Mary Jo Kopechne

Yesterday, we as a country saw an exhibition of what a "bully" is, and how he gets his kicks, and also why we should despise him. And that bully is Edward "Ted" Kennedy.

Ironically, anyone who has ever wondered what the infamous Senator Joseph McCarthy may have sounded like, yesterday's senate hearing concerning the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court would be so very close to how he must of sounded. McCarthy and Kennedy were both alcoholics. That would contribute to the irony.

During the Senate hearing "Teddy (hiccup)" accused a man, Alito, of racism, sexism, and homophobia because he subscribed to a magazine in which an article appeared that contained comments, that though the truth, are hallmarks of the Democratic fascist agenda. So totally unfounded were Ted's comments that it caused Judge Alito's wife to break down in tears.

Senator Edward Kennedy has no decency. And as time passes we forget things we shouldn't. When Teddy points his finger and criticizes someone, I feel we must revisit and remember Mary Jo Kopehne. Mary Jo was born on July 26, 1940 in Forty Fort, Pennsylvania. Mary Jo died in a auto driven by Edward "Ted" Kennedy, on July 18, 1969 in Chappaquiddick, Massachusetts.

Here is the account of the night:

Mary Jo Kopechne July 26, 1940 - July 18, 1969, born in Forty Fort, Pennsylvania, was the only child of insurance salesman Joseph Kopechne and his wife Gwen. Upon graduation from Caldwell College for women, Kopechne moved to Washington D.C. initially to work as secretary to U.S. Senator George Smathers and subsequently as secretary to Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Kopechne died in Chappaquiddick, Massachusetts when a car driven by Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy, in which she was the passenger, went off a bridge and overturned into a pond. Earlier that evening, the two had been attending a party along with other Kennedy aides and several women who had served as "boiler room" girls in the 1968 Presidential campaign of Senator Robert Kennedy. Kennedy managed to escape from the submerged car, but he left the scene and inexplicably did not report the incident or Kopechne's wherabouts. The next day authorities discovered Kennedy's car and recovered Kopechne's body. Though Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury, several details of Mary Jo Kopechne's death remain a mystery.

On July 18, 1969, Kopechne attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island, off the coast of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, held in honor of the "Boiler Room Girls." This affectionate name was given to the six young women who had been vital to the former Robert Kennedy presidential campaign and who had subsequently closed up his files and campaign office after his assassination. Besides Kopechne, the other women, all single, were Susan Tannenbaum, Maryellen Lyons, Ann Lyons, Rosemary (Cricket) Keough, and Esther Newburgh. The men in attendance, all married but partying without their wives, were Ted Kennedy, Joe Gargan, U.S. Attorney Paul Markham, Charles Tretter, Raymond La Rosa, and John Crimmins. The festivity was held at Lawrence Cottage, rented for the occasion by Gargan, Kennedy's cousin and lawyer. The twelve attendees gathered at the cottage after two Kennedy boats raced in the Edgartown Regatta earlier in the day.

Kopechne left the party at 11:15 pm with Ted Kennedy after he offered to drive her back to the Katama Shores Motor Inn in Edgartown where she was staying. On his way to the ferry crossing back to Edgartown, Kennedy reported he accidentally turned right onto Dike Road instead of bearing left on Main Street. After proceeding one-half mile, he descended a hill and came upon a narrow bridge set obliquely to the unlit road. Kennedy drove his 1967 Oldsmobile Delta 88 off the side of Dike (or Dyke) Bridge, and the car overturned into Poucha Pond.

Kennedy was able to extricate himself from the submerged car but Kopechne died. Undertaker Eugene Frieh told reporters that death "was due to suffocation rather than drowning," and diver John Farrar, who removed Kopechne from the car, claimed she was "too buoyant to be full of water." Since her parents' lawyer, Joseph Flanagan, filed a petition barring an autopsy, the cause of death was never medically confirmed. When the car was recovered, all the doors were locked and three of the windows were either open or smashed in. Investigators pondered how Kennedy, a large-framed, 6 foot 2 inch (1.88 m) man managed to get out of the car, but Kopechne, slender, 5 foot 2 inches (1.57 m) tall, was not able to do the same.

Kennedy claims he dove down several times attempting to free her. After exhausting himself, he rested for twenty minutes, then walked back to the Lawrence Cottage where the party had been held. At the Lawrence Cottage, aka: "The Party House", Kennedy asked for his cousin, Joe Gargan, and sat in the back of Kopechne's rental car, a white Dodge Valiant. Though there was a working telephone at this location, none of the group phoned for police or rescue help. Kennedy then returned to the submerged car with Gargan and Paul Markham who then resumed trying to reach her. The group claimed that the tidal current prevented them from reaching her.

Kennedy did not report the accident to authorities; they located him after the car and Kopechne's body were discovered by a science teacher and a 15 year old boy the following morning. He had, in the meantime, discussed the accident with several people, including Kopechne's parents, who say he omitted to tell them the fact that he had been driving the car.

On television Kennedy later said he was not driving under the influence of alcohol. He explained he was in a state of shock when he emerged from the creek and confused by "a jumble of emotions," and that his conduct in not reporting the accident was "inexcusable." He said he gave up hope and remembers little of how he got back to his hotel in Edgartown, except that he swam the narrow channel because there were no night ferries, and nearly drowned in the process.

Kennedy was charged and tried for failing to report an accident involving injury. He received a suspended sentence. Questions remain about his attempts to save Kopechne and the possibility of interference in the investigation and the trial by his family and friends. Kopechne's death severely damaged Kennedy's reputation and is regarded as the major reason he was never able to mount a successful campaign for President of the United States.

A funeral Mass for Kopechne was held on July 22, 1969 at St. Vincent's Roman Catholic Church in Plymouth, Pennsylvania. She is buried in the parish cemetery on the side of Larksville Mountain.

Let's not forget this when we hear the dilusional speech of Ted Kennedy. He has no honor or decency, he has no right to judge anyone because of his personal flaws. The best action toward a bully is a quick, fierce jab to the nose. But, we'll "cross that bridge" when we come to it.

Oooooops!

On Thursday January 5, 2006, Glynis McCants, a numerologist, was a guest on the Coast to Coast late-night radio program hosted by George Noory. If there was such a thing as a "fraud meter," the Coast to Coast program would be second only to the network(?) Air America programs. The Coast to Coast program, formerly the Art Bell Show, attracts psychics and soothsayers from around the world.

Ms. McCants was appearing on the show to review her predictions for 2005. One of her predictions was that the pop singer/freak Michael Jackson would be acquitted of child molestation charges. Of course, she was correct, he was acquitted. Impressive prediction if you don't factor in that the possibility of a guilty high profile Black man or woman being convicted of anything in this country at present is remote to say the least. Now if she would have predicted that the Chicago White Sox would win baseball's World Series in 2005, that would have impressed.

Glynis McCants makes a living as a numerologist. On her website, numberslady.com, she will give you a private reading. All you have to do is give her $18.95. How does numerology work you ask? Here is an example:
You give your birthdate. Let's say 10/5/49. Now, she will say " okay, the number 10 is a happy number, that means at times you are happy and laugh. Now 5 being half of 10 means that you are at times angry, and behind in some of your bills. Of course, 10 plus 5 is 15, the sleep number. You can't escape it as hard you try. Now 49 is an interesting number because eastern Europe has 49 food groups, illuminating the fact that you eat, you are hungry now!

That's numerology. It sure had me pegged.

Basically, you make up stuff and attribute your hyperbole to different numbers. How is that different from the carnival fortune teller you ask? It's not any different. By the time you find out that Europe doesn't have 49 food groups, she has your $18.95 and is in another town or on another radio station. The problem is how do we expose the frauds.

Well, an opportunity presented itself on the Coast to Coast radio program on 1/5/06. It was this day that the relatives of trapped coal miners in Tallmansville, West Virginia were misinformed that their loved ones were all found, and found alive. Not for three hours did the truth come out, the truth that in fact all but one miner was found alive. The Press "ran" with it. The major Networks all broke into their programming to make the announcement of the 12 miners survival. All major Newspapers had as their headline, such ditties as: "ALIVE," "MIRACLE IN W.V.," and "MINERS FOUND ALIVE." Unfortunately, for Glynis McCants, host George Noory also received the news bulletin which he announced to his listeners. Taken aback by this miraculous announcement, Mr. Noory asked Ms. McCants, "Can you believe the latest news coming out of West Virginia?" To which Glynis McCants, the numbers lady, offered, "I knew they were alive."

Not for three hours did the horrible truth come out reporting the true demise of the miners. What numbers were "Numbers McCants" looking at? I have no qualms with people making a living. I have issues with those who do not make an honest living.

Maybe you can ask Ms. McCants about this if you ever see or hear her. She'll be coming to a carnival or radio station in your town, that I'm sure of. Do these type of people.....have your number?

Tokyo Rose

Tokyo Rose was the name given to English speaking women who broadcast propaganda to American servicemen who were fighting in the Pacific during World War II. These broadcasts originated in Japan. The Japanese found three "talking points" that were oh so effective in bringing down troop morale.

Tell them:
1) Your President lied.
2) You cannot win the war.
3) Large Corporations are responsible for the war.

It might be just a coincidence....(cough)..... but these are the same talking points adopted by the American Democratic Party during the current War on Terrorism.

President Lincoln said, "You can fool some of the people some of the time. But you can't fool all the people all of the time." If true, that would be very depressing to Democrats today.

France! Rioting?

From time to time the news media has snookered us. It's not that we're stupid, but we're too busy to pay attention. Once, in a "rating period," we do see and hear things that just can't be true. The top News agencies report rioting in France. How Absurd. Looting in the suburbs of Paris? Yeah right!

Helllooooo! This is France. The country of John Kerry's birth.

Knock Knock!

Who's there.

The country who bailed you out of the Revolutionary War.

Two words. Statue of Liberty.

Wine.

Small portions of food.

Napoleon.

Who denigrates the French by vial rumors of riots?....... In France? Get a life. In America 48% love the French people. (include Prison Inmates & Mental Patients in the 48%).

The French know everything. Far superior to most polyglot Americans. Free health care, welfare up the kazoo, and the self-inflating narcissism of them just "Knowing" that they are French. Sexual behavior? No one can say that they are more promiscuous than the French people. Morals? French don't need them!

Sure, there have been problems in Canada within the province of Quebec associated with the French community. Scurrilous lies. But hey, the French have no influence on anything, so I say leave them alone. They're French. Superior too...Ah....Non-French.

But don't attempt to trick me by insulting me with this tripe about riots in France. Why would anybody riot in France?

You imbecile.

Any pictures you might see surely are prepared in Right-Wing Movie studios by Right-Wing picture defrauders.

Yours Truly,

Baghdad Bob

OH BROTHER!

The recent selection then withdrawal of Ms. Harriet Meirs as Associate Justice to the Supreme Court was tainted with cries of "cronyism" because the President picked his own attorney to fill a vacant position. The event spawned my recollection of maybe the most bizarre appointment in United States history. It involved President John F. Kennedy.

President Kennedy appointed his brother Robert to the position of Attorney General of the United States. His brother! I suppose we are led to believe that his brother was the best qualified candidate for the job. Recent events expose the pure hypocrisy inherent in the standards of the Democratic party.

Just imagine if the current President, George Bush, nominated his brother (Jeb) to a high ranking government position. Oh brother, would we hear the Dem's scream. Their memory is equivalent to their experience with reality. Spotty to say the least.

President's Iraq Speech! Lies?

Here is the speech the President gave to congress justifying his attack on Iraq:

"Good evening.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.

The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.

The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.

The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.

The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.

Faced with Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.

Eight Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman -- warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.

When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.

I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.

I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.

Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.

The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.

In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.

Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party's other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.

Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.

It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance.

As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, "Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.
"In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons program."

In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.

Saddam's deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.

This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.

And so we had to act and act now.

Let me explain why.

First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.

Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past.

Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.

That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.

They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.

At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.

If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler's report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons.

Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the Muslim world and, therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and the progress we have made in the Middle East.

That is something we wanted very much to avoid without giving Iraq's a month's head start to prepare for potential action against it.

Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike. I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses.

So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.

First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.

The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.

Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions have cost Saddam more than $120 billion -- resources that would have been used to rebuild his military. The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food, for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people.

We have no quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq's neighbors and less food for its people.

The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.

The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.

The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are focused on Iraq's military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi casualties.

Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi civilians in harm's way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion.

We must be prepared for these realities. At the same time, Saddam should have absolutely no doubt if he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond forcefully.

Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.

And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.

Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.

Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down.

But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so.
In the century we're leaving, America has often made the difference between chaos and community, fear and hope. Now, in the new century, we'll have a remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past, but only if we stand strong against the enemies of peace.

Tonight, the United States is doing just that. May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out this vital mission and their families. And may God bless America."

Did you pick out the lies? Do you feel misled?

This was the speech presented to congress by President Bill Clinton on December 16, 1998 after launching Cruise Missiles against Iraqi targets.

Air America (II)

If Al Franken and friends are still broadcasting on Air America but no one is listening, are there any sounds?

Shame

There's an old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on ME."

I offer to you a News Item published today by WISN, a radio/TV station in Milwaukee, WI.:

Acting on a tip, Milwaukee police busted a child day-care center for allegedly housing guns and drugs.

Detectives said they discovered four guns, as well as an undisclosed amount of illegal drugs.

The sign out front is missing, but La Conta's Tiny Angels Daycare was still operating Thursday as Milwaukee police swept in around 7:30 a.m.

A 31-year-old man, a 19-year-old man and the 31-year-old woman who owns the center were arrested.

Two children were inside at the time, but weren't injured. They were placed in state custody until their parents could come get them. The Department of Health and Family Services immediately suspended the day-care license and said it has begun the process of revoking the license.

"The department's top priority is to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the children who are in the care of a day-care center," said a department representative.

The state went so far as to deliver the suspension notice to the owner at the jail.

No charges have been issued as of yet against the three.

The day care was just granted its license two months ago.

What's my point? Well, my point is that the government granted a license to these people only two months ago. I ask...on the basis of WHAT? If you believe the Government is there to protect children(upisdown) ....Shame on you!

Air America (airline?)-NO

Air America is a radio network. I think it's a network. The network was conceived by.......someone. And it was meant to do..........something. All the while representing the broad mainstream of America........somewhat.

Those whacky guys and gals at Air America, being true to their progressive nature (?), have gone where no commercial station has ever gone before. They are asking for donations. "GET OUT OF TOWN!" you may be saying. But no.....they are. Here is what the newspaper said:

"In an unusual move for commercial radio, Air America Radio quietly launched Sept. 21 a loyalty program that includes asking for donations from listeners, a strategy more common to noncommercial stations and political action committees. According to the network’s Web site, listeners become an “Air America Associate” by making a cash donation to the network."

They "quietly launched" a loyalty program. OOOPS! I'll probably get into trouble just by writing this. I'll write very quietly. Also, at this point I must recuse myself. I don't listen to Air America which apparently put's me in the stupid category of the human race. Reason would tell you that there are not enough smart people around to sustain a Radio Network for smart people. Therefore a PBS style donation drive should not arouse any suspicion in any of us, because nobody listens to PBS. If this does create suspicion....... you are most likely a racist, or were abused as a child by your parents.

But like I said, "I must recuse myself."

If you think Air America sounds like an airline........you are probably a racist, a stupid racist. Of course it is an airline, isn't it? All I know is that extremely smart people who are better than me, because they have "no God," picked "Air America" as their moniker. I think these smart people have visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads.

These people don't get it. You would think smart people would.

I stand recused.

The Ugly Feminist

Not long ago, a man was about to enter a Department Store in a local shopping mall. Upon his approach to the store he noticed a women heading in his direction. He paused, smiled, and held the door open for the woman who surprised the man with, "I hope you're not holding the door for me because I am a women."

"No," replied the man, "I'm holding the door because I am a Gentleman!"

Feinstein in Fein Form

Dianne Feinstein is a U.S. Senator from California. When you hear about the lunatic fringe of the Democratic Party, Ms. Feinstein would be one of the lunatics. The fact that she is not being treated at a Mental Institution for her delusional tantrums is yet another example of the failure of this country's Health Care system.

Yesterday Ms. Feinstein slipped into Wonderland at the senate confirmation hearing of John Roberts, a candidate for Supreme Court Justice. This is what Ms. Feinstein said, a statement, I think, which was meant to explain the separation of "church and state." It's amazing she said these things without crossing her eyes once. Here's what she said:

I recently traveled to Europe where I saw monuments enshrining the tragedies that have occurred in the name of religion. In Budapest along the River Danube there are 60 pairs of shoes covered in copper: women's, men's, small children's.

During World War II, Hungarian fascist and Nazi soldiers forced thousands of Jews including men, women and small children to remove their shoes, as a final humiliation, before shooting them and letting their bodies fall and drift down the river. These shoes represent a powerful symbol of man's inhumanity.

Never crossed her eyes once.

You may ask yourself, "What in the world is she talking about." Don't ask me, I dunno! Certainly Hungary and Germany were not religious states. I don't have a clue what she was talking about. I just wish someone would have had the compassion and decency to approach her during the statement, and gingerly grab her shoulders and say, "There, there, lets go back to your office. I have licorice!" Then gently lift her from her seat and escort her out of the hearing room.

That would have been the correct thing to do.

I can just see her, her eyes crossed by now, staggering in short choppy steps out of the Senate hearing room saying, "Is it red licorice?"

Gilligan?

This week Bob Denver died. Denver played the character "Gilligan" in the TV series Gilligan's Island. This made me think of the human failure, John Kerry.

John Kerry ran for President in 2004. He was rejected in 2004. This girly man also told many lies in 2004. His whole life is just rotten with bad judgment and out and out lies.

Mr. Kerry tried so hard to dupe the American people into thinking he was a wholesome all-American man. And he might have been successful if only he didn't have to open his mouth and speak. This is the guy who voted against the Iraq war after he voted for it. Of all the major gaffes committed by this traitorous loser was his response to a question about his favorite Boston Red Sox player.

I love baseball, and I love my country. These two things separate myself from comrade Kerry.

Kerry is a Senator from Massachusetts, the state the city of Boston is located. He would wear a Boston Red Sox baseball hat from time to time on the campaign trail. His intention was to portray himself as an average Joe, and a supporter of the Red Sox. Well, Gilligan, er I mean Kerry had some baseball talk with a news reporter that I will never forget, and you the reader might have missed.

reporter: "Senator Kerry, I see you are wearing a Red Sox cap.

Kerry: "You betcha, I'm a life-long fan."

reporter: "Who's your favorite Red Sox player?"

Kerry: "Manny Ortiz!"

reporter: "Do you mean David Ortiz?"
(There is no Manny Ortiz on the Red Sox)

Kerry: "Er... yes, David Ortiz"

[Then he spoke]

Kerry: "But my favorite all-time Red Sox player was Eddie Yost. I admired him while I was growing up because he was a hard-nosed player who never would give up."

Okay. If you know little about baseball, much like Kerry and this reporter, you wouldn't think twice about his statement. At least the reporter knew David Ortiz. But if you are a baseball fan it would grab your attention immediately. At first you would wonder why he wouldn't pick Ted Williams, the games best hitter ever, and a Red Sox player, as his favorite player. Eddie Yost was a hard-nosed player, and Eddie probably did hate to lose, but the problem is this. Eddie Yost never played for the Boston Red Sox. Never. Not one game.

Skipper: "OOOOh little buddy, are you telling tales?"

Kerry: "Who? Where? Me?"

New Orleans D.C.

New York////////New Orleans.

Both cities shared disasters this century.

New York, the terrorist attack on the World Trade Towers. An event that was not predicted, but the city apparently had trained for such an event.

New Orleans, hit by a hurricane that was tracked for days. There was never any doubt it would hit the southern part of Louisiana.

How do they compare? Can you say....ILLUMINATING!

New York Mayor: Rudy Giuliani (Republican).....took immediate charge of the search and rescue efforts. Then succeeded in reassuring citizens of his control, and the endeavors to correct the situation were underway. [His performance was so outstanding that he is now spoken of as Presidential material]

New Orleans Mayor: Ray Nagin (Democrat)......ordered the evacuation of the city more then a day before Hurricane Katrina struck. That was it. He didn't enforce it. Large segments of the city said, "Hell No! We're not going anywhere!" The next time Mayor Nagin was seen he was whining and complaining two days after the disaster that the Federal Government was to slow, that the city, his city, was in anarchy. [It's hard to say that the Mayor lost control because he never had control].

New York Governor: George Pataki (Republican).....was immediately at the scene wearing a hard hat. He mobilized the Guard.

Louisiana Governor: Kathleen Blanco (Democrat).....I don't know what she was doing, and there is evidence she didn't know what she was doing. We only know what she didn't do.....call out the Guard to initiate rescue.

Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco adhere to the Democratic party Creed:"If you don't know what you're doing, do nothing, and blame others."

A note to New Orleans-------if you want to bow to the federal government and give-up your sovereignty as a city in the state of Louisiana, that could be arranged. You'd be called the New Orleans District of Columbia. New Orleans D.C.. You have the crime and mindset to be another D.C..

A new New Orleans?

Hurricane Katrina dealt a blow to the gulf coast of the United States. It could have been worse, but the devastation, especially in New Orleans, could have been prevented.

New Orleans is a city below sea level. The levees that were constructed to protect the city had the capability of withstanding a Level 3 hurricane. A Hurricane, Level 4 or 5 would wipe out the city. Katrina, previously a Level 5, came ashore as a Level 4. The storm tracked east at the point of land fall wiping out coastal towns in Mississippi and Alabama. New Orleans, located in the state of Louisiana, appeared to be spared the brunt of the storm, but then the levees protecting the city failed releasing the water and flooding the city.

The Question: If we knew that the possibility of a Level 5 Hurricane hitting New Orleans would wipe out the city, why were the levees constructed only to protect the city from a Level 3 storm? We must insist on an answer to that question.

The levees failed but also the politicians failed. For those of you not familiar with the city of New Orleans, it is well known for the corruption of city government. The city is one of the most crime ridden cities in America. And like all other crime ridden cities in this country, it is run by liberal Democrats. New Orleans boasts of its immoral attributes. "Do something FOR ME!".... should be the cities motto. In short, there is not a human vice that is not exploited by the city of New Orleans. Why spend money on levee expansion, when you can build bike paths, parking lots, a Mardi Gras fountain, and river walks..... would be the response of the city government to the above question. Democrats will spend millions of dollars on bike paths and river walks, and turn around and say, "We need more Police, to deal with our high crime rate." DEM's will create a budget and after passing it, and at the same time appeasing their special interests with it, decrie that the city needs more police officers.

A sane human being would say, "A bike path through the French Quarter would sure be nice, but seeing the existing crime problem we have, the money is better spent on increasing our fire and police operations."

Did you ever wonder why Democrats hate Police and coddle criminals?.... When a DEM sees a cop, he thinks, "because of that nazi pig, we don't have a bike bath somewhere."

The Dutch have the same problem of being under sea level that exists in New Orleans. A tidal wave in the 1950's killed thousands. What they did was build a series of 3 levees. No expense was spared. Remember that the flooding of New Orleans did not have to happen.

The question, why a better levee system was not built in New orleans MUST be answered by local and state representatives. It has been customary for the federal government to pay 75% of any major construction project, leaving the remaining 25% to be paid by the State and Local authorities. A tremendous deal if you ask me. But apparently too pricey for the Mayor and his corrupt minions.

Natural catastrophe's (USA): You will hear that the New Orleans catastrophe is the worst natural disaster in this country's history. Not true. The people you will hear this from are the same people who said our incursion into Afghanistan would be another Vietnam. Oddly, even though the same people say discrediting things over and over again, they are never discredited.

Worst American Disasters
• Hurricane---Sept. 8, 1900 in Galveston, Texas. 6-8,000 lost.
• Flood---May 31, 1889 in Johnstown, PA when the South Fork Dam broke. 2,2000 perished.
• Fire---Oct. 8, 1871 in Peshtigo, Wisconsin where 1,500 died.

The Worst American Disaster
• Epidemic---1918 the Spanish Flu hit The United States killing 500,000 people.

THE MORAL: To all of you who sheepishly follow the liberal mantra that the Government should provide everything........I hope you witnessed first hand how quickly relief arrived to New Orleans. That is the level of service you wish to condemn others with.

Also, I think it should be stressed that much if not all of the loss of life in New Orleans could have been prevented if the people in New Orleans who were told to evacuate would have left the city. When government, the provider of essential services tells you it can no longer provide those services, believe them,...... LEAVE! All you do is increase the burden you already present by not following the evacuation order. And don't complain later if you were too stupid to leave. There is a fine line between Stupid and Stubborn. Many stayed in New Orleans because they were thugs, accustomed to preying on other's misery. Other people stayed simply because they weren't leaving. They don't obey others.

Reuters Photo

Cindy or Casey?

What took the ultra "Left" wing so long to come up with a Cindy Sheehan? Truly this country is full of unstable people who wear sheep's clothing to hide the Wolfe inside. Without these evildoers the word and concept of upisdown would not exist. Everything that Cindy Sheehan, a mother of a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq, says is a lie. The total opposite of what she says is the truth. Cindy is classic "upisdown".

Why would the media concentrate on this publicly grieving mother, whose rants prove her mental state is very unstable. This media circus is being financed by Ben Cohen of the "Ben & Jerry's" ice cream company. I'd like to know how this money is funneled to these news networks.

I see two good things coming of this:

#1) Cindy will, and has, demonstrated the insanity, and hatred, and intolerance layered in the hearts of far Left socialists. It's all there......right in front of America and the world's eyes to see. And Cindy Sheehan's selfishness is nauseating.

#2) From here on no one can pooh-pooh the idea that the main media is hopelessly connected to the far far left. How disgraceful of the networks to drool over Cindy while ignoring the other Mothers and Fathers who lost their children.

Stalin called these people "useful idiots." I find myself for once agreeing Josef Stalin, hero of the Left.

All this begs the question: Is this about Casey or Cindy Sheehan.

I found the answer quite quickly.

I had heard that Casey Sheehan had re-enlisted and he knew he was going to Iraq. I also heard that this was his second tour of duty in Iraq. If either of these bits of data is true you would definately have to say that Casey would not support the lunatic rantings of his mother Cindy. Her own family is embarrassed and humiliated by her actions. Her husband has filed for divorce, the "grounds" being that she is nuts.

I wanted to verify Casey Sheehan's service record so I did some internet searchs, (Google, dogpile, MSN). I typed in the search window "Casey Sheehan" and clicked search. The results of the search were interesting, and so very sad. All the results were web pages, news articles and blogs about...... [drum roll]..... Cindy Sheehan! Gasp, oh gasp! This whole charade is about Cindy.

Why doesn't the news media talk to Casey's Father?

Just an Afterthought

Now we are a few months past the Michael Jackson trial verdict, a memory has stuck with me.

The memory of his supporters standing outside the court house, and also outside his "Neverland" ranch. Who were these people, and what were they thinking.

If polled, I wonder how many of these people would say they supported John Kerry in the last election? I feel the results of such a poll would be illuminating.

Chappaquiddick

"Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law?Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?"- Senator Ted Kennedy, 1973 -

Let's call him.....Mr. High & Mighty. A product of a truly disfunctional family, Ted Kennedy defines the term "pond scum."

He is the Joseph McCarthy of the Democratic Party. But unlike "Gunner Joe," Ted has never did anything for this country. McCarthy, at least, exposed Communists, a fact that was just recently proven when the archives of the former Soviet Union were opened. Also McCarthy served his country in the military.

Joseph Kennedy, the father, made his money as a rum-runner during the period known as "prohibition." His gains were of the illegal type. Did he go to jail, and have his ill gotten fortune taken from him? No.

My first experience with someone stealing a national election was the election of 1960 when Ted's brother John, with the help of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, was elected President thanks to the Illinois electoral vote. (My second experience was Al Gore trying again in 2000) Then.... John picks his brother Bobby to be Attorney General of the U.S.. Ted was just a lazy drunk during this period. When brother John was killed, and Bobby was killed, Ted became Senator from the deluded State of Massachusetts. (Home of Mike Dukakis and John Kerry---Both men rejected, not elected.)

On July 19, 1969, Ted and a young intern named Mary Jo went for a drive. Unfortunately, Ted was drunk. And of course, Ted was not a womanizer like his brothers were. Oh know! Not Ted! (cough) During this drunken drive, drunken Ted drove the car off a bridge into the Chappaquiddick river. Ted somehow managed to remove himself from the car, his own personal safety being paramount here. Shaken, and definitely drunk, he managed to find his way home.

Up until this point everything that happened that night could be rationally explained. But here's the kicker. Ted gathered himself enough after TEN HOURS to call police. Mary Jo could not hold here breath for 10 hours. Why did it take ten hours?..... You'll have to ask Teddy.

Funny how different people are. I can only speak for myself.....but if it were me....I would of made every attempt to extract her from the car. As the man, as the driver, who was responsible for the deadly plunge, I would of tried to save her. And, if I couldn't, I would of ran, and ran, and ran until I could get help and call the police...... But that's just me.

I only bring this up because just yesterday I saw Teddy on the Television casting judgment on another human being. A Human who was not a drunk or directly responsible for the death of another. His comments are regularly published and I can't figure out why. Teddy is wrong all the time. If you have any doubts of what "upisdown" means........Ted Kennedy is the poster child.

"Senator! Have you no decency?"

LOL. That's my point, he has none.

London Bridges Falling Down

Today, the evil called "TERROR" hit home in the grand city of London, England. During "rush hour" today 4 bombs exploded. One in a double decker bus, and three in the city's underground subway called the "Tube" by London natives. Not surprisingly, a muslim terror group took credit for the bombings. Last I heard, two other bombs were discovered which did not explode.

Much like my own country's 9/11, and the Madrid bombings, innocent people were targeted. Innocents who were working, or traversing to and from work, were killed in all three attacks. Innocents who have every right to live their lives free from suicide bombers, or threats from radical brain-washed zealots who kill in the name of a deity, in the name of God! What god would sanction the senseless death of Innocents.

The people of London are well aware of terrorism. Most recent in their history they had to deal with the IRA (Irish Republican Army). When Americans try to describe the character of the English people we emphasize the "stiff upper lip" facade done so well by londoners. Today we all saw that trait exhibited by the citizens of London. . . . Americans love Brits.

These bombers are vermin. Anytime now the muslim community should stand up and denounce these muslims. I encourage them because I'm concerned about Innocents. Should there ever be a backlash toward the Islamic community in the US of A, many innocent people will die. When that happens we act much like our enemies act. Not good. Not good at all. It's time for the muslim leaders to assert their doctrine of peace that the "West" hears so much about.


(Photo/AP)

DA FRENCH

One of the first enemies the United States had was the French. I once heard that the French were a people who wanted to rule the world but couldn't even rule themselves. A story comes to mind.

A U.S. Marine Corps Officer attended a conference in Europe where Admirals from the U.S., France and other NATO countries were present. This officer overheard a French Admiral commenting, "We, in France, speak many languages, as does all of Europe. Whereas, the Americans only speak one language. Why must we speak in English only at these meetings? Why can't we speak French?"

The Marine officer chimed in, "Maybe because we secured an agreement that you wouldn't have to speak German!"

The room fell silent.

Father of the Year

This week the National Father's Day Council announced the picks for their 64th annual award. This year it went to four individuals. If I told you that Donald Trump was one of them you probably wouldn't believe me. Donald Trump is a millionaire whose projects tend to fail, but he continues to prosper. I think he is married, but I am not positive about that. I know his ex-wife sued him in a very public divorce. Father of the year you say?

The National Council trumped themselves by their next pick. The Radio/TV host Larry King. He does have 6 children which is wonderful. The only problem is the fact that this man has been married 7 times.

It's apparent that the National Father's Day Council has redefined what a "good" father is. The odd thing is, the current definition, as defined by this strange council, was the definition of a "bad" father only 20 years ago. (UPISDOWN)

Larry King is Father of the Year. (UPISDOWN)

Using the council's criteria for Father of the Year, it's a good guess that ex-President Bill Clinton was Father of the Year in 1998.