posted by: Brian Scott

”Polls show that support for your policy is declining and that fewer than half Americans now support it. What does that say to you and how do you answer the Vietnam comparison?”

“Mr. President, before the war, you and members of your administration made several claims about Iraq that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators with sweets and flowers, that Iraqi oil revenue would pay for most of the reconstruction; and that Iraq not only had weapons of mass destruction, but as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said, we know where they are. How do you explain to Americans how you got that so wrong? And how do you answer your opponents, who say that you took this nation to war on the basis of what have turned out to be a series a false premises?”

“Thank you, Mr. President. To move to the 9/11 Commission. You, yourself, have acknowledged that Osama bin Laden was not a central focus of the administration in the months before September 11th. "I was not on point," you told the journalist, Bob Woodward, "I didn't feel that sense of urgency." Two-and-a-half years later, do you feel any sense of personal responsibility for September 11th?”

“Mr. President, I'd like to follow up on a couple of these questions that have been asked. One of the biggest criticisms of you is that whether it's WMD in Iraq, postwar planning in Iraq, or even the question of whether this administration did enough to ward off 9/11, you never admit a mistake. Is that a fair criticism? And do you believe there were any errors in judgment that you made related to any of those topics I brought up?”

“Thank you, Mr. President. Two weeks ago, a former counterterrorism official at the NSC, Richard Clarke, offered an unequivocal apology to the American people for failing them prior to 9/11. Do you believe the American people deserve a similar apology from you, and would you be prepared to give them one?”

“Thank you, Mr. President. In the last campaign, you were asked a question about the biggest mistake you'd made in your life, and you used to like to joke that it was trading Sammy Sosa. You've looked back before 9/11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have you learned from it?”

“Following on both Judy's and John's questions, and it comes out of what you just said in some ways, with public support for your policies in Iraq falling off the way they have -- quite significantly over the past couple of months -- I guess I'd like to know if you feel in any way that you've failed as a communicator on this topic? Because –“

“I guess I just wonder if you feel that you have failed in any way? You don't have many of these press conferences, where you engage in this kind of exchange. Have you failed in any way to really make the case to the American public?”

”is there anything we could have done to stop the attacks. Of course, I've asked that question -- as have many people of my government. Nobody wants this to happen to America. And the answer is that had I had any inkling whatsoever that the people were going to fly airplanes into buildings, we would have moved heaven and earth to save the country -- just like we're working hard to prevent a further attack.”
George W. Bush.

”One thing is for certain, though, about me -- and the world has learned this -- when I say something, I mean it. And the credibility of the United States is incredibly important for keeping world peace and freedom.”
George W. Bush.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/13/2004

Patriotism in question

How has questioning ones patriotism become worse than using a four letter expletive? At what point can you call someone unpatriotic? Is it when they cheer a Berkeley speaker calling for an American Jihad? Can we call those liberals unpatriotic?

In congress it manifests itself as partisanship instead of unity on issues where it should not be. How many times does Bush have to reach across the aisle only to be bitten? It’s one more example of why appeasement doesn’t work in any form with people who are obsessed with power.

Listen, I'm not saying that all libs and dems are traitors or unpatriotic, but this type of rhetoric they use reaches a whole different level than just me ranting about how unpatriotic they are. Calling for Rumsfield to be killed? Come on! I think a blind deaf mute could see that difference.

Predictably, liberal and democratic Americans will turn a blind eye to this. Republicans don't do this kind of crap. And if they did we (conservatives) would work heaven and earth to make sure whoever it was that said it, would never earn a voice again.

Look what happened to Trent Lott when he made flattering comments about Strom Thurmon. Chris Dodd says almost the exact same thing a couple weeks ago about Robert Bird (x-KKK) and nothing comes of it. How hypocritical!

Truth, proof, facts, honesty is not a virtue in the Democratic party at this point. If it were, Kerry would be taken to task for all his waffling, Democrats would be united on the fight against terror, and America would be unified in our resolve to keep us safe.

Read what started my rant at the Drudge Report

I posted it at LFG too.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

The talkRADIOforecast for today

1. Your daily Victor Davis Hansen. In his latest piece he talks about The Fruits of Appeasment. This is a must read for anyone concerned about the war in Iraq.

2. Its hard to say wether or not the Clintons really want the Democratic party to win the presidency 2004. On one had you have Hillary raising 10 million in 10 days and then on the other you have Bill releasing his book this year tends to pull the spotlight away from Kerry and onto Bill (where he loves it). Some of his friends want him to finish it ASAP. We’ll see what happens. In my opinion Hillary would love to be president one day. Having Kerry win the Whitehouse, means that should would have to wait a minimum of 8 years before she gets her shot at it. Are they party loyalists? Or are they loyal only to themselves? Time and their actions will tell. Read the story

3. More troops are needed to help stop the fighting in Iraq. They are asking for about 10,000 more. I say give them 50,000 more and finish it. Read the story

4. Remember Scott Ritter? He was a former UN weapons inspector that while as an inspector claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but then later, in the months leading up to the war in Iraq, came out saying they had no weapons. Turns out this sleazebag is in a bit of a scandal that connects him to the oil-for food program. Read the story

5. Only the colossally blind, stupid, and dumb, believe that Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11. That’s why people who do, teach. In this story a professor an Egyptian professor at American University of Cairo stated the following:

"there is still doubt that the September attacks were the outcome of Arab and Islamic terror."

Only in your world and those like you professor.

But there is no lack of stupid people in this world. Not to be outdone by a measly professor, al-Asi an imam who was expelled from the Islamic Centre in Washington, D.C. because of his hate filled sermons against western culture and America, has been traveling around Canada saying things like:

The Mossad and the CIA infiltrated “Islamic combatant groups” in Afghanistan and were the forces behind the attack on Sept. 11 in New York and Washington, D.C., Imam Mohamed al-Asi said at York University last week.
The “Israeli Zionists” and the “neo-cons in Washington, D.C.,” are to blame for leading the CIA into protecting Israeli interests and undermining Islamic self determination.

Now I’m going to hold my breath till the Muslim community come out shouting against this type of rhetoric. Um before I do, could someone please call an ambulance. I don’t think I’ll make it.

Read the story

These stories are in no short supply. Here’s another Berkeley lecturer urges 'uprising' against U.S.

Muslim scholar declares at rally 'you haven't seen radicalism yet!'

"Well, we've been watching intifada in Palestine, we've been watching an uprising in Iraq, and the question is that what are we doing? How come we don't have an intifada in this country?

Because it seem[s] to me, that we are comfortable in where we are, watching CNN, ABC, NBC, Fox, and all these mainstream ... giving us a window to the world while the world is being managed from Washington, from New York, from every other place in here in San Francisco: Chevron, Bechtel, [Carlyle?] Group, Halliburton; every one of those lying, cheating, stealing, deceiving individuals are in our country and we're sitting here and watching the world pass by, people being bombed, and it's about time that we have an intifada in this country that change[s] fundamentally the political dynamics in here.

And we know every – They're gonna say some Palestinian being too radical – well, you haven't seen radicalism yet!"

Read the story

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/12/2004

Littlegreenfootballs.com and a 20 year old Islamic extremist.

I decided to comment on a LFG post where it was brought to our attention that a 20 year old Islamic extremist stated the following:

“God willing Bush will fall down by the hands of Fallujah,” he says, combining military and political rhetoric. “If John Kerry wins the election and withdraws the Americans troops from Iraq, and maybe just leaves a few in bases, then we will not fight. But Bush we will always fight.”

This is my response: (read it on LFG or read it below)

I feel like I'm in a twilight zone episode. In this creepy episode half of America sees no relevance when voting the same way as a terrorist would. There’s no waking up to safety on this nightmare train.

Logically speaking, If I'm an American, I would love voting for the guy they (terrorists) hate with all their being. It would be just one more show of strength and solidarity against them. Maybe they would start to get the point.

As for this 20 year old; I don't believe for one second that he would stop. The second someone of leadership quality stands up and says "Any American on our soil, needs to be destroyed" this 20 year old would have gun in hand and murder on his heart

If with Bush you will always fight, then with Bush you will surely die. And they know this.

Why can't Democrats be like Lieberman, John Kennedy, Scoop Jackson, and Zell Miller? Regardless of how you feel/felt about their domestic policys, these are men you could trust to act in America's security interests.

The modern Democrat has abandoned freedom for appeasement and even that will not stop the terrorists from attacking us again.

America please wake up.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Is Islam Peaceful?

I’ve decided to learn as much as I can about Islam. I want to get a clear picture of where they stand. Unfortunately I’m not seeing the “religion of peace” that Bush and others claim it to be.

In Islam the biggest blasphemy to them is not believing in God's will. To the Muslim God's will is whatever happens. It does not matter if what has happened is perceived as good or bad, it is only God’s will.

So here’s where it becomes twisted; if an American (or anyone else non-Muslim) fights against them, it is against Gods will. But when they blow up children in buses, run plains into buildings, burn people alive, mass murder each other, stampede each other to death in a Hajj ritual, this is God's will because they are Muslims.

This might go towards proof that the 90% who are considered to have their religion hijacked by radicals preferred not to say anything on 9/11. And still remain quite when Israeli men, women and children are blown to death by Islamic suicide bombers. To protest such acts would be considered as speaking against Gods will.

I'm very quickly beginning to believe that Islam is only peaceful when people wish to ignore the truth.

Read the pinnacle of Irony

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Think About It Online: Prolife website done really well.

Think about it. Read it.

Here are some highlights.

Each year, about 1.3 million women choose abortion.

College-age women account for nearly one-third of all abortions.

More than half of all abortions are performed on women 25 years or younger.

Two-thirds of women who have abortions have never been married.

Less than one percent of abortions are for cases of rape.

Women still die today from legal abortion? Heres the list.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

The talkRADIOforecast for today

1. The big story today will be the enterview Tim Russert had with Paul Bremer. Heres a troubling excerpt.

"MR. RUSSERT: June 30: You're going to turn the keys over to the Iraqis. Who do you turn them over to?

AMB. BREMER: Well, that's a good question,...Read the transcript

2. The following is a redacted text of the presidential daily briefing from August 6, 2001:

Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US:The memo

3. Good economic news:Read the story

4. John McCain - No Veep for Meep

5. This falls under the "Why America is Better Than (add country name here)" catagory. This will probably not get any air time but I want to pull your attention to it. Is America heading in the same direction? John Leo talks about whats happening to free speach in Canada: Read the Op-ed.

6. How could Arafat actually get worse? How about if he tried to "create a leadership organization that would include, among others, Islamic Jihad and Hamas, the most notorious of Palestinian terrorist groups." Read the Op-ed by Joel Mowbray

7. Global warming is global crap.Check this story out.

8. I couldn't agree more with Ralph Peters on this one about what to do in Iraq now. Heres a quote from the Op-ed:

”Our president must make no mistake: Any "settlement," any halt short of the annihilation of the killers who want to destroy the future of Iraq, will be read throughout that troubled country and the greater Islamic world as a resounding victory for the terrorists. They'll be viewed as having defeated the U.S. military, stopping it in its tracks.”

Drop The Hammer Now

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/11/2004

Israel’s Peculiar Position – By Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

In the latest magazine edition of Israel My Glory, there is a feature article by Eric Hoffer written in 1968 just one year after the six day war in Israel. Eric Hoffer died in 1983, but his message from 1968 will live on. This article is a testimony to the saying “Some truths never change”.

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews. Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it, Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchmen. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese – and no one says a word about refugees.

But in the case of Israel the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees. Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab.

Arnold Tynebee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis. Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in the world.

Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had [Egyptian President Gamal Abdel] Nasser triumphed last June he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on.

There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or are executed in Rhodesia [no Zambia and Zimbabwe]. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him. The Swedes, who are ready to break of diplomatic relation with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore, and ball bearing, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are along in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts, and Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.

”History is the witness that testifies to the passing of time; it illumines reality, vitalizes memory, provides guidance in daily life and brings us tidings of antiquity.”

Cicero (106 BC - 43 BC), Pro Publio Sestio

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Resurrection day!

A verse from “In Christ Alone” a song written by Stuart Townend and Keith Getty

There in the ground His body lay,
Light of the world by darkness slain;
Then bursting forth in glorious day
Up from the grave He rose again!
And as He stands in victory
Sin’s curse has lost its grip on me,
For I am His and He is mine
Bought with the precious blood of Christ.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/10/2004

So close we can't see beyond it.

It's hard to find the two faces of a religion (peaceful vs. radical) when the only thing being seen and read are in reality very barbaric.

I constantly battle in my mind a desire to paint most Muslims as radical and unwilling to reason beyond their pride. Why can’t there be two nations living next to each other in peace? Why does Israel have to be driven into the sea for there to be peace in the region?

Every day Muslims are reminded how evil Israel and westerners are. Ravi Zacharius, an evangelist stated that it is almost impossible to talk them about positive aspects of western culture in such a way that they would deem it as reasonable. He goes further to say you can't convince Muslims that you came to know truth or understand meaning while you were in America during a visit. Muslims wouldn't accept that as a valid experience because the thought process must have been tainted by western culture in some way, which is evil.

How do you change an entire belief system of an entire religion? If Allah is not your god then you deserve death. At the very least you have the same intrinsic value as vermin and therefore killing you is just as reasonable and probably more productive than letting us live.

I’ve also heard statistics that only 10% of Muslims are extremists? That means that 90% of the religion is not screaming loud enough to stop the madness that has taken over. Or has it taken over? Do the 90% feel the same as the 10 and are just not as willing to take life over it, but no less gratified when Israeli children are blown to bits? What evil madness is this?

Where was the massive out cry on 9/11 and 9/12 and every day after that from the Islamic community? You only heard one or two small instances of Muslims clerics stating that what had happened was terrible. Contrast that to the Muslims in America cheering and dancing at what had happened. We turned on our TV’s and witnessed most Arab nations dancing in the street and passing out candy. 9/11 will be forever a day of celebration for them.

I hope and pray that these problems are just held to close to our faces. So close that it’s almost impossible to look beyond them. I hope that regardless of how close they are, there is a reality beyond it that begs to differ with what is being reported. I hope there is a peaceful religion of Islam. It is the Muslim community’s job to prove it.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/09/2004

How would you caption this photo of Sadr?

I just picked my nose. It's a rather large boogy.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

The talkRADIOforecast for today

A lot more time will be spent on the Dr. Condi Rice / 9/11 commission hearing. Despite repeated attempts from Ben-Veniste to not get the truth out, Condi did a great job. I'm not against finding out what the truth is, but what I am interested in is why Mr. Ben-Veniste found it impossible to let her answer. You can't get a complete understanding of any situation as complex as 9/11 with just yes or no answers and thats the type of baiting he was pulling yesterday. He made a fool of himself and served further to discredit the purpose of the commission, which is to learn about what happened on 9/11, and then make recommendations as to how we can prevent it from happening again. It's not their to affix blame.

Since it's an election year, there are those on the commission looking to affix blame on the current president. There are also those looking to blame the Clinton administration as well, and although I didn't like Bill, blaming him serves no purpose either.

So what is the truth behind 9/11 that everyone should realize? It is simply that America was attacked by Islamic terrorist because we are who we are and for no other reason. If it wasn't airplanes, it would have been trains, anthrax, biotoxins or some other means by which they could carry out their evil. What we need to do now is fix what was broken and pray it never happens again.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Lets make sure we kill them before they kill us.

Read the transcript Here

U.S. Military Says S. Iraq City Retaken

Western Cannibalism
By Victor Davis Hanson - MUST READ!

Rice and Clarke: By George Will

Even the 9/11 commission wants to revisit Clarke's statements.

Remember when I said that Kerry is trying to paint himself as a fiscal conservative? Bruce Bartlett seconds that by writting this column (even though he has no clue who I am and has never heard of talkradioforecast.com)

More later if I feel up to it.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/08/2004

Daily Kos is Daily Evil

We knew a lot of democrats opposed the war against terror and going into Iraq.

We knew that some of the protestors were off their rocker insane.



We knew by visiting the Democratic Underground online, the type of foul mouthed evil they like to spew.

But what Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, owner of the Daily Kos, a liberal web site and blog with strong ties to the DNC (and democratic members of congress) did is absolutely reprehensible. Evidently Zuniga has no love for country and those that serve to protect it.

Zuinga said in his blog the Daily Kos:

"Let the people see what war is like. This isn¹t an Xbox game. There are real repercussions to Bush's folly. That said, I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They aren't in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them."

The Men of Fallujah celebrating the deaths of 4 of our American sons and fathers by burning their bodies and mutilating them. They were on a convoy bringing food to troops when they were attacked.

And all though some have pulled their support from his site, Zuniga showed no remorse for his earlier statement. In fact the occurance has actually emboldened hiim to say:

"I took their best shot, and... that was it?"

He then let everyone know that this statement won't hurt him one bit.

"I had two emails today about people wanting to advertise despite the controversy,"

He concluded by saying, "But if that's the best they can throw at me, I'll simply echo Kerry. Bring it on."

I will not link to his site. But I will link to this article:

With Reach Comes Responsibility; Liberal 'Blogger' Crosses Line with Recent Statements

Zuinga's e-mail -Let him know how you feel

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

The talkRADIOforecast for today.

The Big story for today of course is that Condoleezza Rice will be speaking to the 9/11 commission. Expect her credibility to go up and Clarke’s to move even further south.

Read up on it.

Here’s the other big story that will get a lot of play.

Kerry says US in a "mess" in Iraq

Kerry says: "I'm not the president and I didn't create this mess, so I don't want to acknowledge a mistake that I haven't made," Kerry said.

Is that right? Weren’t you at a town hall meeting trying to explain why you voted against (or is it for now?) the 87 billion to help strengthen our forces and give our troop body armor? You’re doing everything in your power to keep it a mess. This is why you'll never be president John. You don't have the clarity of thought to understand that we are battling terror, not Iraq as a country. What frustrates me more than anything is that liberals continue to show a divided country giving the terrorist a false since of possible victory.


"But let me tell you something, the president needs to step up and acknowledge that there are difficulties and that the world needs to be involved, and they need to reverse their policy."

You would love that! Bush obviously believes he’s on the right course. And so does half the country. You'll never agree on anything when it comes to the war on terror. You’re trying to make him look weak when he isn't. This is merely a ploy.

Yes it's difficult to build a nation. But it's going fairly well despite the objections of you and the terrorists. Did you honestly believe it was going to be all soft bunnies and beautiful sunsets with peace and love and happiness for all in a country that’s still in the 15th century? Come on! Give me a break. People over there are just beginning to taste freedom. Once they have they will fight to the bitter end to protect it.

Kerry said Bush had blundered by excluding countries that opposed the Iraq war from the huge rebuilding contracts. "That's a terrible message to send to countries.

I love this policy of Bush's. It's completely fair to say that only countries that made sacrifices of their own on the war against terror will benefit from the reconstruction of Iraq. Those that wrung their hands and did nothing – get nothing!

Here’s a little reality TV analogy that might make you understand a little better what might happen this November:

Do you watch survivor? You should. The two types of people considered for being VOTED off are those that do nothing to strengthen the unity of the tribe, and those that sit and do nothing to help set up camp.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/07/2004

President Bush Discusses Iraq, 911 Commission with Reporters - He gets a little cranky - Part 2

Remeber in an earlier blog when I said Bush seemed to be a little cranky when talking to an AP reporter? It turns out he wasn't being cranky. J. McIntyre from RealClearPolitics.com sets the record straight.

"I saw Bush's exchange with the AP reporter live and was taken by surprise, as the President came off sounding like a jerk. To the viewer, it came across like the President was dressing down the reporter for not calling him 'Mr. President.' Courtesy of Josh Marshall, apparently the AP reporter had a cell phone to his ear which prompted the 'Who are you talking to?' retort form the President. This is obviously a big difference and the White House should do a better job of getting the real story out to the press. To the average viewer who saw that live the President did not come off well at all."

Source: Realclearpolitics.com

Kerry Says He Would Cap Federal Spending

Here is a quote from my blog titled: Kennedy is smoking crack... He has to be .

"Remember this day; democrats are actually complaining about funding Medicare too much. It's a watershed event. It's the beginning of democrats painting themselves as fiscal conservatives. And it won’t be hard to because Bush tried to reach across the aisle one to many times." - BS.

Do you see what Kerry is doing? He's pulling the same thing that Clinton did, that Bush is doing and now Kerry is doing. He's trying to triangulate and take issues away from the conservatives. Waffles anyone?

I wish for once a democrat would be a democrat and a republican would be a republican. It makes the poor undecided even more confused. John Kerry is no fiscal conservative. I heard him earlier today on Fox News saying he wanted to roll back the Bush tax cut. Wake up people! This would increase your tax burden and in the process hurt the economy.

Bush is actually playing a bit of a different game though. In my opinion he was actually trying to reach across the aisle and change the tone in Washington. He did it in Texas, he wanted to do it as president. Washington is a completely different animal I guess. My problem is that he kept trying and trying to reach across and it hasn’t helped him one bit. I hope in his second term, he becomes more of a fiscal conservative.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Heres an unfortunate photo.

Picture from the AP

Like everyone is supposed to be 100% photogenic?

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Abortion - You shouldn't have the right.

My wife and I are members of Right to Life. To my family this isn’t even a choice, it’s a necessity. Being a member we get newsletters every once in a while detailing our fight for the unborn, and how the other side is fighting back. The April 2004 newsletter was just released and I wanted to share a couple of the stories.

The fallacy that abortion protects the health of the mother:

In early January a 15 year old 9th grade girl, Tamia Russell, died at the hands of an abortionist. The Dr. did not get parental consent to perform the abortion, which is required by law in the state of Michigan. The father is a 24 year old man which constitutes statutory rape in Michigan. What a travesty of life from start to finish. Had the law been followed, by everyone this girl might still be alive today. It appears as though abortionist have little respect for laws.

Read Tamia’s story.

Warren Hern finds new way to kill despite partial birth abortion ban.

Please be warned. The excerpt you are about to read is a graphic description of an abortion procedure.

“Earlier this year, I began an abortion on a young woman who was 17 weeks pregnant. Because of the two days of prior treatment, the amniotic membranes were visible and bulging. I ruptured the membranes and released the fluid to reduce the risk of amniotic fluid embolism. Then I inserted my forceps into the uterus and applied them to the head of the fetus, which was still alive, since fetal injection is not done at that stage of pregnancy. I closed the forceps, crushing the skull of the fetus, and withdrew the forceps. The fetus, now dead, slid out more or less intact. With the next pass of the forceps, I grasped the placenta, and it came out in one piece.“

He continues lauding the expediency of the procedure, lack of blood loss and an alert patient as though nothing happened.

“Within a few seconds, I had completed my routine exploration of the uterus and sharp curettage. The blood loss would just fill a tablespoon. The patient, who was awake, hardly felt the operation. She was relieved, grateful, and safe. She wants to have children in the future.”

Sad part is, she could have had the child she wanted now. Or maybe someone who needed to give their love to a child could have raised it. It’s called adoption.

Read this monsters editorial

And now a Dr. has come out and admitted that a fetus feels pain when it’s being killed.

“A type of abortion banned under a new federal law would cause "severe and excruciating" pain to 20-week-old fetuses, a medical expert testified Tuesday in one of three trials across the country testing the law's constitutionality.

"I believe the fetus is conscious," said Dr. Kanwaljeet "Sonny" Anand, a pediatrician at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. He took the stand as a witness for the government, which is defending the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. “

I’m not even a Dr. and I would bet my life that a fetus feels pain once it’s brain shows brain wave activity at six weeks.

Read the entire story

These are just a couple of the examples. I’ve had a few conversations over my lifetime about his issue. In fact most complaints come from the stand point that since I’m a male I should have no say in what a woman wants to do with her body.

I simply argue that it is not her body that I’m worried about.

When it’s my turn to ask the questions I ask whether or not abortion would be a suitable solution for them. Quite often the answer comes back; “I would never get one myself. But I would never take that right away from others.” This answer always irks me. I’ll never understand how a person who agrees that it is indeed killing a baby could excuse it as a right for another. It’s like saying; “You know, I wouldn’t kill puppies, but since you think it’s okay, who am I to say you can’t” It’s simply ridiculous.

My feelings don’t change even in cases of incest and rape. The act by which the child is conceived is unbelievably barbaric and the psychological effects will be evident for years to come. But the child is no less a child in either cases. They deserve the same right to life as you and I do.

As for the psychological effects, I believe that by ending the life that is in them will only increase the psychological problems of the mother and not alleviate them.

If you believe that life starts at conception then we need to be doing a lot more to support organization like Right to Life and The Pregnancy Resource Centers.

Related to story:

Right to Life of Michigan

Abortion "Doctor" Admits Partial-Birth Abortions Can Hurt or Kill Women

Abortionists Admit Dismemberment Horror

BS.

The talkRADIOforecast for today:

12 Marines, 66 Iraqis Killed in Battles

I’ll keep reiterating this: It’s about the war on terror and creating a safer world against Islamic extremists. Iraq supported terrorism – they needed to be delt with to make America a safer place, to make the world a safer place. Once again the world benefits as Americans loose their lives. Europe should be grateful for what we are doing.

'Passion' tops $100 mil o'seas

Simply amazing. If you haven’t seen the movie you really should.

Murdoch backs Bush and wants troops to stay

Mr. Murdoch owns FoxNews. I’m sure the liberal elites will point at this as proof of being unfair and unbalanced at his networks. But what the liberals will fail to do is look at themselves and realize that they too are tainted by there own beliefs. And believe me – it shows every day at the networks and CNN.

Saddam being held in Qatar: report
Byby.

Blix Says Iraq Worse Off After War

What a complete fool. I’m dying to hear how being tortured, murdered and raped at the whim of an evil totalitarian regime is better than freedom. Go on… tell me. What a jerk.

Powell rebukes Kennedy in rare political foray

"I was in Haiti and didn't see the whole speech, but I must say that Senator Kennedy, I think, should be a little more restrained and careful in his comments because we are at war," Powell said in an interview on a nationally syndicated radio broadcast.

Good point Colin. It’s amazing that liberals get away with speaking out of both sides of their mouth on this. We support our troops – but this war is wrong. In essence what Ted is saying is that hes okay with the person but not okay with what they are doing. What they are doing is keeping us safe and free. Being a soldiers IS who they are – And I thank God every day for the men and women who serve. Ted, if you were to ask our soldiers why they are there, they are crystal clear in their understanding. It takes a liberal to get confused on the issue.

Updated at 04.07.04 9:40pm
It's also important that this country looks unified to everyone outside of the U.S. This type of rhetoric only hurts our troops, because when they see American Leaders like Ted whining about what happening - they (the terrorists) feel emboldened to continue and fight harder. Their thought process is: "If I just hit a little harder, America will run." The rhetoric of Ted, John Kerry and the rest of the appeasement crowd making these statements only serve to put our troops in greater danger.

Nader Calls for Bush to Be Impeached

"When you plunge our country into war on a platform of fabrications and deceptions, and you bring back thousands of American soldiers who are sick, injured or dead, and that war is unconstitutionally authorized to begin with, Mr. Bush's behavior qualifies for the high crimes and misdemeanor impeachment clause of the Constitution,"

Keep talking Nader - Your doing a great job for the Republicans. You being in this race helped us in 2000 and as long as your ego wins over being bought by Kerry - you'll help us win in 2004. Thanks you crazy nut case.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/06/2004

Even more evidence that Clark is an opportunist and a liar.

I love how people in the media call it a credibility gap. How diplomatic. The President is a liar, you can be liar, I can be one if you so wish to falsely call me that - but Richard Clark who is selling a book that bashes Bush is said to have a credibility gap. The media's credibility gap is looking rather yellow lately.

When Richard Clark handed over a final official assessment on National security in December of 2000, it mentioned al Qaeda a grand spanking total of ZERO times and bin Laden a grand total of 4 times. Length of document: 45,000 words. Percentage of importance based on number of times mention against number of words in the document = .009%


Related story:

Clark doesn't even mention al Queda in last security assessment to Clinton refuting his statement that Clinton made it a higher priority than Bush.

posted by: Brian Scott

---

Kennedy is smoking crack... He has to be.

Kennedy likes to call Bush a liar. Huh. Really? Lets take a look at Kennedy's comments that he used for proof.

Ted said Bush had a credibility gap as large as Nixon's and that he broke the bonds of trust with the American people.

He then attacked Bush on the Medicare bill that was passed claiming that it was a sweetheart deal for the drug and insurance companies. He called it a raw deal for seniors. Ummm, don't tell that to the AARP that currently has a commercial running that calls the Medicare bill a good start. It seems as though the only seniors that don't like this bill are those aged democrats still holding their seat in the House and Senate.

Ted knows full well that its the Congressional Budget Office that gives the Whitehouse it's cost estimates and figures. Kennedy then mentions that Bush mislead everyone on the cost of the bill. Both parties now understand that the bill will actually cost 134 billion more than what was originally estimated.

Am I hearing right? Are democrats actually upset that they have to spend more to properly fund a bad government program? This is such an obvious case of self-loathing, It's truly amazing. For decades the democrats have fought for significant increase in spending for all existing programs. (I have proof –keep reading) They hate the republicans for restraining them. Remember democrats want you dependant on the government, and the only way to do that is by creating programs that make you rely on it. This effectively creates their own voter base of people who supposedly can't make it on their own.

Remember this day; democrats are actually complaining about funding Medicare too much. It's a watershed event. It's the beginning of democrats painting themselves as fiscal conservatives. And it won’t be hard to because Bush tried to reach across the aisle one to many times.

Bush has tried to do exactly what Clinton did, triangulate and take issues from the democrats. That might have worked in Texas, it backfired in Washington. Each time Bush reached across the aisle for support, his hand got slapped, bit and chewed on. He reached across the aisle and gave Teddy the education bill "No Child Left Behind" which Ted wrote and is now saying that Bush's education bill is horrible and under funded. That’s right UNDER FUNDED!! Talk about opportunistic and hypocritical. Man, this tops the chart.

With Ted “truth” is a word without definition. He uses it like toilet paper.

Related to topic:

Kennedy: Bush lied

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/05/2004

President Bush Discusses Iraq, 911 Commission with Reporters - He gets a little cranky

Honestly this doesn't bother me on bit. As sure as I'm sitting here there will be press about this. They'll call him arrogant and use this as proof. Obviously none of the Pundits and Senators you'll hear on this has had bad days. If you ask me, Bush has gotten a lot of bad press about the war in Iraq and was just asking for a little respect. Here’s how it went down:

THE PRESIDENT: Let me ask you a couple of questions. Who is the AP person?

Q I am.

THE PRESIDENT: You are?

Q Sir, in regard to --

THE PRESIDENT: Who are you talking to?

Q Mr. President, in regard to the June 30th deadline, is there a chance that that would be moved back?

THE PRESIDENT: No, the intention is to make sure the deadline remains the same. I believe we can transfer authority by June 30th. We're working toward that day. We're, obviously, constantly in touch with Jerry Bremer on the transfer of sovereignty. The United Nations is over there now. The United Nations representative is there now to work on the -- on a -- on to whom we transfer sovereignty. I mean, in other words, it's one thing to decide to transfer. We're now in the process of deciding what the entity will look like to whom we will transfer sovereignty. But, no, the date remains firm.

Related to topic:
Full transcript

June 30th and no later. Iraq will belong to Iraq.

The talkRADIOforecast for today:

Bush lacked enough information to prevent 9/11

Bush losing support on Iraq - It's part of the war on terror people! Wake up and support our troops and this fight. It's necessary!

Spain gets nervous - And for good reason; They're controlled by terrorists now. My hope is that they learn a leason. One bomb killing 200 made you vote for a man that has the same position as the terrorists. It only goes to reason that the terrorists would try this again. No one in this world is safe from terrorism. You are a target because you are not muslim.

Kerry Says Nader Meeting May Be 'In the Works' - Now we'll get to see just what Kerry offers Nader to get out of the race. If not now, within a reasonable time before election day. It's gonna cost Kerry though. It's just a matter of figuring out what the price line is. So much for Nader's convictions. I guess the saying is true: Everything is for sale.

But Dean is out there now telling voters to Reject Nader's bid for the Whitehouse. Dean could upsets a possible agreement between Kerry a Nader, it may just cost Kerry more than he's willing to give.

Hi. My name is Brian and it's been 10 days since my last double scoop of wiskey sour & beer ice cream.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/04/2004

The Politics of Anger & Hate

-

“It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office.“

H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)

“Republicans had better worry. Angry people are motivated to get out to vote. If they can channel that anger into something constructive, they can literally upset the presidency.”

Paul Weyrich, a veteran conservative organizer.

"We have been too nice. We have been too polite,"

Ann Lewis, a strategist for the Democratic National Committee.

-

Can you recall a time when truth was stuck to fact like brothers? Words had meaning and everyone agreed on definitions of those words. History was written and you could look back and see just what happened. You could get a clear understanding of what might be a good course of action today and what should be avoided.

In the past 20 years I’ve seen America go from “One nation under God” to one nation divided into vastly different groups. We are polarized on everything we used to agree on. I believe this division is rooted in anger and hate. Where strong disagreement once lived, hate has taken root and settled down for good. And the worst part about this type of hate is that it’s been cultivated for political purposes.

It started when the US Supreme court sided with President Bush to become our 43rd president. To this very day Democrats are angered about the outcome. Charlie Rangel used race baiting to help get his constituents angry during a recent appearance on Meet the Press with Tim Russert.

MR. RUSSERT:”Before you go, you talk about this with such passion. What do you think the minority turnout is going to be in 2004? Is the outrage that you're now showing on this show, does it exist in the minority community across the country?“

REP. RANGEL: “There's no question about it. And you don't have to talk about Senator Kerry for president or George Bush being out. All you have to do is go into a minority community and have a button on. And just say, "Don't forget Florida." And it will say the whole story.”

This is race baiting and is flat out wrong! The Florida Justice Department did an investigation into voter disenfranchised and concluded that:

“no Floridians were intentionally denied the right to vote during the 2000 presidential election. “

Despite this fact and the numerous recounts siding with Bush, the Democrats are still sucking on sour grapes and have kept the Florida recount in the fronts of every liberals mind.

To this very day Al Gore mentions it in speeches across the country. Telling those that will listen, to never forget what happened in Florida.

Democrats were genuinely angry about Florida in the days after the US Supreme court made its decision. That seems perfectly fine to me. If they weren’t I’d almost wonder why. However, their anger would be about loosing a fair fight, not about some false claim the presidency was stolen.

Their anger should have subsided long ago. Holding onto anger this long is unhealthy and almost inhuman if you think about it. You can expect this accusation of “stealing the election in 2000” to get louder as November gets closer.

If the 2000 elections started these divisions, it was the 2002 senatorial elections and the ousting of Gray Davis in 2003 that sent the Liberals over the edge. They were taught a lesson about anger in those years and they embraced it.

Lesson 1: On October 25, 2002 Senator Paul Wellstone (D) from Minnesota passed away in a plane crash. On October 30th they held a memorial for Paul and it turned ugly. It began with the booing and jeering of Republicans as they entered the arena to pay their respects to a fallen colleague, and turned into what could only be described as a democratic political rally. David Limbaugh stated it this way:

“The ceremony was more about idolizing liberal politics and politicians than honoring the life of Senator Paul Wellstone. If the tone and substance of the various speakers there are any indication, the national Democratic Party has become even more afflicted with the sin of pride. It's almost scary how seriously they take themselves.”

Needless to say America was extremely unhappy with how bad it looked. No amount of interviews from Democratic pundits was going to quell the anger that America felt for such an ill mannered ceremony for a deceased man. It shouldn’t have been about politics that day. It should have been about celebrating his life. America knew it and they responded with contempt and anger for such an act.

Lesson 2: Almost 1 year later Gray Davis is voted out of office because people were angry with his policies and his obvious ties to special interests. A full 72% of those polled by CNN said they voted him out because they disapproved of his job performance. People were fed up with Gray and they wanted him out of office. There is too much information about how corrupt this man was to put in this piece, so instead take the word of 72% of California who ultimately wanted “anyone else”. (Sound familiar?)

The lesson the democrats learned was that anger will win you elections. So they went out and began a campaign to discredit and foment anger towards George Bush. The Liberal Elites are using it more as a political tool than they are about actually being angry. In the 2002 and 2003 elections people were right to be angry, the anger now is manufactured for political gain.

Instead of debating each other during the primaries on the issues, they repeatedly attacked Bush. They called for “regime change” as though Bush was a despot. They called him “The worst president since Herbert Hoover”, “A miserable failure” and “a liar”. Democratic Pundits on cable news channels likened him to Hitler and Saddam Hussein.

In February of this year Al Gore speaking at a rally of Tennessee Democrats, in a fit of rage stated that Bush “betrayed this country! He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place."

These are seasoned politicians. These words are planned out way before they ever get to stage. He had passion when he spoke and he was very convincing, but with out a doubt he was just churning the pot as a means to an end.

Not wanting to be left out, Senator Kennedy (D-Mass) in a heated interview to the Associated Press floor stated:

"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud."

It’s amazing that he made this statement since he knows that President Bush never said that there was an imminent threat in any of his speeches or since. Kennedy never had any proof of these allegations at all, and to make them is reckless, and proves further the Democratic party’s desire to foment anger in it’s base.

The Democratics want to keep liberals angry and hating Bush, it’s their only chance to win in 2004. Their stump speeches are a continued cycle of rhetoric with these guys who for years couldn’t find a way to “get out the vote” so instead of debating issues and actually being concerned about America, have resorted to attacks that are baseless and anger that is faceless.

The Liberal party has rested their hopes on John Kerry, who by all accounts is the most liberal senator in congress. Knowing this, they cannot win on issues, they have to win on emotions.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/02/2004

talkRADIOforecast.com - What's New?

I'll tell ya what's new. In about a month I should have my own server set up to handle my webpage and streaming audio where you can hear my show. I'm also going to incorporate a column that will feature guest writers to help entice you to their site, a new sponsor section to carry small advertisements for companies, bands, and businesses that have helped me along the way, and a promotions area to help me spread the word.

I'm having way too much fun.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---

4/01/2004

The O'Failing factor

I've listened to the liberals answer to Rush Limbaugh now for about 30 minutes. Right now the O'Franken factor is on. At first I was convinced that it would succeed, but now I'm convinced to believe it won't. Notice I didn't say of all liberal talk radio would fail. I’ll make that assessment after I’ve heard all of their radio personalities do their radio thing.

You might ask yourself why after 20 minutes, was I able to determine this? Here's why: Al Franken has a co-host, Katherine Lanpher a veteran air personality. It doesn't seem to flow well between them at all. In fact I keep asking myself why Al is talking when all I want to do is listen to Kate. It sounds like a planned conversation instead of how conversations normally take place. Al even admitted his lack of experience in the first 1/2 of the show and said that he was relying on Kate's help. How is that being an answer to Rush?

Al can be called the anti-Rush of course, that wouldn't bother me. It doesn't bother me to call him that, because he doesn't and can't do what Rush can. And I mean even being funny falls in that category. Al's show sounds disjointed having both people there. And although Al may feel passionately about his beliefs it doesn't come through when everything sounds written out like it does on his show. The jokes sound planned, anti climatic and dry too. When you listen to Rush, Hannity, Glenn Beck and Mike Gallagher it flows. Why? It’s because their message comes straight from the heart to the microphone. No rehearsal.

Rush is a self made man. He needed no one to tell him how to act, be, feel, or say anything. He is who he is, and even if you think he's crap you’re still attracted to him like flies. You can't stay away! To conservatives, Rush is our headlight and we are his deer. We're caught and can't move. Which is yet another reason why Al’s show won’t succeed, he’s time slotted against a colossal mega talent superstar.

Passion isn't just about having a show. Passion is about standing on the corner of a preverbal street somewhere and attracting people to listen. You’re speaking off the cuff. You’re talking with passion, conviction, and truth and that will bring even the conservatives to listen.

BS

Related to topic:

Air America Radio

posted by: Brian Scott

---

3/30/2004

A Cancer Against Truth.

I cut a portion of this Breakpoint message with Chuck Colson and then followed it up with a conversation between a friend of mine and his United Methodist Pastor.

God's Word v. God's Spirit?

Nine years ago, Karen Dammann quietly moved in with her lesbian lover. She didn't advertise the fact because, as a United Methodist pastor, she risked losing her job if she did so. The denomination's Book of Discipline condemns homosexual acts and prohibits ordination of practicing homosexuals.

The case came to trial in a church court, and last week a jury of thirteen Methodist pastors, eight women and five men, declared Ms. Dammann not guilty.

The jury demonstrated a remarkably flexible attitude toward the facts. It declared, "The church did not present sufficient, clear, and convincing evidence to sustain the charge." In other words, Dammann's letter, her frequent public statements about her homosexuality, and her visible public behavior do not prove she has engaged in homosexual acts? Or what about the fact that she and her partner obtained a "marriage license" from the city clerk of Portland, Oregon?

The jurors also indicated they were puzzled about the meaning of the words incompatible with Christian teaching. They decided that the words don't mean what they seem to say and are open to various interpretations. Explaining its conclusions and decision, the court stated, "We depended on the leading of the Holy Spirit."

End

Conversation between Jim and Pastor Will

Jim: Wanted to be sure you saw this. A little disappointing to me if this is all true. I don't believe this would be any kind of rumor or un-truth though.

Pastor Will: It did really happen. We have a maverik conference out west and the issue is being addressed. their action does not reflect the beliefs of the United Methodist Church which does not support there action.

Jim: Good to know this action is being addressed, but still difficult when there are groups within the UMC who think this way. So, although this action may be taken care of, there is obviously a much larger issue. Well, thanks for your insight, I figured you had an inside track on this one!!

Pastor Will: The issue of homosexuality had been debated in the UMC for the past 30 years. The church has never swayed from it's present view and even though some are becoming more militant in their protest, it will not change the church's position.

End.

Thank you Pastor Will for your clarity.

To me the most shocking thing of all is their (the church court) lack of ability to even grasp the most basic parts of speach in the english language. This is the same ambigutiy that plauges our federal, state, local courts as well.

A question to my readers: Can you tell me why you think the court decided to break away from their clear church doctrine in this case? Do you feel that Christianity is moving towards accepting homosexuality as normal?

I believe I know what the problem is. I'm writting about it now so look for my follow up to this story in a post either tomorrow or later this week.

BS

posted by: Brian Scott

---