Be a patriot. Boycott Citgo.

Chavez's Citgo Is No Friend of America by Mac Johnson
President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela threatens to provide a South American foothold to nations hostile to the United States: nations who are happy to exploit a thuggish, Marxist dictator of an oppressed, unstable country. (Note Chavez's five-billion dollar regional oil drilling project with China, and his stated intent to destroy U.S. influence in the world.) Through his total control of the Venezuela-owned Citgo Corporation, Chavez intends to manipulate U.S. politics and buy political favors through his sale of discounted heating oil to "needy" American customers in congressional districts with pork-hungry representatives. Are there no laws barring foreign governments from manipulating our elected officials?

The obvious first step for Americans to resist this hostile foreign influence is to stop buying Citgo products. I'm boycotting Citgo, and hope You will too. Next, we should direct Congress and our president to find a way to repel this dangerous dictator.

WFMT Folk Festival 2006 -a political event?

WFMT - Show Detail
Words can hardly express my great appreciation and decades-long affection for WFMT and the superb work You do. Thank You! But I do have to express a little disappointment today. Perhaps my listening was simply ill-timed, but on at least two occasions recently (including today) I've tuned in just in time to hear some angry Canadian folk music performer (or another) denigrating the Bush administration, evidently with the hearty approval of the audience. I don’t know very much about folk music, but suspect that its diversity precludes its being monolithically leftist, pacifist, or contemptuous of our democratic government.
WFMT offers a valuable service in promoting and preserving a wide range of classical and folk music, and this helps to humanize and strengthen our own culture. Not having listened to “WFMT Folk Festival 2006” in its entirety today, I’m left wondering how many songs in the program were supportive of those in military and public service who are likewise engaged in promoting the humanity and security of our culture.
Public dissent and serious criticism of public officials should be a positive force in steering the national rudder, but without balance and fairness even musical programs can become divisive, destructive… and not much fun.

Iran uses Hezbollah as a diversion, continues nuclear program.

WorldNetDaily: Iran missile transfer puts most Israelis in range
While the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah runs its course, Iran is gaining time to develop its nuclear capability.

The world's attention is focused on the more visible but purely secondary regional threat posed by Hezbollah's indiscriminate rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and the Israeli response in Lebanon. How much longer will it be before the president of Iran is fully equipped to carry out the threats he has already openly expressed? Who doubts that once he possesses nuclear weapons he will hasten to use them?

The Tivoli Theater is a classic experience

How often do You get a lot more than You expected?

Tonight my wife, daughter, mother, father, and I attended a screening of the movie 'Cars' at the Tivoli Theater (http://www.classiccinemas.com/history/tivoli.asp) in Downers Grove, Illinois.

The movie was a little slow in spots, but deserves credit for the sophistication and artistry of its animation, its surprising promotion the wholesome values of friendship, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and appreciation of simple pleasures and natural beauty. 'Cars' makes an appeal to recall a nearly forgotten time, when road trips 'out west' were not merely a means to reach a destination, but were prized for the beauty and social dimension of the journey itself, whose pre-interstate era route and pace brought its travellers into closer contact with nature and the people along the way.

This message was well conveyed at the Tivoli, a theater opened in 1928, which not only has escaped the wrecking ball of time, but boldly speaks a happy message of confident and youthful tradition. The anachronistic three dollar admission perhaps prepares one to expect a decrepit box with gummy seats, sticky floors, and a tiny screen, but at the Tivoli we were greeted by a building with a vigorous architecture and beautifully restored and improved interior. Bold color scheme. Gold leaf paint. Good amenities. Comfortable seating, a large screen, good picture quality and very good sound.

Before the movie an organist skillfully enlivened the audience with the 3-manual Wurlitzer. The interaction between the organist and the appreciative audience was a real treat. After the movie, complementary candies were offered to the exiting patrons.

I have to applaud the owners and management of the Tivoli, who provided not just a good movie experience, but an evening of family entertainment that went beyond the movie, and was worth well more than the admission fee. I don't know another theater in the Chicago area I'd rather attend. Thanks to You, and keep up the great work!

Illinois Senator Durbin deepens his disgrace

BREITBART.COM - Stem Cell Bill Expected to Force Bush Veto

"The Senate moved Tuesday toward sending a bill expanding federal funding of embryonic stem cell research to President Bush, who has promised a swift veto -his first..."
"This is a vote that millions of Americans are watching," said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill. "They can't understand why America for the last five years has shut down medical research that promises hope."

Senator, You are well aware that embryonic stem cell research is legal and aggressively being pursued by numerous researchers in the United States. Today's vote in the Senate does not concern whether such research will be permitted, but only whether it will be supported by public funds. Your statement that "America... has shut down medical research that promises hope" is a misrepresentation and a lie. It's all the more disgusting because of Your willingness to treat embryonic human beings not as unique human beings, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, but as raw material to be exploited. To You, their highest value lies not in their innate personhood or even their potential to enjoy childhood and a productive adulthood. No, they are of more use to You as fodder for science, and as coins to be spent in furthering Your political career.

You clearly see nothing wrong with sacrificing the vulnerable and defenseless for the sake of the powerful.

The spirit of Nazism and statism live on in You and all politicians who prize political power above the defense of the defenseless.

You, sir, have again disgraced Your position as senator.

Bush seeks to appease Hitler

Iran says Western proposal 'positive' - Yahoo! News

The President of Iran will not stop until he is stopped. Providing him "incentives" and nuclear technology will not contain his ambitions but rather accelerate his rush to war and a new holocaust.

Dubai Firm Cleared to Buy Military Supplier

Dubai Firm Cleared to Buy Military Supplier
Something may be rotten in Denmark, but the stench of an ill and hobbling democracy hovers over the United States.
There are indications that the United States is headed toward increasingly turbulent times with some Muslim and other third-world nations. So why is the Bush administration seemingly fixated on making us more vulnerable to these nations? OK, I suppose the administration doesn't actually want to make us more vulnerable. What alarms me is the administration's seemingly unrestrained promotion of big business to the detriment of national security.

Remember the Dubai ports deal? President Bush almost couldn't let go of that millstone even when it plunged into the harbor. Remember his recent committment of nuclear technology to India? Recall our ongoing massive trade deficit with China? How about our "open door" policy to ill-paid, easily exploited illegal immigrants? Or the massive domestic spending, to the point of debt-worship, on Medicare and other domestic programs.

But back to Dubai. They couldn't close the deal on the ports, so what does the administration negotiate behind the backs of the American public, and then spring upon us to remind us to stay in our place? The sole supplier of certain military turbine components is one of a group of manufacturers being sold to a Dubai government-owned company. Take that, America! "Who do You think You are to embarrass and oppose me before the world? I'm the President! No matter that Dubai supports terrorists (http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200603010741.asp)".

Why can't we recognize the signs of the times and decide that on some issues it is time to circle the wagons. It's a good time to insist that we don't continue to outsource critical military components. It's a good time to protect our critical domestic infrastructure and military capabilities. It's a good time to take control of our own borders and moderate the flood of illegal immigration.

"Peacemakers" ungrateful for military rescue of kidnapped colleagues

Pulse24 - Toronto's News

Four members of the so-called "Christian Peacemaker Teams" were kidnapped four months ago by Muslim terrorists. One, an American, was tortured and brutally murdered. Today the three surviving hostages were rescued by British and American troops without casualties.

You'd think that CPT might express some gratitude to the soldiers who risked their lives rescuing these hostages. But no, CPT's statement of early today appears more consumed with anti-military rhetoric than real gratitude for those who selflessly secured the rescue of their friends.

"We pray that Christians throughout the world will, in the same spirit, call for justice and for respect for the human rights of the thousands of Iraqis who are being detained illegally by the U.S. and British forces occupying Iraq... We believe that the illegal occupation of Iraq by Multinational Forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping and so much pain and suffering in Iraq. The occupation must end.

I'm sure CPT is very happy over their friends' return, but not very happy at all that British and American forces were instrumental in freeing them. This rang loud and clear in CPT's public statement.

Evidently CPT heard from more than a few individuals who excoriated them for the ingratitude of their statement which stood throughout most of the day. Tonight CPT posted on its website an "addenda", which acknowledged the soldiers:

"We are grateful to the soldiers who risked their lives to free Jim, Norman and Harmeet. As peacemakers who hold firm to our commitment to nonviolence, we are also deeply grateful that they fired no shots to free our colleagues."

Am I being harsh on CPT, considering these people are still grieving the murder of their colleague, Tom Fox? I don't think so. Their grief did not prevent them from blaming the rescuers for causing the kidnapping and "so much pain and suffering in Iraq" through their "illegal occupation".

CPT's "addenda", published after a day of public outrage at the organization's ingratitude and political exploitation of the kidnapping and rescue, rings hollow.

Patriots accused of xenophobia in stopping ports deal

Port Deal Backlash -- Joe Mariani -- GOPUSA

In "Port Deal Backlash" the American public is scolded for demanding loudly and insistently that Congress stop Dubya from doing the dubious Dubai deal. It's unfortunate that President Bush and some leading Republicans dug in their heals to defend the transaction without giving due consideration to the nature of the public's objections or their tsunamic force. As a result, the President suffered an embarassing spanking.

I'm tempted to criticize some of the more strident Democrats who loudly (and perhaps gleefully) pounded the President while the pounding was good. However, I can hardly blame them. The President, I'm convinced, was backing a deal that was bad for the United States, and much of the public believed this to be the case. Presumably the President and Congress had further information that might have been used to defend the deal, but the public evidently didn't see the President make a convincing case. They felt he just wasn't using common sense. And suddenly the public's trust was undermined when it realized that the mechanism for approving such deals appears to be inadequate and potentially dangerous.

It's too bad, because President Bush has done some great things that have bolstered the security of the U.S. I suppose we shouldn't expect him to be perfect, but we should expect him to be consistently strong where he has shown his greatest strenghts: in protecting the security of the country.

President Bush, we need to see more coherent and comprehensive efforts to secure our borders, defeat terrorist enemies of the U.S., improve the fairness of our international trade, and reduce our federal spending.

This bad deal isn't dead yet... Congress, don't lose Your nerve.

Senator: UAE firm to transfer port operations to U.S. 'entity' - CNN.com

It appears that Congress is not totally deaf to the public, at least when the public reacts with enough unity and outrage.

However, this deal doesn't really sound dead. Dubai Ports World is proposing giving control of the ports to an American "entity". Why does DPW have any say in the matter if the deal is dead?

Let's remain vigilant and work to regain American control of all our American ports. The days are gone when it was acceptable to have our key infrastructure owned or operated by entities aligned with nations whose friendliness toward the United States is dubious at best.

U.S.-India nuclear deal is a threat to world security

India nuclear deal pushed - Washington Times

It's hard to guess how many nations will bare their nuclear arms before this decade is done. Perhaps more disturbing than the number will be the identity of those nations. The world already has been threatened by the nuclear saber-rattling of an Iranian Hitler and a North Korean Stalin. For Iran and North Korea, leveling the playing field with the U.S. and its allies may be a dream close to fulfillment. Other nations in Asia in Africa certainly are dreaming the same powerful dream.

There must be several former Soviet republics which still possess Soviet-era nuclear weapons. How many of them have resisted the temptation to quietly convert uranium to gold: an alchemist's dream, one that requires no science? How can they be expected to resist the temptation when now even the U.S. is openly forging a deal openly to trade nuclear technology for ...for what? Increased access to Indian markets? The U.S. will be perceived as selling nuclear technology in disregard of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This will diminish the authority and value of the NPT. On what basis can the U.S. object to the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea when it rewards India, who has for decades thumbed its nose at the NPT while developing and then testing nuclear weapons? The Indian deal will damage our ability to contain nuclear techonology through diplomacy and law, and will encourage our adversaries to heap contempt upon American non-proliferation rhetoric.

As second- and third-world nations race to achieve military parity with their more menacing neighbors, it will be increasingly difficult or soon impossible for the western powers to contain the genie any longer. Envy and hatred toward the U.S. and its allies will be fueled by the selective and self-serving attitude displayed by the U.S., which apparently is ready to pontificate against nuclear proliferation when it suits American interests, but is ready to subordinate such principles to economic interests at the whim of the administration.

Congress needs to dissect and examine this deal very closely, and consider very carefully whether the percieved benefits of this deal outweigh the very dangerous effects this deal may cause.

Even Republicans can't back President Bush on the ports deal

Lawmaker vows to kill ports deal -The Washington Times

US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter is on the right track, and I applaud him for courageously applying common sense to this dangerous situation. Our national security is jeopardized by deals to sell assets and technology, or outsource control of critical infrastructure to foreign states, especially states whose loyalties and interests are not those of the United States. Unfortunately in this matter our own President Bush appears to be on the wrong side of the fence. Why is that? I really don't understand, but I feel our national security is threatened by some of his recent actions.

President Bush rewards India with nuclear technology, slaps Pakistan and China

U.S., India reach agreement on nuclear deal -The Washington Times

Let me get this straight... India has always refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and so now we reward them for this by granting them increased access to American nuclear technology. And in exchange for what? This article doesn't really make this clear, but You can bet Your bottom dollar that the answer is measured in dollars.

Turning over nuclear technology to India is likely to destabilize an already unstable region. How will this be perceived by Pakistan and China? Not favorably, who will regard India as an increasing threat to their security.

And this deal is good for the U.S. because... we will gain increased access to Indian markets?

I don't think so. I want to know which companies are behind the lobbying that promoted this plan. The most obvious suspects are those who will directly sell nuclear equipment or know-how to India.

The United States is selling itself to foreign interests, piece by piece, and risking a destabilizing and accelerated nuclear arms race between adversarial nations in Asia.

I hope Congress has the sense to kill this plan.

UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports - United Press International

UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports - United Press International

Mr. President, why are You so strongly opposed to the 45 day congressional security review that so many in Congress and the general public believe to be the prudent course of action? Why the hurry to execute this potentially dangerous deal? What do You say to those who are asking for the reasons this deal should move forward?

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal - Associated Press

What changes were made to the ports deal to eliminate the concerns of the Department of Homeland Security? We need congressional hearings.

"if we were concerned about... the United States of America"

UAE Company Offers to Delay Port Deal - FOXNews.com

It's an understatement to say that sometimes President Bush doesn't seem to think about what he's saying. Consider the Dubai Ports deal, dubbed "Portgate" by talk radio host and author Michael Savage. President Bush attempts to reassure the American public, saying, "We wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America." My thoughts exactly. If we have any common sense left in this country, we will be very concerned about this deal, and will not go forward with it.

I voted for this man, twice. He's done some good things, but that's another discussion. This time, I think he must have lost his marbles. He seems not to be in touch with reality, or at least not in touch with what appears to be a growing tsunami of public opinion: that at this point in history to give control of American ports to an Arab company is to play Russian roulette. Perhaps we have some friends among Arab governments (please don't ask me to name a few), but we also have many enemies in the Arab world who would sieze any opportunity to deliver destruction to our doors.

It's not reassuring to tell us that the security of the ports is under the control of the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs officials. They may be good, but how tight can port security be when only 5% of incoming containers are actually inspected? The Treasury Department has approved of the deal. Is that a reason to feel assured of our safety? I think not.

Is President Bush prepared to absolutely guarantee the security of these ports will not be compromised in any way following such a transfer of ownership? On what basis can he offer such a guarantee, when four days ago he hadn't even heard of this proposed deal?

Will he publicly attach to the ports deal the condition that if an act of terrorism against the United States is ever linked to Dubai Ports World or the UAE, that the U.S. will retaliate with a devestating military attack upon the UAE's capital, Abu Dhabi, and recoup our financial losses through confiscated oil?

If -God forbid- a well orchestrated plot imports destruction through our eastern cities I expect the president's indignant chest-thumping and military response will provide little consolation.

Iran roars. France awakens. Germany dreams.

France says Iran has secret nuclear program - Reuters.com
Iran is working furiously to develop nuclear weapons as quickly as possible, knowing that the West may intervene militarily. President Ahmadinejad regards nuclear weapons as a necessary tool to export Islamic revolution and Iranian control first of the Middle East, then Europe and Asia, and then the Americas.
France, stung by recent uprisings of radical Islamists among its immigrants, has begun to awaken to the threat. Germany either dreams or is afraid to speak openly of the gravity of the threat.
While we wait for the mighty United Nations to restore world peace, Iran refines Uranium. Its true motives will become abundantly clear in due course.

Letting down our defenses... White House Defends Port Sale to Arab Co.

White House Defends Port Sale to Arab Co. - Breitbart.com
It's absolutely insane to turn over control of American ports to an Arab country when we are on the brink of a major conflict with the Arab world.
Suppose the United States uses military force to stop Iran from deploying nuclear weapons. Iran will retaliate with any and all means at its disposal, including destabilizing regional neighbors who do not come to its assitance in opposing the U.S. The United Arab Emirates certainly will feel the pressure of Iran and other radical Islamist forces to exploit the ports it controls in the U.S. for the purposes of terrorism and economic retaliation.
Something is seriously wrong with our federal government that this insane transaction can be permitted to take place. This outrage should be stopped!

Talking points for President Bush's State of the Union Address

President Bush, here are the points You need to make tonight:

The most basic function of a just government is the protection of basic human rights. Elective abortion denies these basic rights to our nation's posterity. Mr. President, deliver a bold, passionate moral argument to inspire and motivate the decent citizens of this country to bar elective abortions in all but the most extreme cases. C'mon, George, this is Your last term. Show us some guts.

Our national borders need to be protected. Terrorists are trying to destroy this country, and our borders are not secure. No more illegal immigration. Use the military if necessary to secure the borders. Revise immigration laws where needed. Enforce them aggressively.

End the war in Iraq by escalating the war. Escalate the intensity of military force to crush the terrorists in Iraq. Then declare victory and pull out.

Recover the passion for limited government. Drop harebrained, expensive, and unnecessary programs such as the manned mission to Mars. Cut taxes while slashing federal spending on notoriously wasteful programs such as welfare and education. Let the states and private charities fill the gap.

Kill Iran's program to develop nuclear weapons. With or without the cooperation of Euorpe. President Ahmadinejad appears to be a psycopath on par with Adolf Hitler. Stop him. If necessary, use force to prevent his creating international havoc, or else we will all pay dearly.

Contain North Korea. Neutralize its nuclear program. Isolate and neutralize its murderous dictator Kim Jong Il.

We are vulnerable to hostile foreign sources of energy. Open the Arctic National Wildlike Refuge and other natural resouces to resposible drilling for oil and gas. Encourage coal production and expand nuclear power generation.

Isolate and neutralize Hamas. Not a dime to the terrorists.

More to come, if I get a few minutes...

Samuel Alito kicks aside the rats

Samuel Alito clearly is about to be confirmed to a seat in the Supreme Court. The hearings were sufficient to reveal that he is a remarkably decent, honest man of great intellect, a splendid attorney, a superbly qualified judge. I believe most decent, honest Americans who heard or saw any of the hearings formed a very favorable impression of Mr. Alito and welcome his confirmation.

But don't expect all our senators to think like decent, honest Americans. Some of them predictably were outraged by the decency and honesty of Mr. Alito, much as rats confused by a sudden, bright light. You and I could have predicted which senators would bare their teeth and charge: Kennedy, Kerry, Obama, Durbin, and many of their ilk: the left of the left. (How embarrassing that two of them come from my state of Illinois.) One independent and all the rest Democrats, by the way, and all evidently much more concerned with their leftist agendas than with their duty to confirm a well-qualified candidate to the Supreme Court. When smiling insinuations did not succeed in tearing down Mr. Alito, they were driven to fury, froth, and filibuster.

Shame on them for their pathetic and repugnant attempts to smear Samuel Alito. Shame on them for wasting time trying to delay and filibuster their way to even greater depths of notoriety when we've got far more serious things for Congress to be working on.

Why did they continue to snarl at the light when it was clear they couldn't stop Samuel Alito? Because for a decent and honest man to be confirmed to the Supreme Court is a victory for decency, honesty, and the rule of law ...and a loss for the likes of them.