Posted on 30 November 2006 by Ed Z
With their pledge to keep us safe by implementing all 9/11 Commission
suggestions, it turns out its really just business as usual for Democrats.
It was a solemn pledge,
repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If
elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all
of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined
the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
But with control of Congress
now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against
implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly:
a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and
funding of the nation’s intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic
leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce
recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.
Why should they bother? They just got power, and they intend to keep
it. How many times did we hear from Democrats that the 9/11 Commission was
the authority on the mistakes Bush made and how they could be corrected.
Not so much when it comes to how they can spend money.
Posted on 29 November 2006 by Ed Z
Danny DeVito gets drunk, whips out his rubber chicken and bashes Bush on The View. Guess he needs to drum up some attention for his new movie. Check out the link below.
Devito Bashes Bush on The View
Posted on 29 November 2006 by Ed Z
This is the kind of stuff that just makes me laugh, via Hot
Lindsay Lohan’s barely literate
Posted on 28 November 2006 by Ed Z
I went to see the new James Bond move, Casino
Royale, and I have to say I was impressed. The positives definitely outweigh
the negatives, the latter only being the length of the movie and sections that
seemed to drag on a bit too long. Otherwise, it had a solid story, amazing
action sequences, dialogue in a Bond tradition with out being corny, and most
important, fantastic acting.
Daniel Craig makes an excellent Bond, playing Bond rough around the edges as
opposed to the more refined recent portrayals. For the record, I believe Sean
Connery was the best Bond, and I’d like to see Craig string together several 007
performances like the one in Casino Royale before I can truly judge him, but he
is off to a great start.
If you’re a fan of James Bond, I recommend this movie.
Posted on 26 November 2006 by Ed Z
Fellow blogger, prying1,
has a great post on the possible increase in minimum wage and the effects
thereof. I have always been fascinated by people who believe raising minimum
wage can solve economic problems. Somehow the money just appears.
Raise minimum wages and it gives the
unions the right to demand more. I understand that many unions have their wage
structures tied in with the minimum wage. Hmmm. And the Dems love the unions…
Every time there is a raise in the minimum
wages many people getting paid more than minimum wage find they’re closer to the
bottom and do not get increases themselves…
Democrats will continue to foster the age of entitlement as Folk
Marxism marches on.
Posted on 25 November 2006 by Ed Z
Without repeating all of the valid/invalid arguments, I’ll say that I think
you can get a reasonable majority of Americans to agree that sometimes an
abortion is justifiable. Sad, but justifiable. In fact, it was the
"justifications" arguments that persuaded many state legislatures to
enact today’s permissive abortion laws. You know them by heart: rape, health of
the mother, incest, deformity-stuff like that.
Where folks part company is when it is stipulated that no justification
should be required at all; that personal convenience is all that matters. And,
that all taxpayers should pay the price. Really? Now that Convenience has become
our Society’s life or death standard, where are the limits to what can be done
under its banner?
Anyway, the fervent "abortion-for-convenience" crowd can’t abide
the "abortion-with-justification" crowd. The "no-abortion-ever’
crowd was beaten a long time ago.
What’s up here?
Saw this headline on Drudge: More
women have abortions as it loses stigma
Also Karol at Alarming News talks
about this today: Abortion
Posted on 23 November 2006 by Ed Z
For each new morning with its light,
For rest and shelter of the night,
For health and food,
For love and friends,
For everything Thy goodness sends.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Posted on 21 November 2006 by Ed Z
If you’re a regular reader, you might know by now that I’m not particularly
fond of certain advertising methods. While I’m all for low-brow humor, I think
it has to have a context and an appropriate time and place.
Some advertising is so in-your-face, it doesn’t give a viewer the option to
ignore it, because by that time, it is too late. Other ads, I believe send the
wrong message, and you wonder, how can you possibly counter these ads when a
child is involved.
Several weeks ago my wife received a Victoria’s Secret catalog and while
browsing through it, she came across a makeup kit named the Very
Sexy Ultimate Makeup Kit. Upon reading the description she called me over to
share some of the names of the contained items: Loose Shimmer Powder in Role
Play, Mosaic Eye Shadow in Satisfied, Perfect Lipstick in G and Hot Spot, Mosaic
Lip Palette in Hedonist, Lip Lacquer in All Access and Chills, Lip Gloss in
Lover and Hot Pants, Sheer Lip Liner in Red Light, and Silky Eye Shadow in
Blindfold, Wink and Ravish Me. G spot? Hedonist? Ravish me?
I wasn’t quite sure of the demographic of Victoria’s Secret shoppers, but my
wife believes that many young girls do shop there because of the implied sex
appeal of the clothing. Which brings me to the point of all of this: is this
I know they’re only names, but it just doesn’t feel right. If I had a 15 year
old daughter, would I want her wearing Hot Pants lip gloss? And really it isn’t
just the names, but the whole culture being promoted. It’s a culture of
pornography, and while there is ample chance for kids to be exposed to porn it
shouldn’t start with makeup.
I would really like to hear your thoughts on this, from parents and
non-parents. Have you had to filter out products from your kids that you never
dreamed you’d have to? How would you feel if your child asked for this for
Christmas? Or went out and bought it and was using it already. What would your
Posted on 20 November 2006 by Ed Z
During the 2004 presidential election, Democrats were trying to scare young
men and women into voting against Republicans by claiming the draft would be
reinstated. They said the military was spread too thin in Afghanistan and Iraq
and more soldiers would be needed. They also claimed that if re-elected,
Bush would surely go to war with Iran and North Korea. It would only be a
matter of timer before Republicans brought back the draft.
You can imagine my shock when I heard over the weekend that Charlie Rangel
(D-NY) will introduce a bill to reinstate the draft. Only this time, according
to Rangel, it will be a deterrent. You know, to keep the administration from
starting wars. Oddly enough, it paves the way for any future administration to
have a draft in place.
"There’s no question in
my mind that this president and this administration would never
have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was
presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of
Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their
communities would be placed in harm’s way," Rangel said.
Check out Michelle
Malkin’s post for details on the scare tactics used by Democrats in 2004.
And as an added bonus, Karol
at Alarming News points out that Rangel had a similar bill and proceeded to
vote against it in October, 2004.
Posted on 19 November 2006 by Ed Z
Will there be a time in the near future, when during a fashion show a doctor
will walk around examining the models, like horses in the stables before a race
or dogs in the kennel before a show? Will the fashion industry be forced to
regulate the health of its models since they obviously do not want to do it
themselves? I am not in favor of any such laws, but what can you do when girls
Last week a Brazilian model
died from health problems induced by anorexia. Ana Carolina Reston, a 21 year
old woman at 5 foot 8, weighed 88 pounds. This is the healthy weight of a 12
year old girl.
My friend, and fellow blogger, Bramble,
shares her experience with this subject:
The sad news of yet another model dying
last week, should be, but will not be, a wake up call to women everywhere. And
yes, the age-old cry of the absolutely fabulous, "you can never be too rich
or too thin" is a lie. In the past couple of months 2 models have died
because they were simply too thin. Thinking one can exist on diet soda and
lettuce, is not really thinking at all. What happened to the hourglass figure?
Where have all the Marilyns gone? The same girl consuming 0 calories a day is
the same girl wearing the pin up girl t-shirts, and cinching their waists with
big belts, trying desperately to create curves. Why not just have curves? Women
are women after all, not men. What is wrong with being 5′ 7" and a size 8?
This I ask myself everyday, and yet still, I wonder what it’s like to be the
size 2s I see on the rack. Do those girls have a better life than me? I seriously
Read her whole post,
because it may give you, as it did me, some insight as to what women are dealing
with on a daily basis.