TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2003

BOTTOM LINE

Let's not tip toe around this.  If you believe that the United States should not have initiated its military action against Iraq, then you believe that Saddam Hussein should have been left to do whatever it is he was doing as the Iraqi dictator.  Simple linear logic.  To say that you oppose the very action that deposed the dictator is to say that you would prefer that Saddam still be in power.  Don't give me that "Yes, I'm glad that Saddam is out of power, but we shouldn't have done this" nonsense. 

This is like telling a friend "Yes, I'm glad to see that that nasty little compound fracture of your left leg is healed, but I'm still really upset with you for going to a doctor."  If you didn't want your friend to go to a doctor, then you didn't want your friend's leg to heal.  If you didn't want the US to take military action against Saddam Hussein, then you didn't want him deposed.  You wanted him to remain in power.

Oh ... and let's mention Howard Dean yesterday.  He says that the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America any safer.  We now know for a certainty that Howard Dean is a fool.  He has eliminated all doubt.  Here is a man who wants to be the president of the United States who believes that America would be just as safe if Saddam were still free as it is with Saddam in custody.  He may be a fine doctor ... don't know.  But with that statement Howard Dean has proved himself to be spectacularly unprepared and incapable.

POOR, POOR SADDAM

Listen, please, to the bleatings and whining of the international left and the phony human rights crowd over the fate of Saddam Hussein.  While you're listening to these bedwetters wring their hands in public anguish over the treatment and future of Saddam, remember that these very same leftists were completely silent and absent when the evil right was expressing concern for the victims of Saddam's repression in Iraq.

AND THE AWARD FOR THE MOST PATHETIC DEMOCRAT GOES TO .....

Jim McDermott, a Democrat Congressman from Seattle, Washington.   You remember McDermott, don't you?  He's the leftist moron who went to Baghdad last year and, from Iraqi soil, told Americans that Bush was a liar and it was Saddam Hussein who was worthy of the trust of the American people. 

So ... what has McDermott done this time?  He told a Seattle radio station on Monday that the capture of Saddam Hussein was timed to help George Bush.  McDermott says that the U.S. military knew were Saddam was all along .. and could have captured him a long time ago if they really wanted to. 

The people of Seattle should be profoundly embarrassed having this ass represent them in Congress.  They should be, but they probably aren't.

AND NOW LET'S GET JESSE SOME FACE TIME

Can someone tell me why in the hell Judy Woodruff and CNN thought that Jesse Jackson had any opinion worth expressing on the capture of Saddam Hussein?  What in the hell was he doing on CNN yesterday afternoon?  Jesse Jackson is a washed-up, discredited publicity whore and race warlord.  There's Judy Woodruff anxiously asking Jesse who he is going to endorse in the presidential race.

TIME TO INTERNATIONALIZE OUR ACTIONS IN IRAQ

That's what we're hearing from practically every Democratic presidential candidate ... plus the Hildabeast.  They're all saying that now that Saddam is captured it's time for President Bush to bring the International community  into the picture.

The International community?  British, Spanish and Italian troops have already died in the Iraq action .. and these Democrats are saying that now we should make our efforts international?  Our effort in Iraq already is international, and the Democrats know that full well.  Bush refers to it as the "coalition of the willing."  He came up with that nifty title because every nation out there that is actually willing to help us handle things in Iraq is already in there.  What do the Democrats propose?  Are they saying that Bush should use some sort of bribery or coercion to get more nations involved?  If countries like France, Russia  and Germany wanted to be a part of the coalition they had every chance.  They chose, instead, to try to obstruct America's efforts to rid Iraq and the world of Saddam Hussein in order to protect their lucrative financial and contractual relationships with Hussein.  You do remember, don't you, that we have discovered that many of the armaments Hussein's forces used against the coalition were actually sold to or provided to Iraq by French, German and Russian interests ... and this happened after 1991; after UN sanctions were in place. 

What are the Democrats really seeking with their "time to internationalize" statements?  First of all, they know that rank-and-file Americans aren't really aware of the level at which countries like Spain, Argentina, Italy and, of course, Britain are already participating.  They pander to this ignorance with their "internationalize now" comments.  Secondly, the Democrats want an increased role for the disgraced United Nations.  The UN failed to enforce 12 years of sanctions against Hussein.  The UN sat and did virtually nothing while Hussein murdered and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own people.  The UN cut and ran as soon as Saddam's insurgents fired a few rocket propelled grenades in their direction.  Now the Democrats want the UN to step in and take over Iraq's reconstruction.  These are American politicians who have been working for years to surrender American sovereignty -- a bit here, a bit there -- to the United Nations and to various international tribunals such as the UN World Court and the new and very frightening international criminal court. 

Would you like an example of a basic difference between Democrats and Republicans?  Try this.  Common sense and a third-grade intelligence level will tell you that some country out there is going to be the dominant military and political power in the world.  This will be true until that sad day arrives when international sovereignty is a thing of the past and we are truly under the thumb of a one-world government.  Someone is going to dominate.  Some country is going to call the shots when the chips are down.  Republicans (and some libertarians like myself) want that country to be the United States.  Democrats don't.  It's that simple.

By the way ... are you aware that the U.S. Supreme Court, a body that is supposed to rely on our Constitution and the laws of our land in its consideration of cases brought before it, has now taken up the habit of citing decisions by foreign courts in its rulings?  How safe is the Constitution of the United States when our own Supreme Court is citing foreign court decisions?  It might take more than a simple government school education to realize how dangerous this is.  Americans should be outraged ... and frightened.

SO ... WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES

Well, things aren't looking all that good for them in Iraq.  Again on Sunday and Monday we saw Iraqi citizens celebrating and dancing in the streets of Baghdad and other cities.  Democrats may fear that things are going to get better in Iraq .. sooner rather than later.  So ... aside from their phony internationalization argument, Democrats need something else.  The solution?  Afghanistan.  Saddam is in custody, things are looking depressingly good in Iraq, so switch the concentration to Bush's policies and actions in Afghanistan.  Look for Deankerrygephardtedwards to start hammering Bush on Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden immediately .  Iraq's just not that great an issue for them any more.

TELL ME THERE'S NO RACIAL DOUBLE STANDARD

A Democratic Party leader in Washington DC, Mary Cuthbert, the vice president of Ward 8, referred to a new member of the Ward 8 executive committee in less than friendly terms.  The new member was Kirsten Burgard, the first white person to serve on the committee since way back yonder ... if not the first white person ever to serve on that committee.  So how did Mary Cuthbert refer to the new member?  As "poor white trash," that's how.  For a while there were some calls for Cuthbert's resignation.  No more.  The executive committee has decided to take no action.  No censure, no demand for an apology, no demand for a resignation.  Just let the whole thing slide.  It's called Black Privilege; the right to make racially inflammatory and derogatory statements about whites without fear of punishment. 

SOME MUSLIM, THAT SADDAM

OK ... maybe it's just me, but I thought that Muslims had some sort of a problem with pork.  They aren't supposed to eat the stuff, and so far as I know they won't even watch a simple Porky Pig cartoon.  So when will the outrage boil over in the oh-so-peaceful Islamic world over the revelation that Saddam Hussein had several cans of Spam in his little hideout in Iraq?  You do know what the ingredients are in Spam, don't you?  In case you missed it, here you are:

• Chopped pork shoulder meat with ham meat added.
• Salt (for binding, flavour, and firmness)
• Water (to help in mixing)
• Sugar (for flavour)
• Sodium Nitrite (for colour and as a preservative)

Yup, that's straight from the Spam website ... and the number one ingredient is PORK!  Some Muslim, that Saddam. 

By the way, just in case you don't know this ... the residents of Hawaii eat more Spam than any people anywhere else in the world ... an average of four cans each per year.  Islam hasn't really caught on in Hawaii.

WHAT ARE THEY DOING TO YOUR CHILD RIGHT NOW ... THIS VERY MOMENT

Today's Neal Boortz Show isn't all Saddam Hussein and Iraq.  As promised yesterday, today I want to give you an example of how the union-controlled government schools indoctrinate your children.  There's an organization at the University of Minnesota called the "Human Rights Resource Center."  This UM organization appears to be fond of the work of one David Shiman, a professor of educational studies at the University of Vermont.  Shiman is also the president of something called "United Academics," a union for college professors.  You're starting to get the picture here, aren't you?

Wait ... let's establish Shiman's credentials just a bit more.  Here's what he writes about himself on the University of Vermont website:

My teaching focuses on the inter-related themes of justice, ideology, and caring. I am concerned about perspective taking and cross-cultural understanding. These find expression in the following course: comparative education, multicultural education, and sociology of education. My research has been built around the concept of human rights--studying and writing curriculum for schools and examining the development of human rights education globally.

Notice the buzz-words like: "cross-cultural understanding" and "multicultural education."  Also note his dedication to human rights.  My experience is that people who talk in terms of "human rights" instead of "individual rights" aren't what you would call conservatives.

On the Human Rights Resource Center website you find an article from Shiman entitled "Activity 2 Economic Justice:  The Scramble for Wealth and Power."  This paper outlines a classroom exercise for government school teachers.  Shiman's overview of the classroom exercise says:  "The distribution of wealth and power within society usually affects a person's opportunities to achieve full human rights and live a life with dignity. This activity involves the distribution of wealth. It challenges participants to examine the concepts of "fairness" and "responsibility" and reflect on their own actions."

So, folks.  Here we go.  A leftist college professor who believes that wealth is distributed rather than earned has prepared a nifty little exercise for your child's teacher to conduct in your child's government school classroom. 

Be listening today.  You need to hear this, especially if you think you are sending your children to school to learn how to read, how to do math, and how to write and communicate effectively with others.  The leftist, union-controlled education establishment in this country has other ideas.  You need to know what's happening to your children.

AND A FEW READING ASSIGNMENTS

David Limbaugh has a few choice things to say about Howard Dean's foreign policy ideas.

Thomas Sowell says that if you are looking for lawlessness .. you need go no further than our Supreme Court.

Kofi Annan opposes any trial of Saddam Hussein that could lead to his execution.  So much for the U.N.

Oh how I wish more Americans knew just what the Supreme Court did last week in upholding parts of the campaign finance reform act.  Mark Tapscott understands ... maybe after clicking here you will too.  If that article outrages you, here's more from Paul Greenberg.  Our freedom of expression is at stake here folks.   Don't ignore this.

GET EMAIL FROM NEAL!

We're all set and ready to start signing people up for the Boortz Blast, Neal's FREE email newsletter launching soon. Each issue will include exclusive content so if you can't get enough of Neal, you've gotta sign up! Also, we will never, ever, ever sell our lists.