Skip to main content.
News and Commentary on Politics, Media and Culture

Chalk Up Another Loss For Liberal Diplomacy Zealots

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
August 22, 2006 at 11:17 am in Feature Article, The War on Terror

As has become customary for modern liberals, the moment that fighting began in southern Lebanon they started fanatically insisting on a cease fire. With few exceptions, liberals throughout the international community were completely unconcerned with finding a solution to the problems in the region – all that mattered was ending the violence at any cost. Only a few days have passed since Israel caved in to international pressure and agreed to a cease fire but it has already become clear that this attempt at negotiating with terrorists will have disastrous results.

As predicted by many pundits in the United States and Israel, radical Muslims throughout the Middle East view Israel’s use of diplomacy in this situation as a sign of weakness. This has allowed Hezbollah to claim victory despite the fact that, militarily, the terrorist group was able to do little more than avoid complete annihilation. Emboldened by his political victory, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah now feels entitled to dictate completely new terms for the cease fire.

Israel agreed to end her military operations based on several conditions, which were laid out in UN Security Council Resolution 1701, including the critical requirement that Hezbollah must be disarmed and completely removed from southern Lebanon. However, due to the terrorists’ recent increase in confidence, Hezbollah is now openly refusing to comply with those terms. This news comes as no surprise; in fact, it is a perfect demonstration of why it is pointless to engage in diplomacy with terrorist organizations – they simply cannot be trusted.

[Read more and discuss...]

Technorati Tags , , , , , , , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Go Elisabeth Hasselbeck

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
August 3, 2006 at 9:47 pm in Abortion Debate, Feature Article

Update: See the final Rosie, Hasselbeck argument here.

==========================
You may now consider me an avid supporter of Elisabeth Hasselbeck. When the subject of selling the Plan B “Morning after pill” over-the-counter came up on ‘The View’ this morning, Ms. Hasselbeck was ready to throw down:

Of course, I wasn’t surprised when Barbara Walters had to try to put this issue into the context of a sob story about a young woman being raped by her father. If Plan B does end up being sold over-the-counter, I would love to see the stats on how often it is purchased/used in situations involving rape/incest - especially considering that victims of rape and incest account for a very insignificant percentage of all abortions. Even though some on the left won’t admit it, Ms. Hasselbeck is right on this part. When you start discussing the idea of selling Plan B over-the-counter, the “exceptional cases” aren’t what you are really worried about. (Maybe there’s a compromise here. If Plan B advocates are really just worried about cases of incest, we could make it available over-the-counter only in Kentucky.)

At the end of the segment, Barbara Walters felt compelled to go into a condescending lecture about remaining civil during discussions. She had a tone that made it sound as if she were scolding a child on how to act properly in public. Personally, it was enough to make me sick because I have yet to see Ms. Walters feel the need to give similar lectures to other members of ‘The View’ when then get equally emotional about liberal issues. Beyond that, Mother Walters hardly seems to be one to lecture others about keeping their cool, considering her reputation for being extremely demanding back stage at ‘The View’.

Webloggin Editor Comment:

You can always count on the left to try and make a rule out of an extreme. Apparently they are unable to differentiate between passing this stuff out like candy and using it for exceptional cases under a doctor’s care.

Others Bloggin on this Subject:
Hot Air
Anwyn’s Notes in the Margin
Santorum Blog
Nephos

Technorati Tags , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Comparing American WWII GIs To Terrorists

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
July 28, 2006 at 6:22 am in Feature Article, Israel, The War on Terror

The following is a partial transcript of Ed Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, being interviewed on Fox News Channel’s “Dayside” this afternoon:

JERRICK: But Mr. Ambassador, do you believe Hezbollah is a terrorist organization?

PECK: Well the terrorist organization is in the eye of the beholder—

JERRICK: Well, I’m asking you.

[audience reacts]

PECK: Okay, you have to understand now we parachuted people into Europe in WWII. You’re too young to remember that—

JERRICK: —Thank you Mr. Ambassador, but—

PECK:Their job was to kill Germans. But no offense, I wish I had shared that with you. But their job was to kill Germans, now were they terrorists or heros?

JERRICK: Well let’s go back to Hezbollah; do you think it’s a terrorist organization?

PECK: No, I think it has objectives to which we object very strongly.

Peck’s entire premise here is both wrong and ridiculous. Terrorism isn’t in the eye of beholder - it has a definition and can be identified when it takes place. For example:

Terrorist:
adj : characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); “terrorist activity”; “terrorist state” n : a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

Terrorism
n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear

[Read more and discuss...]

Technorati Tags , , , , , , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

But Seriously, MSM Reporters Arent Biased

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
July 27, 2006 at 1:32 pm in Feature Article, Media Watch

MSMWhen a group of television critics were supposed to hear a speech by Fox News owner Roger Ailes, we would certainly expect our unbiased, sophisticated friends in the mainstream media to behave like professionals and report objectively on the event. Wouldn’t we?

Well, you may be shocked to find out what really happened:

About two-thirds of the 150 critics left the room before Ailes took the stage, several of them openly voicing their scorn for what they say is Fox News’ conservative spin.

The funniest part is that the reason these people walked out because they think Fox is biased. Hello, Pot? This is the kettle…you’re black! Regardless of your opinion of Fox News, it’s hard to argue that this doesn’t demonstrate more than just a little bias on the part of these critics.

[read more and discuss at 4thelittleguy]

Technorati Tags , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

This Is Why We Call It “al-Reuters”

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
July 20, 2006 at 12:00 pm in Feature Article, The War on Terror

I first saw this picture posted over at Expose the Left and guest blogger Randy was ripping into al-Reuters for the caption describing the photo. My initial reaction was, “If that’s true it would be outrageous, but even Reuters wouldn’t be that stupid.” So I decided not to post about it until I checked into it for myself.

It turns out, Randy (who normally blogs at RightWinged.com) was absolutely right. Check out the caption that Reuters uses to describe this photo:

Supporters of Lebanon protest outside the Israeli consulate in New York, July 18, 2006.

[Read more and discuss...]

Technorati Tags , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

You’ve Got To Love Dr. Dean

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
July 17, 2006 at 3:30 pm in Feature Article, Liberalism Watch

Crazy HowardYou’ve just got to love DNC Chairman Howard Dean - he’s so wonderfully deluded. There is only one rule that he lives by: Democrats are always good and Republicans are always evil. It doesn’t matter how ridiculous his comments have to be to get a situation to fit into that rule; he will find a way to do it.

Most of the time it’s pretty predictable. Dean will make a statement something along the lines of, “This thing only happened because President Bush is incompetent. If Democrats were in power, it wouldn’t have turned out that way because we would have…uh…done something different.” The most amusing part about Dean (and a lot of people on the left) is that he never gets around to telling you what exactly he would have done.

Another great example of this came during Howard Dean’s speech this weekend at San Diego State University when he insisted that the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah wouldn’t have happened if a Democrat were president:

“If you think what’s going on in the Middle East today would be going on if the Democrats were in control, it wouldn’t, because we would have worked day after day after day to make sure we didn’t get where we are today. We would have had the moral authority that Bill Clinton had when he brought together the Northern Irish and the IRA, when he brought together the Israelis and the Palestinians.”

First of all, in case Dean hasn’t checked, Israel and Palestine aren’t exactly best friends at this point so he may not want to point to them as a success story. If that’s what he considers a successful peace deal then we definitely don’t want him running things. Next, I’m not sure Bill Clinton is the guy you want to use as an example of “moral authority”.

Anyhow, Dean goes on about how Democrats would have worked “day after day” to keep the situation in Israel from happening. What we still don’t know is what they would have been working on. If the Democrats were so certain that the Israel/Hezbollah/Hamas problem was about to flare up, why weren’t they out in the media for the last year or two screaming for something to be done? It would be nice if Dean would start telling us about these things ahead of time instead of just complaining after something goes wrong.

[Discuss this article with Chad]

Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Living the American Dream

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
July 1, 2006 at 12:58 pm in Culture Watch, Feature Article

The LA Times had a pretty decent article yesterday that proves that the American Dream is still very much alive. Luz Elena Gutierrez attended a failing public high school in a low income area of Los Angeles but still managed to earn a full scholarship to attend UC Berkeley in the fall.

Luz Elena was a perfect candidate to drop out of high school and end up going nowhere in life because she had everything working against her as she grew up. But she refused to be held back by her socio-economic status or a terrible high school.

Luz Elena had a goal of graduating first in her class and did everything necessary to make that a reality. She was aggressive in demanding the most challenging classes, she chose friends who had goals similar to hers, and she stayed away from social situations that could prevent her from succeeding.

But there was another crucial aspect of Luz Elena’s success: attentive parents. Her parents consistantly encouraged her and reassured her that she could reach her goals. Beyond that, her mother worked night shifts and her father worked during the day to ensure that one of them was always available if Luz Elena needed them.

The result of all this is that Luz Elena Gutierrez will most certainly be a success. She didn’t expect anything to be given to her; she simply worked her tail off and never doubted that she would achieve her goals. There are quite a few people in this country who could learn a lot from the example set by Ms. Gutierrez.

[Discuss this article with Chad at 4thelittleguy]

Technorati Tags , , , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Making a Deal With Islamofascists

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
June 30, 2006 at 5:00 pm in The War on Terror

Insurgents say they’ll end attacks if U.S. goes
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

BAGHDAD - Eleven Sunni insurgent groups have offered an immediate halt to all attacks if the U.S. agrees to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq in two years, insurgent and government officials said yesterday.

Withdrawal is the centerpiece of a set of demands from the groups, which operate north of Baghdad in the heavily Sunni Arab provinces of Salahuddin and Diyala. Although much of the fighting in the country has been to the west, those provinces are increasingly violent and attacks there have crippled oil and commerce routes.

Read the rest of this article…

Why is it that I just don’t believe that the terrorists will live up to their word on this one?

Sadly, I’m sure there are plenty of people on the left who would jump at this offer as an opportunity to negociate with the terrorists.

[Discuss over at 4 the Little Guy]

Technorati Tags , , , , , , , , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

The Pathetic White House Press Corps

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
June 29, 2006 at 3:18 pm in Media Watch

In today’s short press conference given by President Bush and Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi, the American press corps demonstrated once again how pathetically predictable and disrespectful they truly are. As we watched the two leaders give their opening statements about the long list of issues they discussed, my wife and I commented to each other that the first question from the press would still be, “Are you gonna close Gitmo now?” Unfortunately, we hit the nail right on the head.

While the Japanese reporters respectfully asked questions of both President Bush and PM Koizumi, the American reporters zeroed in solely on asking questions that would serve their political agenda. Obviously, the Supreme Court decision that was handed down today is a big deal but there will be plenty of opportunities to ask questions about that. For the American press to act as if PM Koizumi wasn’t even in the room this morning, especially considering the important topics he is here to discuss, was a total disgrace.

[Read more and discuss...]

Technorati Tags , , , , ,     Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Gaza Militants Say Fired Chemical-Tipped Warhead

By Chad at 4theLittleGuy
June 29, 2006 at 9:15 am in The War on Terror

Via Reuters:

GAZA (Reuters) - A spokesman for gunmen in the Gaza Strip said they had fired a rocket tipped with a chemical warhead at Israel early on Thursday.

The Israeli army had no immediate comment on the claim by the spokesman from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed wing of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement.

The group had recently claimed to possess about 20 biological warheads for the makeshift rockets commonly fired from Gaza at Israeli towns. This was the first time the group had claimed firing such a rocket.

“The al-Aqsa Brigades have fired one rocket with a chemical warhead” at southern Israel, Abu Qusai, a spokesman for the group, said in Gaza.

An Israeli military spokeswoman said the army had not detected that any such rocket was fired, nor was there any report of such a weapon hitting Israel.

Why aren’t the television news networks showing any sincere interest in this story? They are spending a twice as much time reporting on the flooding on the east coast as they are on this extremely volatile situation in Israel.

I understand that the flooding is causing a tremendous amount of damage for the people who live there; however, the potential impact of the Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip is far greater. More often than not, the statements coming from the terrorists are full of crap. But if they are being honest about launching a chemical warhead into Israel, it will drastically alter any future efforts towards Middle East peace.

[Read more and discuss...]

Sphere: Related Content

Top Blogs | Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Next Page »