David Horowitz needs my help!

I just got this urgent appeal from well known right wing nut David Horowitz asking for "a contribution of $25, $50, or even $100 if possible today to our National Campaign for Academic Freedom."

Seems the American college campus of today is crawling with left wing fascists!

Seems he was ATTACKED at Butler University with a PIE!!!! (Where's my checkbook?}

He says,

Dear Bushmeister Zero:

"Let me tell you what happened at Butler. As I stepped to the podium, a group of four students -- juvenile delinquents, really -- rushed the stage and slammed a chocolate cream pie into my face.

Fortunately my glasses weren’t broken." [Thank God!]

[And would you believe?]

"At Texas -- where 20 radicals were arrested! -- the thugs got a surprise. Supporters of our National Campaign for Academic Freedom rose and shouted back. The radicals were stunned but not silenced, and with each slanderous epithet they underscored our point:

We need an Academic Bill of Rights to break the radical left’s grip on our campuses".

Amen to that crazy man!

Now, whereas David, my buddy, says of the pie incident "Officials caught and arrested three of the students," an article at Indymedia says different.

"Horowitz's croneys followed the "enemies"
out of the hall, and confronted them with
what a witness called "pushing and shoving."

But alas, says neocon americanthinker.com ,
the attackers got away."

I don't know, whatever the story, I need to rattle through my penny jar and get something to David right now!

Afghanistan! Our new "partner.".

Well, isn't this interesting. Hamid Karzai wants a security arrangement with us. Now that Afghanistan is all "sovereign" and everything they can make their own decisions, right?

The WaPo:

KABUL, Afghanistan -- President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday he is preparing a formal request to President Bush for a long-term security partnership that could include a permanent U.S. military presence.

At a joint news conference with U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Karzai said he had consulted many of his country's citizens in recent weeks about "a strategic security relationship," with the United States that could help Afghanistan avoid foreign interference and military conflicts."

Rummy said the idea of bases was up in the air but,

?What we generally do when we work with another country is what we have been doing. We find ways we can be helpful, maybe training, equipment or other types of assistance. We think in terms of what we are doing rather than the question of military bases and that type thing."

Riiiiight.

But I read in the Asia Times on the 30th of March that:

"The United States is beefing up its military presence in Afghanistan, at the same time encircling Iran. Washington will set up nine new bases in Afghanistan in the provinces of Helmand, Herat, Nimrouz, Balkh, Khost and Paktia.

Reports also make it clear that the decision to set up new US military bases was made during Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's visit to Kabul last December.

President Hamid Karzai accepted the Pentagon diktat. Not that Karzai had a choice: US intelligence is of the view that he will not be able to hold on to his throne beyond June unless the US Army can speed up training of a large number of Afghan army recruits and protect Kabul.

Even today, the inner core of Karzai's security is run by the US State Department with personnel provided by private US contractors."

You mean, Karzai is just doing what he's told?

[I mean, the poor guy couldn't even go out to campaign in the presidential elections. The only time he attempted it, someone shot a rocket at his helicopter.]

John Kerry was right!

But as the president said, the reason we can't find Osama is because he's hiding. Maybe he meant to say "bribing."

The NY Times:

BERLIN, April 12 - The head of the German intelligence agency, in an interview published here Tuesday, said Osama bin Laden had been able to elude capture after the American invasion of Afghanistan by paying bribes to the Afghan militias delegated the task of finding him.

"The principal mistake was made already in 2001, when one wanted bin Laden to be apprehended by the Afghan militias in Tora Bora," the intelligence official, August Hanning, said in an interview with the German business newspaper Handelsblatt.
"There, bin Laden could buy himself free with a lot of money," Mr. Hanning said.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Hanning confirmed the accuracy of the newspaper's account. She said Afghan forces had told Mr. bin Laden they knew his whereabouts and he would be arrested, but they allowed him safe passage in exchange for a bribe."

Kill them. Kill them all.

Maybe he should have gotten the treatment 3000 Taliban got at the beginning of the Afghan invasion when they were shoved into storage containers and shot.

In March of 2003 a German TV station "presented fresh evidence implicating US troops in the massacre of Taliban prisoners during the 2001 war in Afghanistan. Shown on the ARD channel, the programme presented footage, including interviews with two Afghan government ministers who confirmed the presence of American troops during the transportation and killing of surrendered Taliban prisoners.

"Hundreds of prisoners died of suffocation in the course of transportation in closed containers to the prison of Shibarghan. The transport finally ended in a stretch of desert known as Dasht-i-Leili, near Mazar-i-Sharif, where dead bodies were unloaded and several hundred prisoners who were still alive were shot to death.

And who was mother's little helper in all this? Why it was "forces loyal to the commander of the Northern Alliance, General Rashid Dostum," who is now the defense minister of Afghanistan. See picture of his American counterpart Rummy below shaking hands with another killer.

Now that the Taliban are defeated, or all dead....

Crime wave hits Afghanistan.

The Guardian reported last month "Armed robbery, kidnapping and intimidation have displaced the Taliban as the principal security problem. The line between cops and robbers is becoming increasingly blurred.

Demobilized Mujahideen fighters, underpaid policemen and corrupt officials are behind the lawlessness, according to Afghan officials, western diplomats, and victims.

Thousands of newly Demobilized mujahideen fighters have been inducted into police ranks. Many have retained their criminal sidelines.

The crime wave has heightened worries that a culture of impunity has taken root in the Karzai administration."

Hmmm...that's fine by us. More money for dodgy contractors like Custer/Battles.

The dope on Afghanistan.

Of course, the most successful part of our little excursion into Afghanistan is the drug trade, which accounts for over 40% of the economy. Smashing!

A report by the State Dept. given to congress said Afghanistan is "on the verge of becoming a narcotics state." That's cool. It's worked for us in Vietnam and Columbia.

But women are better off right?

Laura Bush was over there a few weeks ago and brought 23 million dollars for women and children.

Of course, Rummy went over there with 83 million for new bases, but hey. This is a man's world.

The Chicago-Tribune :

WASHINGTON - (KRT) -Human rights organizations criticized the Bush administration Wednesday, saying in the three years since the Taliban was ousted from most of Afghanistan, the United Stateshas not fulfilled promises of safety, freedom, education and health care for Afghan women.

"They have failed, misguided and betrayed Afghan women by giving them false hope," said T. Kumar, an Amnesty International advocacy director for Asiaand the Pacific, at a news conference addressing Afghan women's issues. "Three years later, they are still dreaming, and it may be a pipe dream..."

[See article on narco state.]

All in all, a very "liberating" experience. Iraq is all settled, now on to Iran!

Jewish looney toons.

WaPo:

"JERUSALEM - Israeli police sealed off a Jerusalem shrine on Sunday to foil a march by ultranationalist Jews which Palestinian militants had warned could scupper their cease-fire.

Israel banned the march, intent on derailing Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to pull troops and settlers out of the Gaza Strip, and security forces blocked approaches to the Old City holy site revered by Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif and Jews as Temple Mount."

So, let me get this straight. The Palestinians have declared a cease fire, Ariel Sharon, of all people is advocating pulling out of Gaza, [Even if it is just a smoke screen to take most of the west bank] peace seems to be on the march and now here comes REVAVA!

They just have to get a holy war started this week!

That'll keep the pull out from happening! Well, this is what Sharon gets for coddling these people for so long.

There is one thing, despite all this hate and religeous lunacy, that all faiths can agree on though. They all hate the queers!

The Revava site reports besides the move on the Temple Mount to piss off Muslims around the world:

"Another event which is the topic of much media attention is the planned 10 day international gay festival to be held this summer in Jerusalem.

In a rare move, Jewish Christian and Muslim religious leaders all came together , discussed the issue and issued a joint statement condemning the festival explaining that it is an affront to the holiness of Jerusalem and is extremely offensive to the followers of all 3 faiths..."

Violence, naturally, isn't any kind of affront to the holiness of Jerusalem!

Why don't these people just go desecrate Rabin's grave and leave the rest of us alone?

Oh, they already did?

"Yitzak Rabin's grave desecrated,"

Sunday Times:

"One of the slogans written on the grave in Jerusalem's Mount Herzl cemetery read "Murderous Dog" of a man who came to be hated by the extreme right for signing the Oslo autonomy accords with the Palestinians.

Political leaders have voiced fears that the atmosphere of incitement which marked the build-up to the killing of Rabin is being replicated by opponents of the plan to pull Jewish settlers out of the occupied Gaza Strip."

Hmmm....

See Non Sum Dignus for more on our own homegrown jewish terrorist groups. The fact that pisses me off the most about these religeous types, is that most of them are from the U.S. Thye're all about the bible giving them the whole Middle East, but they were born in brooklyn and they want people who have been living in Palestine for 2000 years to pick up and move.

It's all better now. Here's twenty bucks. Very humane.

Okay, these guys are really getting on my nerves!

AP

"Minuteman Volunteer Dismissed Over Photo."

Organizers of the Minuteman Project said that although authorities determined the man [Bryan Barton] had not illegally detained the immigrant, he still violated the group's procedures. [Procedures? They're a bunch of yahoos running around playing border patrol!]

They added that the volunteer had given the immigrant $20 and fed him during Wednesday's encounter. (Whoa! $20 bucks American!)

"The volunteer's actions were admirable, justified and undeniably humane," Chris Simcox, a project official, said in a news release, "but unfortunately they jeopardized our established procedures and overall purpose of passively monitoring the border."

On its Web site, the Minuteman Project said the volunteer believed the man was in distress from lack of food and fluids and gave him cereal and milk. [Not cookies and milk?]

He then posed for a picture next to him while holding up a T-shirt and gave him $20 as a federal agent arrived to take the man into custody.

The shirt read, "Bryan Barton caught an illegal alien and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."

The immigrant who complained he was held illegally remained [Fucking crybaby!] in custody Friday."

"The Minuteman Project didn't identify the volunteer, but authorities had previously identified the man in the incident as Bryan Barton of San Diego."

See yesterday's post. It is that asshole from the "Koala!

Follow the link. Check out Mr. Barton's essay on Mexican whores!

Why do they call them "Minutemen" again? Do they have little guns?

democracynow.org reported today:

"Three volunteers from the so-called Minutemen Project patrolling the Arizona border for undocumented immigrants are being investigated after a man told authorities he was held against his will and forced to pose for a picture holding a T-shirt with a mocking slogan.

According to law enforcement officials, the 26-year-old Mexican man told agents he was physically restrained and forced to hold a shirt while his picture was taken and he was videotaped. The shirt read: "Bryan Barton caught an illegal alien and all I got was this T-shirt."

So much for old grannies with binoculars!

[I don't know if this is the same Bryan Barton, but it sure fits his M.O.]

DeLay is all about checking the balance.

I came across an interesting letter from senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey from April 1st to Tom DeLay.

Some calmer heads are prevailing in the senate. Who is listening to them though?

"April 1, 2005
Tom DeLay

Majority Leader
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Majority Leader DeLay,

I was stunned to read the threatening comments you made yesterday against Federal judges and our nation?s courts of law in general. In reference to certain Federal judges, you stated: ?The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.?

As you are surely aware, the family of Federal Judge Joan H. Lefkow of Illinois was recently murdered in their home. And at the state level, Judge Rowland W. Barnes and others in his courtroom were gunned down in Georgia.

Our nation?s judges must be concerned for their safety and security when they are asked to make difficult decisions every day. That?s why comments like those you made are not only irresponsible, but downright dangerous. To make matters worse, is it appropriate to make threats directed at specific Federal and state judges?

You should be aware that your comments yesterday may violate a Federal criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. ?115 (a)(1)(B). That law states:

?Whoever threatens to assault?. or murder, a United States judge? with intent to retaliate against such? judge?. on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished ?
Threats against specific Federal judges are not only a serious crime, but also beneath a Member of Congress.

In my view, the true measure of democracy is how it dispenses justice. Your attempt to intimidate judges in America not only threatens our courts, but our fundamental democracy as well.

Federal judges, as well as state and local judges in our nation, are honorable public servants who make difficult decisions every day. You owe them ? and all Americans ? an apology for your reckless statements.

Sincerely,
Frank R. Lautenberg"

[Thanks to Democratic Underground.]

Okay, here's the apology.

"WASHINGTON- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, stepped up his attack on federal judges Thursday, telling a gathering of religious conservatives that the judiciary has "run amok" and demanding that Congress assert authority over the courts.

The judiciary branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and in some cases just ignoring the legitimate will of the people," DeLay said. "But I also believe the executive and legislative branches have neglected the proper checks and balances on this behavior ... Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric."

Intervention by the Congress, however, does not sit well with some conservatives.

John J. Pitney Jr., a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College and a former Republican congressional aide, said: "A lot of conservatives may strongly disapprove of what the courts are doing but don't think it's proper to punish judges for the decisions. They regard that as a breach of separation of powers."

Even Congress' attempt to influence the Schiavo case prompted a strong rebuke by one of the judges deciding the matter. Circuit Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr., appointed to the court by President Bush's father, said, "Congress chose to overstep constitutional boundaries into the province of the judiciary. Such an act cannot be countenanced."

Republican lawmakers too are splintered over whether to take on the judicial branch of government. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., distanced himself from DeLay, saying he thought the judges in the Schiavo case had given her case a "fair and independent look."

Wow, even the spineless jellyfish is backing away from DeLay!

Here's the corruption!

Maybe, it has something to do with the stench of corruption waffting off of DeLay.

The WaPo reported DeLay took money from Russian business men trying to influnce the U.S. governemnt.

The NY Times reported on DeLay's family getting half a million dollars from his PAC.

And then, as if all this and the threat of an indictment in Texas hanging over his head wasn't enough, there is the Indian casino scandal involving one of his "closest and dearest friends" Jack Abramoff.

I hope the republicans in congress keep pushing this fight against the judiciary. Just ride that train straight out of power!!!

Even David Brooks for christsake thinks DeLay and his buddy on K-Strret Grover Norquist have gone too far!

No wait! It's Texas.

Senator John Cornyn is trying to out-do Ton DeLay for biggest wacko idealogue in congress.

I thought the senate was suppossed to be where calmer heads prevailed.

The honorable senator said of our judicial branch:

"...it causes a lot of people, including me, great distress to see judges use the authority that they have been given to make raw political or ideological decisions. And no one, including those judges, including the judges on the United States Supreme Court, should be surprised if one of us stands up and objects.

And, Mr. President, I?m going to make clear that I object to some of the decision-making process that is occurring at the United States Supreme Court today and now. I believe that insofar as the Supreme Court has taken on this role as a policy-maker rather than an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people, it has led to the increasing divisiveness and bitterness of our confirmation fights.

That is a very current problem that this body faces today. It has generated a lack of respect for judges generally. [Wonder where that comes from?]

I mean, why should people respect a judge for making a policy decision borne out of an ideological conviction any more than they would respect or deny themselves the opportunity to disagree if that decision were made by an elected representative?

Of course the difference is that they can throw the rascal ? the rascal out ? and we are sometimes perceived as the rascal ? if they don?t like the decisions that we make. But they can?t vote against a judge because judges aren?t elected. They serve for a lifetime on the federal bench.

And, indeed, I believe this increasing politicalization of the judicial decision-making process at the highest levels of our judiciary have bred a lack of respect for some of the people that wear the robe. And that is a national tragedy.

And finally, I don?t know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that?s been on the news.

And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in violence. Certainly without any justification but a concern that I have that I wanted to share.

You know, it?s ironic, if you look back, as we all have, being students of history in this body, all of us have been elected to other ? to other bodies and other offices and we?re all familiar with the founding documents, the declaration of independence, the constitution itself, we?re familiar with the federalist papers that were written in an effort to get the constitution ratified in New York state. Well, Alexander

Hamilton, apropos of what I want to talk about here, authored a series of essays in the Federalist Papers that opined that the judicial branch would be what he called the ? quote ? ?least dangerous branch of government.? The ?least dangerous branch.?

He pointed out that the judiciary lacked the power of the executive branch, the white house, for example, and the federal government and the political passions of the legislature. In other words, the congress. Its sole purpose ? that is, the federal judiciary?s sole purpose was to objectively interpret and apply the laws of the land and in?"

Jackass!!!

Feel free to write Mr. Cornyn and let him know how you feel.

I did.

"Dear Senator Cornyn-

Your recent statements regarding the judicial branch of government are totally unacceptable. If you had an ounce of self respect or honor, you would resign, but you don't.

You are a crass opportunist playing a very dangerous game with our way of governemnt.

You say, "...I believe this increasing politicalization of the judicial decision-making process at the highest levels of our judiciary have bred a lack of respect for some of the people that wear the robe. And that is a national tragedy."

What is a national tragedy is republicans of your ilk who are politicizing the judicial decision-making process for your own ends. If people are having trouble respecting the robe, it it mainly because of you sir.

Shame on you.!"

The "Dumbshine State" wins!

No, I was right the first time; Florida is the stupidest state.

BBC:

"A law letting people in Florida kill in self-defence on the street without first trying to flee an attacker has been passed by Florida politicians.
Florida law already allows people to shoot a potential attacker in their home, place of work or car.

But until now, courts insisted that anyone confronted in a public place should first try to run away.

Critics of the law say it will bring a Wild West attitude to Florida - magnet to hundreds of thousands of tourists.

One critic said all the measure would do is sell more guns and turn the state into a modern version of the OK Corral.

The bill has been heavily backed by the National Rifle Association, the lobbying group which defends the rights of Americans to carry guns."

Guns and the Minutemen. (Not in the sexual context, right?)

I thought Florida was the stupidest state...

WaPo:

"Miami Suburb Sells Old Guns To Shop Favored by Criminals."

A place called Lou's Gun Shop and Police Supply in the suburban Miami town of Hialeah has a certain status among Florida gun dealers. According to the Americans for Gun Safety Foundation, Lou's sells more weapons that can be traced to crimes than any other gun dealer in the state.

So, where do you think the police chief in Sweetwater, another suburban Miami town, decided to unload his officers' old guns and a bunch of confiscated weapons?

That's right.

None other than Lou's.

Not surprisingly, some gun-control advocates are worried that the same guns the Sweetwater Police Department is passing along to Lou's will end up in the hands of the criminals that the Sweetwater police are trying to catch.

The heat of public criticism aggravated chief Robert Fulgueira at first. But now he says "I sleep real well at night," because his deal to trade in old police Glocks and confiscated weapons for new Glocks is saving the city thousands of dollars. Indeed, Fulgueira is feeling so good about his business acumen that he is scoffing at the police departments that melt down old weapons and dispose of them rather than doing a little wheeling and dealing with them.

"It costs to destroy, so it isn't free," he said. "Then they dump them in the ocean, and I think that is a bigger crime."

-- Manuel Roig-Franzia


...but Arizona is really giving the "Dumbshine State" a run for its money.


"PHOENIX - State senators voted Thursday to let Arizonans carry their firearms into bars and restaurants.

The approval on a 17-11 vote came after supporters of the legislation defeated two efforts to narrow its scope. One would have permitted firearms only if the owner posted the establishment as a gun-carrying zone; the other would have limited firearms only to restaurants.

But Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, said both proposals would infringe on individual constitutional rights.

Current law prohibits weapons anywhere alcohol is served. But Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, said that really isn't the case.

"There are already guns in bars and restaurants now," he said. "But they're brought in by criminals."

Gould said the change is needed to "allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves."

What you really want is a bunch of drunks armed to the teeth.

But it gets better...on to:

The Minutemen (Not like Mike Watt.)

Washington Feb 21, 2005 ? Intent on securing the vulnerable Arizona border from illegal immigrant crossings, U.S. officials are bracing for what they call a potential new threat this spring: the Minutemen.

Nearly 500 volunteers have already joined the Minuteman Project, anointing themselves civilian border patrol agents determined to stop the immigration flow that routinely, and easily, seeps past federal authorities.

They plan to patrol a 40-mile stretch of the southeast Arizona border throughout April when the tide of immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border peaks."

A group; called Border Action see these folks as vigilanties. They say these self appointed border guards are detaining and, in some cases, beating people coming over the border.

This has created some friction between us and the government of Mexico.

"...Mexican President Vicente Fox has condemned the self-described border patrol as "immigrant hunters," and said that his government has sent a diplomatic note to the US expressing concern."

One would think these gun totting types would be good Bush supporters, but they're way beyond that.

The "Arkansas Bushwhacker & The Parrott Mountain Bully Boys" explain Bush is a pussy and the Minutemen are NOT vigilanties:

"President Bush, it would seem, has taken matters into HIS own hands by CHOOSING to ignore, and to not enforce, this country's immigration laws.

He has, therefore, also failed to honor his Oath of Office. President Fox of Mexico has also openly encouraged his country's nationals to ignore and break U.S. immigration laws.

The illegal aliens are also ignoring the law and proper procedures to get what they want, and so are the employers who employ them, the "coyotes" who smuggle them, etc. So they are ALL taking matters into their own hands, ignoring legal procedures, and breaking the law to get what they want!

The "Minutemen", on the other hand, are set up to act as a "neighborhood watch" [They're really little old ladies with binocculars?] along the border, and are instructed to call the Border Patrol when they spot illegal entry taking place in violation of the law.

Therefore, THEY are ASSISTING the Border Patrol and lawfully aiding in the enforcement of our nation's laws.

Now if you see a criminal breaking the law, and you call the police, that certainly does not make you a "vigilante" by any stretch of the immagination - in fact, just the opposite! As we should all remember from our government and civics classes in grade school, THAT is called "being a good citizen."

So I ask you, WHO ARE THE REAL VIGILANTES HERE - THE "MINUTEMEN", OR PRESIDENTS BUSH AND FOX? Who is ignoring the law here, and who is trying to uphold it? Who comes closer to the definition of "vigilante"? I think it is pretty obvious."

The president's spokesman Scott McClellen had some trouble explaining that Bush is not a pussy, but doesn't beleive in vigilanttes either.:

"...people cannot take things into their own hands. But if they see suspicious activity, they should report that suspicious activity to the proper authorities and --

Q: And that doesn't make them vigilantes, does it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, if you're talking about a group of armed, untrained individuals roaming around the desert, that would be something that would concern us and it would increase the chance that someone could get hurt.

And we don't want people operating outside the law --the President made that very clear last week. So if you're talking about people reporting suspicious activity, that's one thing.

If you're talking about people operating outside the law, that's another matter and it's one that cannot be allowed to happen."

Maybe the president is thinking he doesn't want to alienate aliens who pay lots of taxes and might get us out of our Social Security problems?

NY Times:

"While it has been evident for years that illegal immigrants pay a variety of taxes, the extent of their contributions to Social Security is striking: the money added up to about 10 percent of last year's surplus - the difference between what the system currently receives in payroll taxes and what it doles out in pension benefits.

Moreover, the money paid by illegal workers and their employers is factored into all the Social Security Administration's projections.

Illegal immigration, Marcelo Suarez-Orozco, co-director of immigration studies at New York University, noted sardonically, could provide "the fastest way to shore up the long-term finances of Social Security."

Starting in the late 1980's, the Social Security Administration received a flood of W-2 earnings reports with incorrect - sometimes simply fictitious - Social Security numbers. It stashed them in what it calls the "earnings suspense file" in the hope that someday it would figure out whom they belonged to.

The file has been mushrooming ever since: $189 billion worth of wages ended up recorded in the suspense file over the 1990's, two and a half times the amount of the 1980's.

In the current decade, the file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year, generating $6 billion to $7 billion in Social Security tax revenue and about $1.5 billion in Medicare taxes.

In 2002 alone, the last year with figures released by the Social Security Administration, nine million W-2's with incorrect Social Security numbers landed in the suspense file, accounting for $56 billion in earnings, or about 1.5 percent of total reported wages."

And remember, Walmart, America's store, loves illegals too. They're good cheap labor they can take advantage of.

Hear a debate between a "minuteman" spokesman and a representitive from Border Action at Democracy Now.

With friends like these...John Bolton is a shoe-in.

The WaPo:

Former defense secretary Caspar W. Weinberger, ex-CIA director R. James Woolsey and 64 other retired arms control specialists and diplomats are lined up in support of John R. Bolton, whose nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations has stirred controversy.

In a letter being delivered today to Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, other committee members and congressional leaders, they said the attack on Bolton is really an attack on President Bush's policies.

The counterattack, organized by Frank J. Gaffney , a Pentagon official in the Reagan administration, said Bolton "has distinguished himself throughout a long and multifaceted career."

And the best argument for his confirmation?

"... (The) critics of Bolton's positions on arms control treaties are "misdirected" because his views "are identical" to those of Bush..."

Well, that's good right? Because everyone knows W is really into securing those Russian loose nukes.

"The 9/11 Commission and leading nonproliferation experts say that the administration has been too lax in securing nuclear weapons and materials in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union..."

Ooopse.

Well, anyway, "Jesse Helms endorsed Bolton: "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon, if it should be my lot to be on hand for what is forecast to be the final battle between good and evil in this world."

Wow, Jesse Helms. Most people would agree, that's a mainstream endorsement. Most diplomats at the U.N. would be pretty inpressed by that.

Stupid diplomats! What do they know about Armageddon? What do they have to do with the U.N.?

59 of them have sent a letter to Richard Logar, too.

"He is the wrong man for this position," they said... ,

"We urge you to reject that nomination,"

Others who signed the letter include James F. Leonard, deputy ambassador to the U.N. in the Ford and Carter administrations; Princeton N. Lyman, ambassador to South Africa and Nigeria under Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Clinton; Monteagle Stearns, ambassador to Greece and Ivory Coast in the Ford, Carter and Reagan administrations; and Spurgeon M. Keeny Jr., deputy director of the Arms Control Agency in the Carter administration.

Their criticism dwelled primarily on Bolton's stand on issues as the State Department's senior arms control official.

They said he had an "exceptional record" of opposing U.S. efforts to improve national security through arms control."

Whatever!