Start Spreadin’ the Myth…

It seems that the democrats have discovered a new way to bash President Bush. On Iraq, they said President Bush was too unilateral. On North Korea they say that he is too multi-lateral. Now these crazed, hypocritical liberals are trying to claim President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative as their own. Throughout the 1980’s, these same liberlas ridiculed Ronald Reagan by calling his program “star wars,”  and refused to fund the SDI program. They mocked Reagan and insisted that Reagan, George HW Bush, and George W. Bush discontinue the program. Falsely claiming that Bill Clinton was successful in North Korea, these liberals have now “re-discovered” the SDI. Please, we are not that stupid. It’s just the liberals trying to spread their latest myth.

The following are the words of President Ronald Reagan.

Perish The Thought

 Gull at Perish The Thought has it “goin’ on.” This analysis hits the mark. Read the entire post.

Our economy is booming.
The job market is the lowest it has been in years.
National Debt has been reduced.
There is progress in the fight against terrorism.
Gas prices are way down.
Our nation is more secure than it has ever been.

What’s gone wrong?

Two fundamental, precipitating phenomena, in my humble opinion:

1) The Bush Derangement Syndrome has finally seeped through to middle-America.

While liberal media and talking heads have harped headlines and sound-bytes on the foibles of Foley-gate and Abramoff-gate (nevermind that these gates swing both ways), the party of hype and histrionics has dominated the media and the Internet. “Blame Bush” has also been the undertone from both sides of the aisle.

Can Bush awaken the nation during the next three weeks?

Yes, if he is allowed to focus on issues and rattle a few cages.

2) Americans FEEL secure. With security comes complacency. With complacency, comes low voter turn-out.

Low voter turn-out means that hype and histrionics will prevail.

Vote for Mike Dewine.

Coulter vs. Carter on North Korea

The mystifying news from North Korea this week brought the Clinton apologists in droves to defend the Clinton record with Kim Jung Il. Whether it was Sandy Burglar, Bill Richardson, or Jimmy Carter, team “re-write history” made themselves available to say that Clinton’s eight year record with North Korea was spotless. It’s too bad for team Clinton that even their liberal buddies at the New York Times can’t support their claims this time.

Team Clinton repeatedly cites the “agreed framework” as the peace deal of the century. Too bad it obviously didn’t hold at all. Just ask Ann Coulter and the New York Times (since when do they agree on anything…).

Under the terms of the “agreed framework,” we gave North Korea all sorts of bribes — more than $5 billion worth of oil, two nuclear reactors and lots of high technology. In return, they took the bribes and kept building nukes. This wasn’t difficult, inasmuch as the 1994 deal permitted the North Koreans to evade weapons inspectors for the next five years.
Yes, you read that right: North Korea promised not to develop nukes, and we showed how much we trusted them by agreeing to no weapons inspections for five years.
The famed “allies,” whom liberals claim they are so interested in pleasing, went ballistic at this cave-in to North Korea. Japan and South Korea — actual allies, unlike France and Germany — were furious. Even Hans Blix thought we were being patsies.
If you need any more evidence that it was a rotten deal, The New York Times hailed it as “a resounding triumph.”
At the time, people like William Safire were screaming from the rooftops that allowing North Korea to escape weapons inspections for five years would “preclude a pre-emptive strike by us if North Korea, in the next U.S. president’s administration, breaks its agreement to freeze additional bomb-making.”
And then on Oct. 17, 2002 — under a new administration, you’ll note — The New York Times reported on the front page, so you couldn’t have missed it: “Confronted by new American intelligence, North Korea has admitted that it has been conducting a major clandestine nuclear weapons development program for the past several years.”
So when it comes to North Korea, I believe the Democrats might want to maintain a discreet silence, lest anyone ask, “Hey, did you guys do anything with North Korea?”
But by Richardson’s lights, the only reason Kim Jong Il is testing nukes is because Bush called him evil. He said, “When you call him axis of evil or a tyrant, you know, he just goes crazy.” This is the sort of idiocy you expect to hear from an illiterate like Keith Olbermann, not someone who might know people who read newspapers.

While notable quack Jimmy Carter vigorously proposes one on one talk, Condoleezza Rice destroys that theory.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Tuesday defended the Bush administration’s refusal to hold bilateral talks with North Korea in the face of Pyongyang’s claim of a successful nuclear test.
In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Rice said having direct negotiations with North Korea over its nuclear program, instead of negotiating in concert with its neighbors, would not be the right approach because the United States has less leverage to ensure the communist regime lives up to its agreements.
“The United States tried direct dialogue with the North Koreans in the ’90s, and that resulted in the North Koreans signing onto agreements that they then didn’t keep,” she said.

Regardless of Jimmy Carter’s pale statement defending the Clinton administration, this is just another failure of Clinton, Albright and Company that was left for the Bush administration. Maybe someone will make the movie that Rush suggested, “The Path to 10-8.”

Liberal Definition of Constitutional Free Speech

It is so intertesting to notice the definition of free speech to modern leftists: liberal free speech is the only free speech protected under the constitution, and allowable under all circumstances. A couple of recent examples highlight this point.

Katie Couric’s staff at the CBS Evening News nearly revolted over a segment involving Brian Rohrbough who addressed the removal of all spirituality from the public schools. It’s hilarious to note that the staff was objecting to Mr. Rohrbough’s words that were expressed in Katie’s new “free speech” segment. The producer of the Evening News described the concerns as “protests” against the words and views expressed by Mr. Rohrbough. At least Katie permitted the words to be spoken, but the entire episode reflects on the liberal media and their very narrow definition of free speech.

Peggy Noonan has an extensive piece in the Wall Street Journal detailing many recent examples of liberal intolerance of free speech.

Soon after, at Madison Square Garden, Barbra Streisand, began her latest farewell tour with what friends who were there tell me was a moving, beautiful concert. She was in great form and brought the audience together in appreciation of her great ballads, which are part of the aural tapestry of our lives. And then . . . the moment. Suddenly she decided to bang away on politics. Fine, she’s a Democrat, Bush is bad. But midway through the bangaway a man in the audience called out. Most could not hear him, but everyone seems to agree he at least said, “What is this, a fund-raiser?”