What’s Good About Club Gitmo?

There has been great concern about US prisoner-of-war camps at Guantanamo, including calls for the prisoners to get lawyers and for them to be brought to the US for trial. Many people on the left would like to close Gitmo down entirely; and there are many who are concerned about alleged torture taking place there.

First of all, we are at war, a fact which has eluded many. During war, there are prisoner-of-war camps, and enemy combatants are kept there until the war is over. There has never been a call from any major group in any country for prisoner-of-war camps to be closed down, for prisoners to be given a criminal trial nor has the gathering of intelligence ever been discouraged—until the past several years. Somehow, there are very vocal individuals who want us to wage a “nice” war against those who capture newsmen and behead them, strap bombs onto their very own children, and sent them into places crowded with innocents with the intention of killing and inflicting pain to people who may or may not have any connection to the struggle at hand, apart from being geographically convenient.

Secondly, the US army is not equipped to, during a battle, gather evidence against those whom they capture. This is pure foolishness. This is not like a crime scene where we can easily go back and gather evidence against those we capture; nor do we have cams mounted on military vehicles in order to gather evidence against those we capture.

Our enemies do not wear uniforms and we are going to have to simply trust our own men in uniform not to grab up innocents off the street to fill our prisons with.

Finally, a lot has been made out of waterboarding. We have used waterboarding a total of 4 times on 3 different men—one of whom was a mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Our enemies have beheaded far more prisoners than we have waterboarded. If we eliminated waterboarding, do you really think our enemies would suddenly treat their prisoners more humanely? These are barbarous individuals who are treated quite well at Guantanamo when captured. When it comes to the capture and subsequent detainment of those who would kill us, I am fine with letting our military call the shots.

Caller to Rush Limbaugh Makes Observations:

I was listening to Hillary sobbing about the hostage crisis in New Hampshire, and she provided perfect cannonball fodder for the Republican Party when she said, in the face of a small hostage crisis, that she was "bewildered and confused and angry." Listen, if one hostage in an office can do this, what would an A-bomb do to her?

Religion without freedom is exactly what radical Islam is. It's tyranny. They're a strong religion but no freedom, whereas freedom without religion is anarchy and total hedonism, which is the modern Liberal Party.

Compact Fluorescent Bulbs

A few months ago, on the Half-hour News Hour, there was a skit about someone breaking a compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb and bringing in a guy in a hasmat suit, and it seemed rather silly. Their skits on the ACLU were much better.

So, I am reading my Consumer Reports magazine (October 2007), and there is a column called safetywise which tells us what to do if a CFL breaks or smokes:

CFL’s contain small amounts of mercury, a neurotoxin. If a bulb breaks, follow these instructions from the US EPA:

•            Open the windows and leave the room for at least 15 minutes.

•            For hard floors, don’t vacuum or sweep the mess. Instead, wear disposable rubber gloves and use cardboard or stiff paper to scoop up the debris. Then clean the area with a damp paper towel.

•            Place the debris and cleanup materials into a plastic bag and seal it. Put that bag into another plastic bag and seal it.

•            If your area allows it and no other disposal or recycling options exist, place in the trash outside. Wash your hands.

This goes on for nearly a full column. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!

Bear in mind, probably not 1 out of 10 CFL bulb owners has any idea that these bulbs are potentially dangerous and may pollute the environment. And, I hope you realize that, there is a Congressional move to require us to use these bulbs.

Vietnam Revisited

General Võ Nguyên Giáp, the commander of the North Vietnamese army during the Vietnam war, recently published his memoirs.

When I talk with various liberal friends about Iraq and Vietnam, and, invariably, I hear, “How much longer should we have stayed in Vietnam? 10 years? 20 years?” From what General Giáp has written, it sounds like perhaps a few more weeks or a few more months would have done the trick.

He writes: "What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it.

But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!"

These are not the memoirs of some conservative pundit; these are the words of the commander of the North Vietnamese army.

Vietnam, after 4 decades, is now, in some areas, practicing capitalism. I have one friend who lives in Saigon (now Ho Chi Minh City), and, from all I can pick up from her, there is greater freedom there now and it sounds like they are not taxed near as much as we are. For this reason, there is less ideology there and more pragmatism; and for this reason, we now enjoy peaceful relations with Vietnam. When we pulled out of South Viet Nam, the quick result was the slaughter of 3 million Vietnamese and Cambodians. These were our allies. These people depended upon the United States and looked to us to help them. We let these people be slaughtered in their own streets, which is one of the most shameful things the United States has ever done. We could have achieved this same result with a few more months and a far fewer than 3 million lives. We could have achieved this same result back in the 1970's rather than 4 decades later. It would have required resolve and unity. We didn’t have that, and we, as a country, are responsible for the slaughter of those 3 million who depended upon us and trusted us.

I realize that there are those whose thoughts about war are summed up by John Lennon: All we are saying, is give peace a chance. Vietnam is an example where we gave peace a chance. 3 million people were slaughtered for having the wrong friends, the wrong jobs and the wrong thoughts. Saddam Hussein attacked his own people with chemical weapons. People have even insisted that his tough approach (killing hundreds of thousands of his own people) kept the peace (is that giving peace a chance?). We all wish that we lived in a nice world where everyone is kind and there is no evil. If such a world exists, this isn’t it.

Peace and liberty is rarely if ever achieved by a combination of sticks and carrots, particularly with an evil enemy. They understand their dead bodies stacked up to the sky; they seem to be less influenced by “tough and hard negotiations.” Right now, in North Korea and in Iran, we might have a brief respite. Don’t think it will last forever.

Why Not Let Environmentalist Have Their Way?

It is a reasonable question. These are people who care about our environment, they care about clean air and clean water, and most conservatives agree with these general principles. So, why not simply give in, give a little more taxes, and fix our planet?

Here’s the problem: most of these environmentalist are kooks who have no clue as to what to do. Let me offer up some examples:

Back in the 1960's, the book Silent Spring was published, and as a result of this, a great many pesticides were banned and/or restricted, including DDT. Conservationists have become so rabid about imposing their standards upon others, DDT is not used in Africa to kill mosquitoes, and, as a result, millions of Africans die every single year from malaria.

Conservationists have opposed nuclear energy for the past several decades. Had we been building nuclear energy plants over the past several decades like France has, the impact upon greenhouse gases would make proposals like switching out light bulbs to be negligible by comparison of impact. By the way, one of the few Democratic presidential candidates to make specific proposals when it comes to greenhouse gases is Biden, who proposes a carbon tax on a variety of businesses. I am so surprised that more taxes is the solution to global warming from that Democratic mind.

The text of Romney’s “religious” speech

Romney’s Speech on YouTube Part 1 Part 2

Some of Rush Limbaugh’s comments: it's embarrassing how profound liberal ignorance is when it comes to the founding of this country; and the rest of you libs who might have this paranoid belief, "He [Romney] was leaving out the atheists, and he was leaving out the agnostics. It was exclusive." He was encapsulating what the Founding Fathers said in the Declaration of Independence. They pointed to natural law and the Creator. I am convinced these liberals have no more understanding of the founding of this country and the tradition behind it than people who have never been born here or live here. I don't think they have the slightest -- (interruption) well, then if they do, then they just can't stand it, whatever it is, either they don't know or they've forgotten, or they do know and they can't stand it. Whatever they're doing, they want to change it. They don't like it.

When you get right down to the bottom line, what really grates on them is that our country was founded on the belief in God, and natural law does not compel every future citizen to believe in God. But it does mean that for our society to survive, the founding principles must be embraced by most of us, otherwise what do we have here? Who are we? What is this place? It will cease to be America. It is why I ask the question over and over again, have you ever stopped to wonder why, in the course of all human history, nations, civilizations, thousands of years before we came into existence, we dwarf them in every which way for good? Economics, technological advancement, freedom, civil rights, human dignity, all of these things, quality of life, standard of living. How did it happen? It is not an accident. It is not a coincidence. It's directly traceable to our founding. What he was talking about yesterday, he was encapsulating what the Founding Fathers said in the Declaration of Independence. If we lose this tradition, if we lose the roots to our founding, we are not going to be the America that we are today, that we've always been.

Justice Scalia on habeas corpus for detainees:

Do you have a single case, in the 220 years of our country -- or, for that matter, in the five centuries of the English Empire -- in which habeas was granted to an alien in a territory that was not under the sovereign control of either the United States or England? In 220 years of our history, or five centuries of the British, do you have a single case in which it was not a citizen of England or a citizen of the United States in which a common law writ of habeas corpus issued to a piece of land that was not within the sovereign jurisdiction? You are appealing to a common law right that somehow found its way into our Constitution without -- as far as I can discern -- a single case, a writ ever issued to a noncitizen.

More discussion from PBS.

Planted Questions by Dems at CNN Debate

You may recall the Republican debate when an advisor to Hillary Clinton posed a question to the Republican Candidates, and the Anderson Cooper said that he did not know who this General was affiliated and said that, had he known, this would have been revealed. Personally, I believed him.

Another questionnaire was there and he observed And so here we all come up there, and Anderson Cooper comes out, and he immediately recognizes the general. He says, "Oh, General Kerr. I'm glad you're here." He didn't recognize any of the rest of us, but he recognized him real easy. CNN defends the debate. Michelle Malkin ferrets out some of the plants.

Rush Channels Bill Clinton

Rush channeling Bill Clinton (re: the documents at the Clinton Library which are not being released): "I tell you, Limbaugh, you know I'm not lying about this. I tell you I'm going to get those papers out there as fast as I can. I had nothing to do with it. We're trying to speed up the process, but there's gazillions of those things in there. You know how much that woman talked to me? We have documents on all that stuff, and most of it was screaming at me! We can't put that kind of stuff out. What are people going to think of me? I'm going to look like a wuss. I'm going to look like an absolute pimp, and all I'm doing is getting yelled at by my wife throwing lamps and stuff. I can't release that stuff, Limbaugh. You ought to know that."

How People of Faith are Viewed

What the Media (and some liberals) think about people of faith (commentary by Rush): All the way back to the eighties, during the Reagan years, you know how you were portrayed. You're stupid. You're hayseed hicks. You have CNN with questions in a debate and some guy in a basement like the Unabomber holding up the Bible and asking, "Do you believe every word in this book?" Like, "You idiot! You can't possibly." You know how you've been insulted. You have gun racks in the back of your pickup truck. You get to church on Saturday night, and have a barbecue in the parking lot in order to be the first in the pew you want on Sunday. You go to NASCAR races. You're missing a couple of front teeth. You chew tobacco, and you are stupid. That's what they think of evangelicals and the so-called Christian right, and they're dumping on Mitt Romney the same way. You have to understand why. They fear the morality of religion. They fear the moral guideposts. They fear that people of faith, whatever the faith is, believe in things larger than themselves. Liberals, some Democrats think the end-all is with them and with humanity, and that there is nothing larger (other than right now the environment), and anybody who knows there is something larger than themselves in this life, anybody who knows that there are questions human beings are capable of asking, but we will never be capable of answering while on this Earth, scares liberals to death, and they can't control people like that, and they fear what they consider to be the judgmentalism of people like that. And they fear the standards, both moral and ethical, that people of faith [have].

Is Global Warming settled science? John Stossel interviews some global warming deniers. VID

Many of these links were culled from the past week on Rush Limbaugh’s show:

Rush’s complete View on the Romney Speech, including how the media speaks with one voice. HTML This is excellent.

Microsoft’s online Santa-bot discusses sex with chatters. HTML

Drought makes the Rain Forest Greener. HTML

Global Warming destroying the Rain Forest. HTML

Al Gore takes public transportation at Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Price for his work on Global Warming. HTML I assume he flew there on a private jet?

Hugo Chavez took the first step to becoming president for life in Venezuela, and the voters voted him down. Chavz. Rush comments: [Chavez takes the typical liberal stance, thinking] Once again the people are too stupid, don't know what they're doing: liberal point of view.

RUSH: Get this: "Hugo Chavez's ex-wife said Thursday she is proposing a constitutional amendment to shorten presidential terms, saying the president has been in office long enough. (laughing) You people know how much I love this. We all have ex-wives (laughing).” HTML

Christmas causes Global Warming. HTML Duh!

The National Intelligence Estimate

Some commentary on the National Intelligence’s Estimate. American Thinker Who wrote the conclusions? Wall Street Journal (this is excellent) AP News — this report is a victory for Ahmadinejad (that is his claim, btw)

PMSNBC Attacks Rush on the NIE

For years, wide-eyed liberals have been claiming the Bush cooked the books on the CIA intelligence so that he could go into Iraq as some kind of a war-monger. You cannot square this with the NIE undercutting Bush’s attempts to neutralize Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. These are either independent reports or they are not; you don’t get to have it both ways.

Don’t forget: Hillary Clinton criticized President Bush for not taking a hard enough line against Iran....2 years ago. Sweetness & Light

Pelosi hides Iraq war funding by funding Afghanistan. MSNBC At one time, this would have remained hidden from the public.

RUSH: The Democrat reaction to the NIE was predictable, as it always will be predictable. We have a montage here of Dingy Harry, Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Jay Rockefeller.

REID: I would be very surprised if, when this report came out yesterday and was made public, that the president didn't already know all about it.

BIDEN: The president raised the specter of World War III with Iran because, as he said, its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, months after he had been told by our intelligence community it's likely that Iran had halted its weapons program.

EMANUEL: This report is a game changer. Okay?

HILLARY: I vehemently disagree with the president that nothing's change and, therefore, nothing in American policy has to change. I have, for two years, advocated diplomatic engagement with Iran, and I think that's what the president should do.

OBAMA: They should have stopped the saber rattling, shouldn't have never [sic] started it, and they need now to aggressively move on the diplomatic front.

ROCKEFELLER: I have to believe that he knew what was going on. Why was he talking about a nuclear Holocaust? Why was he talking about all of those things?

RUSH: This is scary, folks. I mean, this is real-world scary. These people are making it up as they go along. All of a sudden, they believe the intelligence when it fits their paradigm, when it fits their worldview, when it fits their view of the political situation. Then, all of a sudden, the intelligence is infallible! Why, and not only that, the president knew this even while he was pounding the war drums -- and Mrs. Clinton, of all people, suggesting that the president needs to actively engage in diplomacy. There are two ways to look at this. Either the intelligence is wrong, and Iran is still working feverishly toward their nuclear weapons program -- which Ahmadinejad has always maintained they are doing! I guess he's a liar. He's just rattling sabers. We're not going to trust what he says. Bush, however, we can't trust either. If they have indeed stopped, then there is a reason for it, and it is not "diplomacy." It was Shock and Awe in Baghdad, if they have, indeed, stopped. This is a... It's not exactly a win-win, but, if they've stopped, it is really, really good news. But we still don't know this. This is an "estimate," and we know that the people that put this together... Well, we're legitimately suspicious of their motives. The Democrats, however, couldn't care less about the substance of the issue. This is all about discrediting Bush, making him out to be a liar and destroying his political party, his presidency, and so forth, because that's all that matters to these people.

Let me add to this: when you remove the saber rattling, you remove the teeth from negociations with Iran. This is more likely to move us toward war with Iran.

Here is a direct quote from the NIE: "This NIE does not assume that Iran intends to acquire nuclear weapons." This helps to explain the approach of this recent NIE.

The war in Iraq is twice as popular as the Democratic Congress. Rush Daily Mail Politico

Great commentary as to how the new Kyoto treaty, like the old one, is just a front for Marxist philosophy. The Financial Post

Some Rush Commentary

What Does Hillary Get Right?

RUSH: Get this: "Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton's support from South Carolina's black religious leaders may not be quite as extensive as her campaign suggests." Say what, bro? "Clinton got a boost last week when she shared a South Carolina stage with dozens of supporters, accepting what organizers said were endorsements from nearly 90 ministers in the state, but an AP review of the endorsement list supplied by the New York senator's campaign found that some of the backers were affiliated with religious ministries and outreach groups rather than churches. Some were wives of ministers. Two were church elders. At least two were not members of the churches listed beside their names." You mean to tell me that they even lie about minister endorsements, the Clintons? (laughing) You know what? I said last hour, the most expensive thing in this country is ignorance. We pay a higher price for ignorance in this country than gasoline, you name it -- the highest price we pay is ignorance.

Would somebody explain to me why Mrs. Clinton is even a viable candidate? She can't get anything right. Can she not get one thing right? She's been all over the place on the war. She has been all over the place on driver's licenses for illegal aliens. She has no idea that she claims that felons are laundering nearly a million dollars in her campaign. Norman Hsu, we've got the dishwashers in Chinatown, and she can't even get the list of ministers who supposedly support her in South Carolina correct. She can't tip a waitress. Can Hillary do anything right? You know, they talk about competence. What has she done that's right? She will continue to claim on the minister thing, "I didn't know about that. My staff handled that. I didn't know about it." She doesn't know anything. She can't get anything right. She can't do anything right. I think, you know, ignorance and the high price we pay for it, it is clear, a number of Democrats just like thugs. They're just impressed with gangsters. We have Hsu indicted, and, of course, the Drive-Bys not making much about that even though Hsu has been told in the indictment to give up the autographed saxophone from Bill Clinton. (laughing) I know, it would be a great ad. Hillary Clinton can't do anything right. This woman can't do anything right. What has she done right? What does she get right? I know I'm Swiftboating her.

Alternative Minimum Tax and the Bush Tax Cuts:

Listen to this: "Experts say the tax cuts approved in the early days of the Bush administration have also pushed more people under the tax. The Treasury Department estimates that without a change in law, a total of 23 million people would have to pay the Alternative Tax on their 2006 taxes, at an average of about $2,000 each. The tax could reach some Americans earning $50,000 or even less." I thought only the rich got tax cuts? And, by the way, if the Bush tax cuts helped move people up to a different tax bracket, I thought only the rich benefited from Bush's tax cuts! Now we've got a tax cut here, in effect, with the AMT being temporarily suspended, and so people, 50 grand or less, or more, right around that, are going to end up getting a tax cut, and I thought that was not possible, because that's just not what the Democrats say. Only the rich get tax cuts. NY Times on the AMT How far Harry Reid is removed from even his own party—editorial.

A Rush Caller reminds us of a little history: Neville Chamberlain came back with a paper signed by Hitler that says "peace in our time," and look what happened. Now we're listening to Iran saying, "Oh, well, everything is okay, nothing's really happening, we're not doing anything," but people also forget that the Japanese were in Washington, DC, at a peace conference with our president when they bombed Pearl Harbor.

Caller gives testimony to Rush inspiring independent thinking: Unlike the Democrats, who want me to be dependent on them, actually you make me more independent and a more analytical and a sharper thinker, and I think what you hear from your callers is a lot of gratitude and respect and, you know, you're larger than life. You're what we need in this country to help us sort through all this stuff that comes through the Drive-By Media...It's changed my life -- and, you know what? I raised my two girls to listen to you, and let me tell you, they are sharp, and they are great thinkers, and you can't put much past them -- and they require more of the men in their life, because of you. And I'll tell you, you are very articulate about religion and its proper role in politics, and there's no way that you can separate the two, because politics is really the study of people and their issues, and people who believe in God, they live out of the center of their hearts. Those issues motivate everything they do. So anyway, I can't thank you enough for what you've done. You just made my life so much richer, smarter