BlogWonks

Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker has this gem: Warmist polar expedition was cancelled due to extreme cold

Explorers suffered extreme frostbite in the dangerously cold conditions, leading Lifson to wonder if these publicity-seekers were undone by believing their own propaganda.

They need to alter their mindset to not believe their own propaganda, like Al Gore. You won't soon see Al too afraid of greenhouse gases not to fly in a private plane, stop heating his mansions and pools, or to travel to the North Pole. The latter is a good thing, because given his current size and color, he'd be at an extreme risk of being humped to death by a turned-on polar bear.

A man claiming to have a bomb and/or guns has reportedly taken hostages in a Hillary Clinton for President campaign office in Rochester, New Hampshire. Local station WHDH reports that the downtown area is being evacuated.

Jimmy Carter en route to negotiate a settlement. Just kidding… I think…

Update: The hostage taker is demanding to speak to Mrs. Clinton. He either has a political grievance or needs the number of Hillary's Botox dealer.

Oddly enough, this is Islam's version of "getting off the hook" — the Middle-East's answer to the O.J. Simpson murder trial verdict:

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States, backing staunch ally Britain, branded as "outrageous" the jail sentence of a British teacher in Sudan who let pupils call a teddy bear "Mohammed" as part of a class project.

"Obviously, it's an outrage," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said after a judicial source in Sudan said Gillian Gibbons, 54, would be jailed for 15 days for insulting Islam and then deported.

Unless of course Gibbons commits the heinous crime of being raped while in prison, which Sharia law would aggressively address — by stoning her to death.

Otherwise, the sentence could have been worse — as being deported from Sudan is like getting kicked out of the stands at an Oakland Raiders game.

Frankly, I'm more shocked that people haven't been stoned to death for referring to it as a "Teddy" bear — named of course after Theodore Roosevelt, who once wrote this in an essay:

It is only the warlike power of a civilized people that can give peace to the world. The Arab wrecked the civilization of the Mediterranean coasts, the Turk wrecked the civilization of southeastern Europe, and the Tatar desolated from China to Russia and to Persia, setting back the progress of the world for centuries, solely because the civilized nations opposed to them had lost the great fighting qualities, and, in becoming over peaceful, had lost the power of keeping peace with a strong hand. Their passing away marked the beginning of a period of chaotic barbarian warfare.

Calling it a "teddy" bear should be far more insulting to Islam than naming it Mohammad, but I won't bring it up until Gibbons is safely out of Sudan, just in case the Sudanese courts haven't done any research on Theodore Roosevelt.

I am the illegal alien of commentary.
I will do the jokes that no one else will do.
—Ann Coulter

It sounds kind of silly to imply that a conservative has the status of a rock star, but Ann Coulter might be the closest rightists come to a figure who makes the news merely by breathing. In recent years she has become an icon, and just about everyone interested in politics has an opinion about her…and usually those opinions are emphatic.

The amazon.com reviews for her latest book, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans, a collection of quotations from her sizable oeuvre, aptly reveals the split in the public’s perception. At the time of this writing, the compendium has 121 Five Star (excellent) ratings and 105 One Star (terrible) ratings with not a whole lot in between. This is entirely appropriate and Coulter wouldn’t want it any other way.

For conservatives the reasons to admire her are readily apparent. Coulter is a one woman battalion who says things most of us may think but are too civil (or fearful) to say out loud. Yes, albeit unfortunate, the side wishing to preserve western civilization is largely populated by kindly, deferential types who eschew conflict. The majority of us make for poor combatants in the culture war. This state of affairs makes Coulter’s value all the more pronounced. Furthermore, her enemies, for the most part, are our enemies as well, and such a commonality has forged the basis for countless political alliances over the centuries.

Coulter’s fame and esteem among rightists is cause enough for the left to hate her. Indeed, to say she is the Democratic Party’s least favorite conservative is not an understatement. The ever bloviating Ted Kennedy remarked this spring, “Ann Coulter’s words of hate have no place in the public sphere much less our political discourse.” Well, there’s no hate in her statements, but clearly she has as much a right to offend as anyone else in America—particularly if she is provoking outrage from our cowardly, statist politicians. In comparison to Senator Kennedy, I find her observations downright soothing.

At least the monstrous drunkard from Massachusetts was content to attack her with rhetoric alone. In the past, other radicals have thrown pies at her, sabotaged her biographical entry on Wikipedia, arranged to have her jumped on television shows, and spun rumors that she is a transvestite.

Pseudo-liberal outrage over her utterances is but self-parody as Coulter says what she does in the hopes of provoking her enemies. Her tactics have been enormously successful. PC automatons line up on television to express their self-righteous condemnation practically every time she opens her mouth. Their animosity and invective showcase that it is they, as opposed to the blond Page Six entry, who are the real haters in our society. Their faux indignation only serves to highlight their own shallowness and conformity, however.

The left’s ire in regards to Coulter is chiefly a result of two factors. First, emotion—as opposed to detached logical evaluation—is the essence of her fame and reputation. Despite the outstanding intellectual arguments she sometimes makes, her affective responses are the reason for why she is a household name. This is deeply resented by pseudo-liberals because they see her style as one which subsumes their own. Without emotion and conclusions based on irrational premises there would be no Democratic Party and no political left whatsoever.

Coulter’s humorous advice, “[j]ust call them traitors and let them sort it out,” inflames her foes as she uses their methods against them. Where would sensitivity statists in America be without the brandishing of isms? Answer: Out of office. If they could not dub their opponents names like racist then they would have to explain why they hold government and “the poor” to be synonymous terms. That’s the second to last thing they want. The first are opponents every bit as rude as they are.

Her ridicule is something they cannot handle. Radical feminists are well known for their obtuseness and lack of wit so imagine how irate they become after hearing Coulter describe an ideal abstinence kit as containing “an 8×10 glossy of Susan Estrich.” That is a hysterical quip, but also one that is highly accurate.

Truth is the second reason for the left’s disdain. Nothing infuriates them more than the truth and Coulter pronounces it publicly on a regular basis. “Veritas parit odium,” the truth begets hatred, which is exactly what happens when one shares reality with our elites; those same elites who look down on us from their perches atop government, the universities, and the mainstream media. They prefer not to be reminded of the fact that most of their state-sponsored “solutions” only manage to exacerbate existing social pathologies. These magnates prefer to play pretend games wherein their every socialist inclination ends up “helping” someone.

Coulter elucidates this eventuality in the following sentence: “[E]very time the government tries to help the poor it ends up removing the marvelous incentives life provides to do things like buy an alarm clock, get a job, keep your knees together before marriage, and generally become a productive, happy member of society.” Short, irreverent, funny, and also more descriptive of the dole than anything ever spun by Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama.

Yes, calling someone a traitor is not an effective argument in itself, but it does aptly describe the mindset of the PC-nik. These individuals regard America as being a racist, sexist entity so why on earth would they ever want to defend it? Answer: They wouldn’t. They pray [sic] that our shores soon become inhabited by new diverse peoples who will assuage their pseudo-liberal guilt by transplanting our indigenous culture with charming societal accoutrements such as Sharia or election via coup d’etat.

These leftists care nothing for our Constitution and wish to breathe life into it…until it is dead. To them, America will always be “Amerika.” With sophist ease they have redefined patriot with its antonym. The word now refers to a person who reflexively criticizes their own country whenever possible. Clearly, traitor is a term which embodies them.

The mainstream media responds to Coulter the entertainer, but makes a point of ducking her logical arguments. They depict her as being an airhead yet she knows her foes far better than they know themselves. Even her intentionally outrageous stuff—“Most newspapers in the red states-even nice states like Mississippi-are run by loser liberals who rub their foreskin while reading the New York Times”—illustrates the depth of her analysis. Journalists and yuppies are the only two remaining groups of Americans who retain any admiration for the slanted operation that once dubbed itself, “the paper of record.”

I am very grateful for her presence in the public square; although, duty necessitates my providing prospective purchasers of If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans with a warning. Those readers who already own her books would be wise to pass on this one. There’s precious little here that hasn’t been said (and excoriated) before. Besides, one can access her online columns for free.

In summation, in regards to Ms. Coulter, I have said it before but will say it again—she may be the most important conservative in America. Not only is the scorn she showers upon the left well-deserved, it also enables her peers to speak freely. Like Valderrama, Ballack, Zidane or any other brilliant soccer midfielder, Coulter’s thrusts and counterstrokes create space within which the rest of us can roam and prosper. We should be allowed to say what we want in our private lives without fear of termination, prison or banishment.

I will concede that the uttering of verboten syllables is not a cause for celebration, but by lampooning PC she helps roll back the invasive boundaries of the sensitivity state. We badly need her. Whatever one thinks of her personality, all rightists owe her a debt of gratitude because everyday she acts as a lightning rod…on our behalf.

Bernard Chapin is the author of Women: Theory and Practice and Escape from Gangsta Island. He can be contacted at veritaseducation@gmail.com.

Dictionaries often contain multiple meanings for words. The meanings may or may not have any relation to each other. Useful definitions are those which most aptly fit the meaning of the word in a particular, desired usage. In seeking to find a definition of “junk-science,” especially as it most aptly pertains to domestic abuse law, I offer the following:

The Encarta World English Dictionary defines “junk” for this usage as”

2. rubbish: discarded things, or things regarded as worthless or causing clutter (informal)

4. nonsense: meaningless or worthless talk (informal)

The same dictionary, among it’s multiple definitions of “science,” defines “science” for this usage as:

4. systematic body of knowledge: any systematically organized body of knowledge about a specific subject - the social sciences

5. something studied or performed methodically: any activity that is the object of careful study or that is carried out according to a developed method - treated me to a lecture on the science of dressing for success

Combining the two words “junk” and “science,” based on the above definitions, logically leads one to the following definition for “junk-science”:

# A systematic body of nonsense: any systematically organized body of knowledge about a specific subject, i.e. current domestic abuse law

# Nonsense conjured or fabricated methodically: any activity that is the object of careful study or that is carried out according to a developed method. - tortured me with a lecture on the junk-science of gender feminist, domestic abuse theory

Volumes have been written about domestic abuse, its causes, and it’s solutions. Most of it appears to have been structured carefully to fit the beliefs and goals of a particular political ideology, gender feminism. In the process of creating this current body of domestic abuse nonsense, constructed out of some truth, half-truths and outright lies, much of the logical and ethical methodology of true science has been lost, or more aptly, discarded. There is no body of social “science” work more fallacious, more wrong headed and in need of debunking, in my opinion, than the gender feminists’ domestic abuse theory that has lead to America’s corrupt domestic abuse law.

The asinine, women’s studies theory of Patriarchy, that alleges that all males have special privileges as a result of being males in a Patriarchal society is truly the pinnacle of all junk-science. In further alleging that males use such non-existent privilege to oppress women through violence is not only ignorant, it’s just plain stupid, when considering the forces in society which oppress men even more greatly than women. It takes a truly ignorant, unethical, and arrogant ideology such as gender feminism, to disregard male responsibilities and oppressions, thereby creating a grossly inaccurate theory of Patriarchy, then foisting the scam onto society with a pretentious moral superiority. That society has been duped so badly by this egregious fraud, speaks volumes about the special treatment (special privileges) society as a whole has historically, unquestioningly showered on women to the detriment of men.

At the website “Breaking the Science.” this explanation is offered for the unprofessional way in which much research is conducted in the field of sociology.

http://www.breakingthescience.org/

In “soft” sciences like sociology, it’s much more difficult to detect manipulation of research, than in “hard” sciences like physics. Soft science researchers who strive for objectivity deserve an extra measure of respect. Sadly, far too many researchers are more concerned with pushing an agenda than with objectivity. These same problems are not unknown in the world of journalism. Since the soft sciences and the media have a powerful influence on social policies in this country, this affects every family and every individual.

Obviously, much of BTS’s criticism is directed at the shoddy, social science, advocacy research that has been used to establish much of the published work in the area of domestic abuse theory. Many of the articles on that site are critical of the misconceptions and biases inherent in that body of domestic abuse “junk-science” and yes, “junk-law.”

BTS goes on to say:

These same problems are not unknown in the world of journalism. Since the soft sciences and the media have a powerful influence on social policies in this country, this affects every family and every individual.

Breaking the Science is about the broken “science” that’s being used to create law and drive social policy.

Indeed, mass media is a major part of the problem, when it comes to spreading the half-truths, myths, and outright lies coming out of America’s gender feminist dominated, domestic violence industry. So much propaganda has passed for truth for so long, with so little scholarly refutation, that uncritical thinkers have been brainwashed into believing the vast majority of gender feminist domestic abuse propaganda.

To describe the effects of the systematic, domestic abuse theory discrimination, (perpetrated against all men in America today) as a “tragedy” is actually employing a euphemism. Given the scale of destruction done to the targeted male population, it is more accurate to describe it akin to the beginnings of the holocaust in Nazi Germany, or the institutional persecution of African-Americans in the decades before the civil rights movement.

Tremendous abuse has been inflicted on innocent men through America’s misandrist, and corrupt domestic abuse laws. What we see being done to men in our domestic abuse courts, family law courts, colleges and universities, mass media and other societal institutions in the name of domestic abuse law is a gross national disgrace.

That this 21st century domestic abuse, hate war against men is being conducted with the illusion that sound science supports it, adds to the depth of the injury that is being perpetrated on the innocent male citizens of America. The time is now for good people everywhere (especially those involved in the liberal arts and social sciences) to debunk the domestic abuse law junk-science (and junk-law) that is being used to demonize and persecute men. Shame on American, gender feminism for being the primary force in the furtherance of such junk-science and junk-law.

We'll just never learn:

Textron Inc.'s Cessna Aircraft Co. will become the first U.S. manufacturer to turn over complete production of an airplane to a Chinese partner, a move intended to cut production costs and foster a nascent private-aviation market in China.

Textron figured that since the food and toy imports from China are such high quality, why not let 'em make our airplanes, too?

Given the recent track record of Chinese products, if we now just let them make our razor blades, cars, beer, step ladders and electrical appliances, they'll be able to take over the U.S. without firing a shot — and they'll fly in on anything but a Cessna, of course.

An Ohio man has been sentenced to serve ten years in prison for conspiring to provide material support to terrorists, according to an announcement on Tuesday by Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Nuradin M. Abdi, 35, a Somali national living in Columbus, Ohio, was named in a four-count indictment returned under seal in the US District Court in Columbus on June 10, 2004. On July 31, 2007, Abdi pleaded guilty in federal court to Count One of the indictment, which charged him with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists.

The federal indictment specifically alleged that on April 27, 1999, Abdi applied to the Immigration and Naturalization Service — now known as ICE — for a travel document, wherein he concealed his destination by representing that he intended to visit Germany and Saudi Arabia for the purpose of “Umrah (Holly[sic] - Mecca) and visit my relative,” when he actually planned to travel to Ogaden, Ethiopia, for the purpose of obtaining military-style training in preparation for violent jihad. Abdi allegedly sought training in radio usage, guns, guerilla warfare and bombs.

“Today’s sentencing brings to conclusion one aspect of a critical joint investigation that identified and stopped three terrorist supporters bent on causing panic and significant harm to US citizens, said ICE Assistant Secretary Julie L. Myers. This investigation highlights the aggressive pursuit by ICE and the Department of Justice to identify and prosecute those who seek to terrorize America and its allies.”

“Today’s sentence is just punishment for a defendant who exploited our country’s freedoms and manipulated our immigration system on numerous occasions, all in an effort to support and conspire with international terrorists,” said Assistant Attorney General for National Security, Kenneth L. Wainstein.

“I want to commend the men and women who have diligently investigated and prosecuted this case,” US Attorney Lockhart said. “They are successfully carrying out one of our nation’s most important jobs in the fight against terrorism — stopping those in this country who provide support to terrorists.”

“Nuradin Abdi’s sentence should send a very clear message to those who, like Abdi, provide support to terrorist organizations and operatives. The FBI will not tolerate the propagation of violence and discord by those who wish to harm the US and its citizens, and we will continue to work with our partners to pursue suspected terrorists and their supporters,” said Assistant Director Joseph Billy, Jr., FBI Counterterrorism Division.

According to the statement of facts agreed upon by the government and the defendant, Abdi first entered the United States in 1995 using a false passport. He once again illegally entered the United States from Canada in 1997. Abdi was later granted asylum in this country based on a series of false statements.

In the ensuing years, Abdi befriended coconspirators Christopher Paul and Lyman Faris in Ohio. Christopher Paul was later arrested and indicted in April 2007 on charges of providing material support, conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, and conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives). Lyman Faris was later convicted of providing material support and conspiracy to provide material support to Al-Qaeda. He is currently serving a 20-year prison term.

Federal agents arrested Abdi on Nov. 28, 2003. Abdi subsequently agreed to be interviewed by FBI agents and admitted conspiring with Faris, Paul and others to provide material support to foreign terrorists. These admissions by Abdi have been corroborated in a variety of ways, including bank records, travel records, invoices, and items seized in search warrants.

This case was investigated by the Southern Ohio Joint Terrorism Task Force, a multi-agency operation that includes agents and officers from 15 federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.

The investigation was a joint investigation by agents and officers of the JTTF, specifically ICE Special Agents Bob Medellin and Rich Wilkens; and FBI Special Agents Steve Flowers and John Corbin.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

If you're going to be flying soon and are looking for a discount on holiday travel, Alaska Air has some great deals for you.

Oh, but you have to admit to being gay first… sort of.

The "gay" page at Alaska Air is here. So, if you're looking for a good deal, aren't afraid to say you're gay, and you don't mind sitting next to Barney Frank while watching the in-flight movie, "Edge of Seventeen," you've found your airline!

"Why, would they send us someplace special?"

The Campaign for America's Future, whatever that is, has an ad in which Ken picks up Barbie, and ends up giving her a rather odd type of STD. Can you guess what it is?

Here's the best part: It's Bush's fault! No, seriously. And by Bush, I mean the president.

Update: Allahpundit at Hot Air asks what the mode of STD transmission would be, as Ken dolls are famously non-developed.

The Associated Press can always be counted on to perpetuate more fakery than a Malibu beach bunny's bikini top.

Here's a couple of sentences from a story about Al Gore's visit to the White House on Monday:

They have not met privately since then-President-elect Bush paid a visit — short, and not that sweet — to Gore's residence in December 2000.

That was back when the acrimony was fresh, in a country still in disbelief over an election that seemed never-ending. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court certified Bush's 537-vote victory margin over Gore in Florida to settle the outcome.

Once again, for those challenged in recounting (if you'll pardon the expression) historical facts, the Supreme Court did not certify Bush's victory — Initially, seven SCOTUS Justices concluded that the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court violated the Equal Protection Clause.

In a subsequent 5-4 ruling, SCOTUS issued a stay of the Florida Supreme Court's ruling that would have had people digging into ballot boxes until the Second Coming, or enough Gore votes were "discovered" — whichever came first.

The Florida Secretary of State certified Bush's Florida win before most of the legal wranglings, and it was allowed to stand — unlike the AP's version of history.

Speaking of Gore's visit to the White House, Scrappleface has more on that story: Bush welcomes Gore with low-carbon ceremony