Huh?  I thought this was some sort of private business that was responsible for its own signs.  Will the auto square reimburse the Feds (and us) out of its energy savings?  What do you suppose the next “auto square” down the freeway thinks of having Uncle Sambama buying a new sign for the competitor up the road?

Beloved readers in Iowa, Pennsylvania and 47 other states: How excited are you that part of your income tax will go towards putting up a half-million dollar sign on what’s already supposedly the world’s largest auto square?  Beloved readers in California:  How about you?  Do you feel like I do that the existing sign is just fine with us taxpayers and that four short-term, part-time jobs installing a new sign shouldn’t count towards the four million jobs Obama promises?

Let’s see here … I wonder who represents Cerritos?  Could it be a Dem?  You betcha! But remember – it’s a stimulus bill, not a pork bill.

For lists of stimulus abominations in your own back yard, check out Stimulus Watch.

Hat-tip:  Jim

No Comments yet »