Friday, March 30, 2007



The lies and nasty rhetoric that come from a moonbat with a column

(Stay tuned: we'll be recording a webcast analyzing this vile little column in the next day or two.)

Discussing an ugly war on a lovely day
Steve Lopez
March 30, 2007

We sat under a tree in Patrick Briggs' frontyard in Pasadena on Thursday, next to a row of pansies, on a spring day so lovely it seemed strange to talk about war.

It's called hateful obsession, Steve. Note here, readers of Jimmy Z's EXTRA: Lopez and Briggs are blowing a perfectly beautiful day making themselves miserable. They can't enjoy the lovely weather - hell no! "Let's talk about how we hate Bush and all that!"

"Yeah, and how he lied and stuff!"

"Yeah! Heh-heh! And how war is bad and stuff!" They just couldn't wait to be miserable. That's what leftwingers do - they like to be angry and miserable.

"It's like the 'The Americanization of Emily,' " said Briggs, recalling a character in the 1964 movie who was living the good life while others died in World War II.

I had heard about the small antiwar rallies Briggs occasionally stages at Hill and Orange Grove and stopped by to meet him. He's the guy who had a run-in with Pasadena City Hall in 2004, when officials ordered him to take down a banner hanging over his front door because it was too big.

It said: "War Starts With W. Bush Lied; People Died."

This cracks me up. This nasty, ignorant old fool with his meaningless, dishonest bombast - "Bush Lied, People Died" - is the best he can do? We're fighting a war for the very existence of freedom in the world, and this Briggs twit boils his political view into a bumper sticker-ism of such trite proportion? A lowest-common denominator thinker on the left; that's a big surprise.

Briggs: Look pal, there was no LIE. You're the one LYING. Read THIS, and tell me how you are going to go about refuting it. You too, Lopez. Read it and refute it. I freakin' DARE you. You won't though - you are all too comfortable, relaxing behind your desk at the Lost Angeles Times, hiding out with the moonbat, leftwing mass media, pushing your poison while the world faces the very real danger of Islamo-Fascism - you braindead fools. Holy mackerel.

Briggs, a database analyst, sued the city and won. These days, though, he and his wife, Maddie Gavel, who writes advertising copy, have a different sign up. This one says:

"Those Who Exchange Freedom for Security Deserve Neither and Ultimately Lose Both."

Ah, the perfect anti-American couple, Patrick and Maddie, with another sign now, advertising their idiocy for all the world to see. If we don't fight the war; if we don't WIN this war, there won't be any freedom to worry about. Don't these two realize they'd be among the first cretins to have their heads chopped off?

I can see them now: "Oh, we are all about live and let live, Mr. Muslim. You don't have to worry about us." *CHOP! . . . CHOP!*

Not much subtlety there, but the disaster in Iraq and continued bickering in Washington cry out for blunt declarations.

Disaster? As the President's plan is showing real signs of progress, you dare to tell your readers it's all a disaster? This is blatant lying. This is the best you can do, with your anti-war view, is to lie? And YOU are best the Times can find to write a column? Bah! You're a phoney, Lopez!

Briggs has spoken out against the war from the beginning, a voice of reason amid the cheerleading from Washington and the mainstream media.

Hmmm... voice of reason? If all he's got is "Bush Lied People Died" then he's not very reasonable; hell, he's not even a voice of truth.

Briggs, a member of All Saints Church, attended large rallies in the war's early days, but he didn't appreciate the extremists who insisted the U.S. was evil and other countries could do no wrong. "That's no different from what Bush does," he says.

Though he aggressively opposed the war, Briggs recognized the complexities of history in the Middle East. He wanted to rally for economic and diplomatic leadership, not tribunals.

Briggs should get his ass OVER THERE and start this dialog with the terrorists. That's gonna work. *L*

He said it doesn't matter whether 200 people or only five show up at the rallies he helps organize. In the time he's been out there, the tide has turned, with polls showing that six out of 10 Americans favor a pullout from Iraq by next year.

Thanks to dishonest reporting by this Lost Angeles Times and the rest of the mainstream leftwing media. The fact is, and this is an undeniable fact - if the US begins succeeding and moving FORWARD (something you and the democrats in DC cannot allow to happen!), America's citizens WILL BE behind the President. No question about it.

I told Briggs that one of the things I'm angriest about [Your very first big mistake, Lopez, is getting emotional about an issue like this war. Your anger serves no purpose.] is that staying in Iraq guarantees continued carnage, and leaving could mean even more. It would be hard to walk away from a mess we created by having gone it alone when trusted allies and common sense warned against.

Lopez: You should be thankful that the 'carnage' is as little as it is. You should be on your knees thanking God that the numbers of dead are so minimal - not tolerable, minimal. Get it right, don't lie about what I've said when and if you respond.

"It's a hard thing to do," Briggs said, "but it's hard to ask our troops to continue to get killed."

Briggs: You know nothing of our troops. You are disgusting! You act as if the troops are going unwillingly. You have no idea do you! Amazing! You pipe up with such horrible ignorance! Our troops are willing. Our troops are only dismayed by the American left, who does not want to let our troops do what they are there to do - WIN THE *!@?*! WAR!

To my readers, the following is not Briggs, but Lopez; you can hear the echos within his empty head as he writes this kind of hateful copy for his mindless column:

What's even harder is to hear Bush talk about honoring our troops, as he frequently does, or to suggest that others do not. No one has done greater dishonor to our troops than President Bush, who didn't hesitate to send soldiers into battle without a clear signal to them or the American public as to the reason. Now he's threatening to veto a bill passed by the Senate on Thursday that ties war funding to a commitment to withdraw troops by 2008.

As well he should - if for nothing else but all of the democrat pork added to it in order to get enough votes to pass it. You are quite nearly completely ignorant!

We know that critics of the administration have been smeared, that soldiers have been asked to risk their lives without benefit of the best armor available, that wounded soldiers have come home to scandalously inadequate medical facilities. And yet, here was Bush on Wednesday: "If Congress fails to pass a bill to fund our troops on the front lines, the American people will know who to hold responsible."

Which is totally, completely and 100% correct. The American people need to know that you have been LYING all this time, and that we need to win this war. We must win this war, we have no choice.

Yes, Patrick Briggs told me, he too had bristled at that quote.

A warm breeze kicked through the camphor trees and stone pines at Loma Vista and Hamilton. In Iraq, the death toll topped 130 on Thursday, one of the deadliest days in years.

I hope W continues to make mind-numbed left-bots like Briggs bristle. I looked up Briggs on the internet; I googled he and his goofy Maddie and found out that they are not at all the middle of the roaders that Lopez would like you to believe. They're involved in far left anti-war anti-American activity. They are the haters in this little passion play. Briggs and his wife are active within Pasadena Progressives, a far left anti-Bush (it all comes down to hating the President for these people) group who get together and watch leftist movies and talk about how evil America is.

What a disgusting group of 'Americans.' This is yet another reason I ended my subscription to the Lost Angeles Times a decade ago.



Transcribed from her radio program

What Kind Of Creeps Would Burn
In Effigy A U.S. Soldier?

March 28, 2007 on 12:54 pm

I got an e-mail recently which just about made me throw up. I don’t throw up easily. I like to keep what’s inside of me there, unless it’s supposed to leave, but this pretty much almost put me over the edge, because my baby’s over there.This is from Kathleen. She says:

I hope you inform your listeners about the anti-war protestors in Portland who burned in effigy a United States soldier. I can’t even find the words that would be printable to describe how I feel.

Well, I have the words, but let me finish her letter:

A car was allowed to pass through a checkpoint in Iraq, because the car had two children in the back seat. The adults got by the checkpoint, left the car, and blew it up, with the children in it.

Now, I realize in my position, I need to behave appropriately as a role model, but I am so enraged that most of America is so damned “wussy-weak” that you people actually allowed protestors in Portland to burn in effigy a US soldier, with not a greater counter-demonstration. How could you do that??

Let me just explain what kind of bugs, what kind of animals, what kind of creeps would burn in effigy a US soldier? Why aren’t they burning in effigy a Muslim terrorist? How about burning in effigy a Muslim terrorist who hides behind civilians, so that when American or international forces have to deal with them, they allow civilians to be killed, and then say, “See? America’s bad!” How about burning in effigy a Muslim terrorist who uses children to get through a checkpoint, because they know Americans won’t stop or fire on a car with kids, and then they blow the children up as part of a car bomb?

Instead, we have bugs in this country like Jane Fonda, Rosie O’Donnell, Martin Sheen, Bill Maher, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon….the list goes on and on and on in Congress and all over the United States. You’ve got people blowing up their own people praying, shopping, going to school? These Muslim terrorists are murdering people by the scores every day, and we have people in the United States burning in effigy a US soldier? What in the hell has happened to this country, that we quietly stand by and just go “eh.”

And another thing….I’m a little tired of CAIR - the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They spend their time, it would appear to me, trying to silence radio, television and print who make any comments about Islam, Muslims, Mohammed - anything - so that everybody will be intimidated into silence. Why? Well I don’t think they understand that in this country, we’re entitled to opinions. I know in totalitarian theocracies, they’re not entitled to opinions except those approved by the state - they’re beheaded. I would like to see CAIR mobilize every Muslim in the world to close in on the Middle East and squash the bugs who blow up innocent people praying, shopping, going to school, sleeping in their beds. That’s what I want CAIR to spend its time and money on. I hear rumors that CAIR’s money goes to terrorism things - I don’t have any facts on that - I just hear the rumors. But still, the best way to have good relationships with America is to have all the Muslims in the world stop the terrorists. I am told that the terrorism faction of Islam is very small, so I think that this would be an easy thing for them to do. 98% are pro-peace, pro-love, pro-freedom - go for it! Stop the bugs, so that we don’t have to. Stop the people who blow up children for power. Stop the people who blow up the police, the people who clean in the street, and mothers holding their babies. That’s what I want to see CAIR do, instead of intimidating talk show hosts all over America. I’m bored with that. I don’t know if anybody else is, but I’m bored with that. Scaring people out of speech?

So, it’s not that I think the protestors in Portland who burned in effigy a US soldier shouldn’t have speech rights, but this is so ignorant, so stupid, so off the mark that it should be intolerable to some extent. I know we allow Nazis to parade in the streets, because we’re supposed to have free speech - I understand that. But what I don’t get is that there wasn’t an equal and opposite protest. It’s the bad guys who have the giblets, the energy and the will, and if the good guys don’t get into gear and stop the bad guys - if the good Muslims don’t stop the bad Muslims, if the good Americans don’t stop the bad Americans - we’re going to lose the world and lose our country, and lose freedom in the world, because we’re pretty much the center of it.

Burning in effigy a US soldier. Mind you, our young men and women volunteer to live under disgusting conditions, and be paid almost nothing - they have to buy their own freaking uniforms to go into training and into battle — they come back maimed or dead, changed forever, to free people to create a democracy. And there are people in this country who dare to sneer at that? I’m a proud mother of an American soldier. My boy Is over there risking his life with a bunch of other people’s boys and daughters to stop people from blowing up children, blowing up worshippers in a mosque, blowing up people in their villages and in their markets - that’s what our children are doing. And for all you morons and creeps and bugs who burned in effigy a US soldier - what are your children doing that’s of any value whatsoever?

So I’m making a challenge. I want all you decent people who have a grip on reality to get out of your comfortable homes and stand up against this. Come out with your banners, come out with your music, come out with your flags. I want to see Patriot Guard, Hell’s Angels, everybody out there on their bikes…whoever. I mean, Rosie O’Donnell on “The View” makes a comment that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who said he was responsible for beheading Mr. Pearl, who was responsible for 9/11 and all this stuff, she had the nerve to go on her show, using her vast understanding of counterterrorism operations and in-depth knowledge, to cast doubts on his confession, when there is information confirming everything he said from a number of sources. Why is her knee-jerk thing that we’re hurting somebody? Does she realize that this guy killed thousands and she’s protecting him? Does she not realize that, as a lesbian, she’d be one of the first ones eliminated by these people? They’re not very pro-gay rights! Even that doesn’t stop her! And I understand somebody else is giving her yet another TV show. Soon, there’s going to be nothing on television, in the newspapers, because what is it? What is the percentage of people in this country who can’t and don’t read?

I’m done. I’m done. I don’t really care to take time on my radio show to talk “politics.” I don’t see this as politics. I call this “survival of America.” This is way past politics. I don’t really give a damn if it’s a Democrat or a Republican who gets into office as long as they will protect the United States….with force, if necessary. Gosh darn, we had these kind of morons out there, even in World War II, but they crossed the line, and you have to let them know they crossed the line. Bringing death to our American soldiers who volunteer to protect this country and everybody in it for the right to even be a moron - there has to be a line. I am the proud mother of a deployed American paratrooper. Hoo-ah! And I spit on people who use kids as shields, and I spit on people who burn US soldiers in effigy. I spit on you both.

Thursday, March 29, 2007


. . . and nails a college professor

I love this story - some knucklehead college professor (teaching a computer class!) professed his desire to hang President Bush, and a disgusted student called Rush Limbaugh to talk about what he might do. Though Rush gave him some suggestions, Rush also told the student that he would not have to do anything - that the Secret Service was probably already on it because they listen to his show. Sure enough, the Secret Service called Limbaugh and the kid, and no doubt either have had or will have a little talk with the stupid moonbat leftwing computer professor. Dig:

RUSH TRANSCRIPT: Do you remember the call we got on Tuesday from Ron in Port Huron, Michigan? This was the student at a university or college there whose computer class professor said to him that if he had the power he would assassinate or kill President Bush, and Ron wanted to know what I thought he should do about it. I said, "Well, first thing is you're not going to have to do much because you're going to be hearing from the Secret Service." When the Secret Service hears about stuff like this, they're very interested. But we went on to discuss it and he was going to write a letter to the dean and say, "Look, this is not what I paid tuition to come here for, and this is reflecting poorly on the school," and I urged him to copy the professor as well. I got this note from him last night.

Dear Rush,

I just got on my friend's computer. (She's a 24/7 member. I'm soon going to be.) I spoke with you on Tuesday about my instructor. Needless to say, the Secret Service met with me today. I don't think my professor will be professing his beliefs anymore. [Little smiley signal here] Thank you so much for your time yesterday. You really are a strong influence in my life.


If you have any questions about anything, please contact me.

He gives me his number here to get a hold of him. So I knew this was going to happen. The Secret Service got hold of him. There's a reason I knew it was going to happen is because they called us, and they wanted a tape of the segment and so forth. I know they're out there monitoring this program. It has a lot of big fans out there in the Secret Service. I don't know anything more than that. But I just know the Secret Service does not take this stuff lightly.


Wait, she's a democrat. Same thing.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT: Here's the Dianne Feinstein story, and this is from a website that is in suburban San Francisco. It actually has not been picked up by the Drive-By Media yet, which is fascinating in and of itself. Peter Byrne writes the story.

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein. As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp."

"Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she couldn't take the heat generated by this newspaper's exposé of her ethics, or was her work on the subcommittee finished? Because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapon manufacturing firms in late 2005. Now, the military construction appropriations subcommittee is not only in charge of supervising military construction, it also oversees quality-of-life issues for veterans, which includes building housing for military families and operating hospitals and clinics for wounded soldiers. Perhaps Feinstein is trying to dissociate herself from the military construction appropriations subcommittee incredible failure to provide decent medical care for wounded soldiers. Two years ago, before the Washington Post became belatedly involved, the online magazine exposed the horrors of deficient medical care for Iraq war veterans. While leading the military construction appropriation subcommittee, Dianne Feinstein had ample warning of the medical care meltdown, but she was not proactive on Veterans Affairs. Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problem for surfacing in the media and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan."

Now, Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters also references this story today, and his take on this is right on the money. "The new Congress has barely made it past its start before a new face has been put on lobbyist influence. Dianne Feinstein, senior senator from California, has resigned her leadership position on a subcommittee which put billions of dollars into her family business. This is culture of corruption Democrat style." Now, wasn't it the Democrats who insisted that the Republicans jumped into bed with lobbyists and special interests? Now we have a senior Democrat who made sure that over a billion dollars of federal money got routed through her own checkbook with her husband as proxy. When can we expect to see a Democrat investigation into this brand of corruption?

Hint: We won't, folks.

"During the 2006 election, Feinstein's party made a lot of hay out of none competitive contracting by the government. Democrats railed about Halliburton, even though Halliburton won 95% of its contract dollars by full and open competition. Now we see that Feinstein herself had no problem with noncompetitive practices as long as it meant stuffing her own pockets with taxpayer money. Take a look at the percentages. I'll go through those here in just a second.] In 2005, CB Richard Ellis, one of the companies, made $100 million in federal contracts, only half of which had been part of full and open competitive building. As of December 2006, according to SEC filings and, three corporations in which Feinstein's husband's financial entities own a total of $1 billion in stock, won considerable favor from the budgets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

"Here are the three. Boston Scientific Corporation, $17.8 million for medical equipment and supplies. 85% of contracts awarded without benefit of competition. Kinetic Concepts, Incorporated, $12 million, medical equipment and supplies, 28% noncompetitively awarded. CB Richard Ellis, the Blum controlled international real estate firm holds congressionally funded contracts to lease office space to the Department of Veterans Affairs. It's also involved in redeveloping military bases turned over to the private sector." This is "Culture of Corruption Democrat Style." So the bottom line here to the question is, the Democrats are not going to shut down the Navy.

Look at Murtha. Murtha has enriched himself and who knows how many people in his own district, via the Department of Defense budget and various projects and so forth. The military exists for that purpose as far as the Democrats are concerned. As far as Feinstein is concerned, she's resigned MILCON for whatever reason, but you won't hear much about this. There's a clear double standard. The Democrats are simply incapable of "corruption," folks. They're simply incapable of it. If anybody got on this path in an elected official, you would see the Democrat Party set out to destroy that person like the Clinton, Inc. bunch tried to destroy Ken Starr.

• Fred Thompson on Fred Thompson


What do YOU think?
Comments encouraged!

Humor: The President Shows
His Keen Sense of Humor

(That which the democrats do NOT have!)

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

• AudioPhiles™ - Jimmy Z


Coming up this Saturday, A very important Hi Def LIVE!
Click HERE for details, Part 1

State of the Blog, Political Round Up
Click HERE for Part 2

Dream Team for '08 and More
Click HERE for Part 3

Tuesday, March 27, 2007


Pray for Tony Snow & Family . . .

His cancer has spread to his liver.


Arnold, Rush Battle for Republican Party's Soul
By Kevin Hassett

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- Last week, two titans of American popular culture had a dustup. It was Arnold versus Rush for the heavyweight championship.

Much of the news coverage focused on the outsized personalities of the two, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh. But the content of their exchange was surprisingly important. Indeed, this squabble may well receive extensive treatment in the history books.

The Republican Party is at a historical crossroads. If you are Republican, the odds are you're ideologically either with Rush or Arnold. Only one side can win. And as is so often the case, California is the canary in the political coal mine of America.

Republicans seeking to run the federal government are bedeviled by the opposition of Democrats. In California, it's much worse. Someone is going to try Schwarzenegger's approach of bipartisan governance at the federal level, and soon.

If you are a conservative governing California, you face an almost impossible challenge. A large proportion of the political might in the state is held by those whose views are closer to those of a typical labor union representative than those of, say, a scholar at Palo Alto's conservative Hoover Institution. So you have to choose between approaches.

Years of Inaction

First, you can try to present conservative ideas, like school vouchers, to the people in so convincing a manner that they collectively urge politicians of all persuasions to vote with you. Second, you can work with those of opposing views and negotiate compromises.

Ever since President Ronald Reagan departed from Washington, there has been no politician capable of effectively employing the first strategy. The results have been many years of policy inaction, fiddling while Washington burns.

Ideologically, enough Republicans are still with Reagan that they can't stomach compromise, but politically, no leader has been able to rally enough support to create momentum for conservative policies. So nothing happens.

Schwarzenegger has decided that the state's problems are so pressing that inaction is no longer an option. As a result, he has chosen to compromise with Democrats, or even at times, jumped out in front of them in areas that have traditionally been Republican taboo.

`Typical Sellout Move'

The result has been a higher minimum wage, aggressive steps toward reducing reliance on carbon-based fuels, and plans for the provision of universal health care.

This movement to the left has boosted his popularity. Schwarzenegger's latest job-approval rating is 48 percent, a considerable climb from 37 percent in 2005.

But popularity might come at the expense of principle. Limbaugh said as much, stating provocatively that Schwarzenegger was a traitor: ``Now, here's the truth of the matter,'' he said. ``Arnold Schwarzenegger has done the typical sellout move. He has sold out, and there are too many conservatives selling out these days.''

Limbaugh Irrelevant?

Those words brought out the Terminator in Schwarzenegger. ``Rush Limbaugh is irrelevant,'' he replied. ``I'm not his servant.''

Later, Schwarzenegger appeared on Limbaugh's radio show, and the exchange was lively and telling. Limbaugh railed against the $1.25 increase in the minimum wage. Schwarzenegger defended himself, saying the Democrats wanted $2.50.

The exchange continued in that vein, until Rush closed with this telling summary: ``The problem with that is the liberals and the Democrats aren't going to punt their ideology, because it defines them. And so when we end up agreeing with them just to get compromise, even if the numbers they want aren't as much as they wanted, we are still compromising our ideology. They are not.''

If you could find a workable crystal ball and tune it forward to the first major debate of the Republican presidential primaries, my guess is that the main point of contention would be the same.

Some candidates will refrain from laying out strong policies and will argue that the country urgently needs to come together to address long-run problems such as the entitlement programs that are headed for financial ruin. That can only be done, it will be argued, if Republicans are willing to compromise with Democrats.

A Clear Victor

Others will describe explicit conservative policies -- a flat tax and Social Security privatization, for example -- and will passionately argue the merits of those reforms.

The compromisers will call the traditional conservatives unrealistic and ideological obstacles. The traditional conservatives will call the compromisers sellouts. The voters will have the difficult job of choosing between them.

How will they choose? Schwarzenegger's might seems to suggest that the compromisers will win, but I am not so sure. Republican policy in the past six years, especially the burgeoning size of government, has been so far from mainline conservative theory, that many in the party must hunger for a candidate who returns the party to its roots.

If you read Rush's exchange with Arnold, there was a clear victor. Rush won by a knockout. It is hard to imagine that a presidential debate covering the same territory would go differently.

(Kevin Hassett is director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. He was chief economic adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona during the 2000 primaries. The opinions expressed are his own.)

Monday, March 26, 2007

• Jimmy Z's AudioPhiles™

Sean Penn preaching to the
Bush-hating crowd in Oakland

This is the Hollywood King of the Moore/Soros Moonbats in action

You've probably heard this nasty traitor in bits and pieces, but you have to hear him go on and on for a time to get the real depth of his hatred. The most amazing thing, you'll notice, is that he points to Bush and Cheney, and calls THEM hateful! Holy rat-infested brain, Batman!

Penn is SO anti-American, he thinks that his little tours of Iraq and Iran, hanging out with America's enemies and swallowing everything they tell him and present to him gives him a real view of what is going on there! He believes them! It is almost unfathomable; even a guy who has lived a charmed life in Hollywood and made busloads of money must know something of the truth, right? RIGHT?

Nope, not Mr. Penn, who is quite honestly SCARY-stupid. His vitriol is nasty, bitter and spiteful. He carries on again with their claims that Bush lied (He did not, we can prove it: Click HERE if you want the truth that Mr. Penn obviously has no time for) and a litany of personal insults. When in doubt, call names, right Mr. Penn?

The audience of course is filled with the same 'church going' inner city doofi that call out, "tell it!" and carry on as if Penn were giving them the hate rally they haven't been able to get from their local politicians already.

Note that Mr. Penn refers to our military as 'just the children of the poor minorities.' What a nasty and miserable insult to our brave men and women. Penn is saying, these are people with NO choice, no other option. They can only join the military, as if it were their last resort.

Note also that Sean actually believes Iran has yet to develop real hatred for the west. This is laughable! Iran seeks to wipe Israel off the map and yearns for a day where there would be no United States. Where has Spicoli been all this time? And why isn't Speilberg on the phone with him, explaining what would happen to Israel if Iran gets the nuclear weaponry they want so badly?

Bottom line, kids: Penn is a traitor; he is America's adversary. We have hoped and continue to hope that one night, out in Hollywood at one of the clubs we like to frequent, Penn and his entourage show up. We would like to give him an opportunity to show off his lack of anger management skills again. Our guess is that when confronted, and not surrounded by a room full of other like-minded ignorant fools, Mr. Penn is a full-tilt yellow-bellied coward.

Once again, you should have a barf-bag at the ready - sorry we keep doing that to you. We did insert some Penn-isms to lighten the load! *S*

Click HERE to listen to Penn ignore the threat of Islamo-Fascism and display god-awful amounts of pure ignorance.

Sunday, March 25, 2007


You're going to hate this

We are posting this, though we do not want to go to bed angry so we are not watching it tonight. Drudge talked about it - You Americans out there, you patriots: pass this around. Make sure everyone knows that these people represent the left in this country.

This was going on not in the middle east, but in Portand, Oregon. Holy cow.

These people represent the democrats; these people, these 'anarchist' wipers represent what Pelosi and Murtha think. These people hate America. These people are the scum of the earth; they are losers and they are non-productive excrement.

We recall a radio fellow here in Lost Angeles, Doug McIntyre, who was talking one morning about these anarchist losers. "Why don't we just run up to some of the anarchists as they are getting into their cars, and take a baseball bat to the windshield, the headlights, the sides of the car... 'Anarchy! Right on! I'm with you buddy!' "

Watch with a barf bag near by:

2 -

Down under goes over the moon

Wow, it must be bad - the globe is going to be cooling finally as those willing to volunteer and be a part of this one hour black out shut down everything for an hour. We wish we lived there; we'd be burning every light, every appliance, everything electric we could think of - and then some.

"Australia's largest city will be plunged into darkness for an hour on Saturday in a world first blackout to raise awareness of global warming.

"The lights will go out in landmark headquarters buildings in Sydney's central business district, on the iconic Harbour Bridge and Opera House, and in tens of thousands of suburban homes.

"If the switch-off is successful then it could be copied by major cities around the world in a symbolic drive to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions blamed for climate change, according to international conservation group WWF.

"Earth Hour", which begins at 7:30pm Sydney time (9:30am GMT) on March 31, has been planned for 10 months by WWF in partnership with the city authorities, businesses and a major newspaper group."

Impressive? No, you say? We agree. Read the source; click HERE.
And this page gives you the low down on the hooey-kaflooey, right HERE.

3 -
Australian Muslims endorse
controversial cleric al-Hilali

Published: Monday, 26 March, 2007, 08:46 AM Doha Time

SYDNEY: A Muslim cleric who whipped up a storm last year when he told his Sydney flock that women who don’t wear the veil invite rape * has been endorsed as the supreme leader of Australia’s 300,000 Muslims. Clerics from around the country meeting in Sydney decided Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, 67, should keep the post of Mufti of Australia that he has held since 1988.

Prime Minister John Howard last year urged Muslims to dump al-Hilali, as did New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma. Earlier this year al-Hilali raised the ire of Australians when he said Muslim migrants had a greater entitlement to the country than those who arrived at the time of colonial settlement.

“We came as free people, we bought our own tickets, we are entitled to Australia more than they are,” al-Hilali told a television station in his native Egypt. Howard called on Muslims to show a willingness to join the mainstream by ditching their controversial leader.

MUCH more to this story; Click HERE.

We have to ask - Is Australia doomed to a future of Islamo-Fascism? Or, here is another even better question: Haven't we been told that the majority of Muslims are peace loving and don't buy into the 'radical' side of Muslemming?

* And we ask yet another question: Where's the National Organization for (I don't know what kind of) Women on this one? Don't hold your collective breath, campers!



For years we've been saying the hybrid is the 8-Track of automobiles

We are delighted to report that once again we are right: Hybrid sales are slumping. California, the center of the hubbub and fad of Hybrid Technology, can't sell 'em as easily anymore. Why?

That's the funniest part of all. Once upon a time, you could buy a hybrid here and fly down the carpool lanes. Not anymore. The ceiling of 85,000 such permits has been reached, so that incentive is gone.

Next, there were tax cuts available on the Toyota product, but they're gone. Honda and Ford still have some tax incentives, but they won't last forever.

Sadder still is the story of the first buyers who plunked down enormous sums of money to buy these cars when they were HOT HOT HOT. Now, they're not not not, and the first buyers are finding that they were (PREDICTABLY, I might add) royally reamed.

We hate to say we told you so, but we told you so.

Read the source, click HERE.



But we believe so. Fred's got enough smarts to make 'the world's smartest woman' look more like the braindead leftist she is. We crave a Thompson/Clinton debate.

No doubt the Clinton war machine is already trying to dig up dirt on Mr. Thompson - after all, the politics of personal destruction are their calling card. They would likely not be interested at all in - you know - debates and stuff.

The Clintons would rather lash out in personal attacks than to engage their political enemies in debate. This is because they are leftwing far left liberals, and that is what liberals do. So, we look forward to a good old fashioned throttling of Ms. Clinton, courtesy of Fred Thompson.

Jimmy Z officially endorses Fred Thompson for President of the United States in the 2008 election.