"We Support the Troops, We Just Think They're Idiots"

When the far left discusses the War on Terror (and yes boys and girls, Iraq is one front in the War on Terror) they've learned to repeat the phrase, "We support the troops, but not the War." It's a nice thing for them to say; I'm sure our soldiers appreciate not being called baby killers as regularly as they were during Vietnam.

Of course, we all know that phrase is relatively hollow and meaningless. One might ask, "How can you support the troops, if you believe they volunteered to fight in an immoral war of imperialism/ecological destruction/oil greed?" One might ask, "How can you support the troops when you refer to the terrorists whom they are fighting as 'minutemen'?"

But what is particularly galling is when they openly deride the troops and then are applauded for it. Today over at the Daily Kos the top liberal blog in America, someone going by the name of "MDpatriot" posted the following:

"The biggest mistake of 2000 was when Al Gore nominated the slimy Lieberman to run as VP. Right away it looked suspicious when Lieberman failed to even commit to the run, continuing his Senate bid for something to fall back on.
Then he essentially single-handedly gave away the recount with his sucking up and automatic acceptance of "military" votes as if some know-nothing enlistees in the armed forces somehow were exempt from the laws! Several hundred "late" votes were accepted from overseas, more than enough to throw the election to shrubby, Lieberman's crony even then.
2004 led to Loser Lieberman attacking the courageous Howard Dean, the first national politician to get some momentum as he pointed out Bush's disastrous failures in Iraq and elsewhere. But there was Joementum, working for his kissing buddy Bush by attacking Dean constantly."

Now, I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure that calling our brave men and women "know-nothing enlistees" is very supportive. How did the other folks over at Kos react? 20 people "recommended" the post, and was followed up with a comment entitled "Hear, Hear."

"At the Daily Kos, we support the troops, even though they're stupid. What we do not support is American contractors in Iraq. We hope they die, screw them!"

More Inconvenient Truths

More climate data you won't find in the New York Times, appears in the June 13 issue of Geophysical Research Letters (a peer reviewed publication of the American Geophysical Union) and it's not good news for "An Inconvenient Truth" (which apparently was also peerreviewed, but by Al Gore's peers--pot smoking hippies).

Apparently "An Inconvenient Truth" contends that a rise in human caused global temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions are currently melting the Greenland Ice Sheet and we're going to need to start building dikes aroundManhattan less we suffer an invasion of Nordic ice water.

As the study says:

"An important question is to what extent can the current (1995-2005) temperature increase in Greenland coastal regions be interpreted as evidence of man-induced global warming? Although there has been a considerable temperature increase during the last decade (1995 to 2005) a similar increase and at a faster rate occurred during the early part of the 20th century (1920 to 1930) when carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases could not be a cause. The Greenland warming of 1920 to 1930 demonstrates that a high concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not a necessary condition for period of warming to arise. The observed 1995-2005 temperature increase seems to be within a natural variability of Greenland climate. A general increase in solar activity [Scafettaand West, 2006] since 1990s can be a contributing factor as well as the sea surface temperature changes of tropical ocean [Hoerling et al., 2001]."

An Inconvenient Truth

While "human caused global warming" has led politicians, academics, and the media to fall over one another proclaiming the impending doom of the human race, the Canada Free Press has published a column noting a number of actual climate experts who view Al Gore as, "An embarassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

It is telling the manner in which the global warming "debate" going on in our country resembles the quality of debate on our college campuses. The elites are in universal agreement (in this case that humans are the cause of a very dangerous global warming), and as such provide the general public with only half of the information. Subsequently anyone daring to dissent from the politically correct position is ridiculed as "flat earthers" or simply ignored.

Beelzebul is Buying Ice Skates

Hell has clearly frozen over. A San Fransisco judge just threw out the city's ban on handguns. The ban, approved by 58% of voters via referendum in November, outlawed possession of handguns by all city residents except law enforcement officers and others who need guns for professional purposes. It also would have forbidden the manufacture, sale and distribution of guns and ammunition in San Francisco.

Accuracy in Academia

The Counterweight gets a mention in Accuracy in Academia's June issue of Campus Report

Guns Don't Kill People; Not Having Guns Kills People

Firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens is not only a constitutional right, but it's also good public policy. A report by John Barnes of the Washington Policy Center shows that legal gun ownership actually prevents crime--a finding echoed by John Lott in his seminal book on the subject: More Guns Less Crime. That's of course, because disarming citizens makes them targets for criminals, whereas allowing them to defend themselves can stop crimes in process, and often will deter future crime.

Barnes notes:

"In 1997 Britain banned handguns, and between 1998 and 2003 gun crimes doubled. According the British Home Office, between 1997 and 2001 homicides increased by 19% and violent crime increased by 26%, while in the U.S. those same crimes fell by 12%. Between 2000 and 2001, robbery increased by 28% in Britain but only 4% in the U.S. Domestic burglary increased by 7% in Britain, but only 3% in the U.S.

In 1996 Australia enacted sweeping gun control laws. In the six years following, violent crime rates rose by 32%. Canada isn’t faring well under its stringent gun control laws. Today Canada’s violent crime rate is more than double that of the U.S.

The fact that during this time right-to-carry laws were expanding in the U.S. makes these statistics all the more telling. Now 40 states issue permits for individuals to carry guns. Violent crime rates are steadily declining in the U.S. Research—and common sense—show the “right-to-carry” by honest citizens deters crimes against persons and property."

Screw the Rich!

Larry Kudlow explains why class warfare rules and economic growth sucks.

http://author.nationalreview.com/latest/?q=MjE0OA==

One Down...

Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is dead. I wonder if they'll have his 72 virgins in hell

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/08/D8I3VFVO3.html