“Uncle-Bill” politician Sheila Jackson Lee booed by her constituents (a.k.a. Yessa’ Massa’): http://www.khou.com/….ee.11d275a3.html

Another liberal anti-military movie flops:
http://www….-is-superflop-stop-loss-doa/

Liberal newspaper ad revenue in the shitter:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/…03781895

The Religion of Peace (*ahem*) threatens to kill livleak.com employees for hosting anti-muslim film:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr……/

CBS continues to help with terrorist propaganda: http://www.cbsnews.com/…/main3976928.shtml

Merkel stands on principle and refuses to attend opening day of China olympics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/…olympicgames2008

This article details the fact that it will require a draft to successfully execute an ambitious military-based foreign policy. Sounds obvious, but it’s rarely pointed out. Here’s an excerpt:

Still, if political leaders want to send the troops to solve a vast range of the world’s problems—if they want a military that’s far-flung, deployed on many fronts, and fighting in multiple theaters—then, at some point, numbers do matter. Or, rather, numbers and missions matter. If we want to maintain all these military missions, then the numbers have to go up. If we don’t want to do everything necessary to push the numbers up, then the missions have to be cut back.

So, should we continue to send troops overseas to fight wars, keep peace, settle conflicts, impose order, and build nations? How do we get the extra troops—pay them a lot more (and where do we get that money?), mobilize all the reserves, reactivate the draft?

Or should we handle international affairs in a different way, relying much more on military alliances and diplomacy—not because (or not just because) that’s often regarded as preferable to unilateral military force, but simply because there is no practical alternative?

I’ll take the latter.

Draft

At first I thought, “OK, Dems are backing off a little on their ‘let’s lose as soon as possible’ strategy, and the White House is finally acknowledging that if Baghdad isn’t held accountable for stepping up and taking control of their destiny, then we’ll never get anywhere.”

Great, right?

OH No…it seems that somehow health coverage for children, farm aid, a minimum wage increase (double AAARGGH) , and tax breaks for small businesses must be included with the bill.

It reminds me of when my grandmother was suffering from Rheumatoid arthritis (yeah, I know…bear with me). She’d take about 10 pills twice a day…one for pain, one for inflammation, one for something else, and the other 7 to counteract the vicious side-effects of the first three.

I understand the concept of give and take in the Senate. I probably would never make it as a Senator (OK for tons of reasons) because I would not be able to sign off on bills which included 80% BS. But the inability of the Senate to formulate good legislation (especially a military funding bill) without packing on lard…well it’s just sad.

Democrats to fund Iraq war with no pullout date

The White House says it wants to appoint a high-powered official to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and issue directions to the Pentagon and the State Department. This person would be called “the President of the United States”.

Here we go…Yale’s recent heroic stance against Military recruiters for the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy. Thank God for the courage of academia for standing up against the EVIL U.S. military.

…[L]et’s give Yale the benefit of the doubt and assume that they really are concerned with discrimination. If that’s the case, then why is Yale thinking of opening up a satellite campus in the United Arab Emirates? Not only is it a country that won’t even allow Israeli citizens to set foot within its borders, but it bans homosexuality by law. In the U.A.E., gays are arrested, imprisoned, subject to therapy and even hormone treatments.

Well…there…you…go.

It’s Only Discrimination if the U.S. Does It–Brain Terminal

My friend Michael is stationed in Iraq and had the following entry posted on his blog yesterday. How refreshing to hear the real deal from someone actually on the ground. However, I’m sure his perspective won’t keep the blowholes in Congress from conjuring up more images of our troops freaking out because of the Democrat’s resolutions . . .

Yahoo! 360° - Mike’s Blog: “3. ‘Embolden The Enemy and Demoralize The Troops’

It always makes us laugh when we hear someone say this rediculous line on TV. The Brits love to tease us about this line. It’s absurd and just plain wrong. The enemy is emboldened by all kinds of things that have nothing to do with this year’s budget in Congress or our debates about a pull out.

Demoralize the troops? No way. The US Military is very professional these days. The biggest demoralizer is when the Army extends orders at the last minute and people can’t return home. Or they screw up your 2 week leave. Or the mail doesn’t arrive. Nothing the politicians do in Washington will moralize/demoralize us significantly at this point.