PLANET CALIFORNIA

To show those of you who think I'm a fire-breathing, Maureen Dowd-hating, ideologue, I offer the following:

Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forward.
Soren Kierkegaard

People do not care how much we know until they know how much we care.
Anonymous

A religious awakening which does not awaken the sleeper to love has roused him in vain.
Jessamyn West

Few things help an individual more than to place responsibility on him and let him know that you trust him.
Booker T. Washington.

Fear not that thy life shall come to an end, but rather that it shall ever have a beginning.
John Henry Cardinal Newman

God enters by a private door into every individual.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Maureen Dowd's latest trip to The Hamptons proved she really, really hates screen writers (and people like me).
Andrea M. Hall

BBC Heads Continue to Roll

This isn't your grandfather's shame. Andrew Gilligan, the writer who drove Dr. David Kelly to suicide, resigned today but offered his own ideas of how the Fourth Estate should respond. "Hell, he (Dr. Kelly) told me he thought Tony Blair was an idiot." retorted Gilligan. "I read between the lines."

NAFTA

Next time some Democrat gets all high and mighty about "jobs," and the seeming lack thereof, use this:

A total of 24 Democrats bet on (I mean, voted on) Bill Clinton's baby, the North American Free Trade Agreement. Of those 24, you can cite names like John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, Tom Harkin, David Pryor.

NAFTA is one of the worst, most ill considered pieces of legislation to come out of Washington since environmental laws that caused California to burn down.

Ten years after NAFTA's passage, manurfacturing jobs have flown far, far away.

I blame the Republicans as much as the Dems. This was a deal made with the devil and it has caused more than just a loss of jobs; it has created a major safety issue with substandard semi rigs rolling across my tax-paid-for highways.

I think this legislation should be looked upon as an "experiment" that failed. The sooner we can regain control, the sooner we can move forward with border security.

But, then, I could be wrong.

Thanks for the read.

David Kay, the ex-head of the weapons inspection team, says everyone was wrong and the intelligence was evidently faulty. What about the Dr. David Kelly pronouncement that he thought Iraq was within days of deploying WMDs?

Another news service report out of Iraq states the head of the Iraq Governerning Council insists there are WMDs.

The BBC Shows the Good Grace to Apologize

A second BBCer resigned today as a result of the scandalous treatment of Dr. David Kelly, the late British scientist, and Prime Minister Tony Blair. Unlike the U.S. print media, BBC shows its good will by taking responsibility for its written lies about both men, and publically apologizes to Mr. Blair. Remember, it was BBC who catigated Blair, tried to blame him for the suicide of Dr. Kelly.

Can you imagine even one of the NY Times liars apologizing for their blatant lies about President Bush and his administration? Of course not. These folks weren't taught either by their culture (or even their mothers, evidently) about how to graciously accept blame for mistakes, misquotes and poorly documented and researched articles. But in our coarse culture, ego-driven defiance is the standard. Too bad.

America is angry with George Bush. At least, that's what the big media guys breathlessly announced last night after John Kerry's win. After all, the people in New Hampshire (and Iowans) say so.

I'm scared to death we're losing the "Antis" war at home, and ultimately, the war on terror Today, I'm discouraged and somewhat disheartened. I'll feel this way until President Bush begins to hit back and Karl Rove gets his strategy figured out. Till then, someone has to start throwing these loathesome prevarications back in their faces. Guess it starts with lil ole me.

Just the facts, Ma'am

Let's talk about that "anger," shall we? First, what in the world are these Antis protesting? This Iraq War remains the most successful war in history, out of which came minimum casualties, the release of 27 million of Saddam's hostages, i.e., his own people, then the shutdown of Iraq's war machines and the capture of Saddam Hussein.

Secondarily, thanks to our presence in Iraq, the world can monitor Iran's nuke build up and possible aggression against other states, Muslim and otherwise. Can there be anyone among serious foreign policy professionals who doubts Iran's motives?

Bush stole the election.. Uh huh. Remember when Nixon won the popular vote, but not the electoral votes against JFK? It happened again. So what? Change the system if you don't like it. A coup? Silly, immature little people.

He's lied to us (along with Tony Blair) about the existence of WMDs. No, he didn't. The president worked off the same information that Senator John Kerry, who sits on the Foreign Intelligence Committee was given and everyone from Kofi Annan to Bill Clinton knew about. How can the allegation that the president lied shape up against such facts?

It was faulty and exagerated intelligence. George Tenet and his CIA people lied and the president knew they were lying. So did the FBI. Wait just a minute! You libs want to play the internal lie card? I'll call that bluff right now. It was Bill Clinton and the left wing of the Democrat Party who managed to gut our intelligence capabilities because, in the strange logic found among the most illogical polity that ever received a charter, G2 expertise was no longer needed in the post Cold War world. In their hopes of turning our world into the Garden of Eden, the serpents among them pulled a hell of a lot of apples off the tree. The Dems can't call this into an intelligence failure unless they take full responsibility for the fact we had not one spy on the ground in Iraq for nearly ten years, therefore setting up the same failures they decry.

And speaking of perpetuating the former adminstration's foreign policy blunders, we must also mention the fact China currently sits a decade ahead of where she would have been if America's nuclear secrets hadn't been sold for votes.

I'm just getting started. Wanna talk about the Balkans? The criteria the Dems use is that despotism and tyranny are only to be preemptively destroyed if a Democrat president proposes to do so. Speaking of terrorists, why didn't Bill Clinton use the prior two or three terror attacks (the U.S.S. Cole and first World Trade Center bombing) as opportunities to shut down Bin Laden? Does anyone truly believe John Kerry will continue Bush's unrelenting anti-terrorist policies and keep us safe? The facts reveal the last Democrat administration wasn't able to handle terrorism. What makes us think any Democrat will in the future? It wasn't in Carter's DNA, nor will it be in John Kerry's. As an example, they're already doing everything in their power to neutralize the Patriot Act, the first line of defense against the creeps in robes.

Oh, you're just a Clinton hater (my favorite). No, I am not a Clinton hater. I strongly disagreed with his policies and personal values. Because of this man, we're in a terrible mess culturally and politically. However, I never had the pathologic hate that is displayed today against the president.

Americans Had Better Figure This Out

Just how disastrous would a Kerry win be in November? Kiss auvoir the U.S.'s resolve to win the war. Slowly, but predictably, the U.S. will capitulate and withdraw, having turned a just and righteous war against terror into another vain and tragic exercise, misunderstood and mischaracterized by history.

Iran might view a Democrat win as proof of an inherent weakness of the American people. The Shi'a in Iraq will hold a gala parade thinking they can finally wrest a minority victory to control the new Iraq. Hammas and their immoral leader, Arafat, will eventually force the region into conflagration as the state of Israel has only so much patience, and must exercise self defense. North Korea will play games again, abandon the multilateral talks that Bush was able to maneuver, successfully scaring the wits out of the new administration and giving an emboldened N.K. a reason to delay talks. This gift of time by the Dems could be the final call to prayer which puts in place the mother of all jihads against America A gift of time to all the tyrants and outlaws in the world who want to kill American citizens in America.

Then there's Pakistan. And Turkey. And all the "Stans" in the south of the old USSR, all holding auctions on their nukes.

If American's haven't figured out what and who's behind the committed and intense struggle the Islamists wage against the U.S., then remain in denial of the very real danger to the lives of our people, we're in for some rough times, both here and there. September 11, 2001 will be only the beginning.

None of the Democrat candidates show he has the guts to lead this nation through the most perilous time of our history. Why would we give them the chance?

Thanks for the read.

Two of the most critical issues for disposition by the United States of America are the WMD question and the War on Terrorism as it relates to immigration and borders.

WMDs Must be Found and Destroyed

Reuters, UPI and the respected London Telegraph and the London Times have reported this morning Dr. David Kelly, the WMD expert who committed suicide shortly after his questioning by top British government officials, stated that private documents reveal Dr. Kelly indeed thought Iraq owned WMDs.

The British government committee asked Dr. Kelly specifically about statements he proportedly made to a BBC reporter that Kelly was not willing to admit their 45 minute deployment capability claimed by Prime Minister Blair and President Bush. Meanwhile, BBC practically put its corporate hand on the Bible, stating Kelly disagreed there were WMDs in Iraq. That wasn't true, and BBC has had a lot of 'splaining to do, again.

First of all, let's disabuse the notion that the WMD question was legitimate. Everyone in the world, including France, Germany and the U.N. knew, or stated they knew of their existence. Questioning that fact only came up as a response to the president's numerous reasons for preemptive war on Saddam Hussein. For the opponents of the war, this seemed as good a opportunity as any to find a reason that the president and Blair lied to all of us.

So, now that it turns out one of the world's experts (he was an expert when the BBC interviewed him; he must be now as well), Dr. Kelly, said he was convinced there were WMDs in Iraq. Moreover, he stated they were deployable within days. Hardly a material difference with Blair. Forty-five minutes, two days? Who cares? If the enemy's attack is done in secret, the time it takes to get it done doesn't matter. Many scenarios have been presented using 45 minutes. Again, the BBC, the war critics and the media got it wrong. There are indeed WMDs in Iraq, or somewhere close by.

This story should be placed on front pages, above the fold, in the same position as the salacious coverage of Dr. Kelly a few months ago. But don't expect it. We are engaged in a cultural/political fight to the end, and most of the elite media are central actors in this fight for their own survival.

Yet, the discrediting of the NY Times, USA Today, BBC, CNN, CBS and others seems to sit in the middle of the room like the elephant people talk about during interventions with alcoholics and drug addicts. People don't seem to mind that they're lied to by the very people who are entrusted as the Fourth Estate to disseminate information.

The establishment media should be focusing on the discovery of these weapons, not distorting the truth to fit their political needs. As usual, irresponsible editors and publishers who know better, continue their ridiculous editorial meeting moot trials of Blair and Bush.

We'll see how the world press handles this loss of trust with BBC, and others. I suspect it will go unnoticed. Frustrating as that is, however, I am more concerned about where these materials are and who has them.

War on Terror

About a week after the 9/11 tragedy, I had lunch with my daughter in Irvine, California. Poeple seemed to be getting used to the idea that America had been attacked. I, sorry to say, had felt we were vulnerable many years before. I'm not saying I told you so, but I told you so. Anyway, two Arab men (not Persian) spoke Farsi at a table across from us. They looked at no one, paid by credit card. then left. I thought at the time they just might be one of "them." Of course, they were probably just as like you and me.

How strange it is to realize the people you're talking to, or living next door to or doing business with might want to kill you. That the people you thought came to the U.S. to make a good life for themselves actually don't want any part of your good life, they only want to take your life.

The president is proposing a first step in immigration reform. Thinking about our problem here in California and in other border states where militias have formed to help prevent illegals from entering, I've reached the conclusion we may be too late to avoid bloodshed. I don't make this statement lightly. I feel terrible sadness, along with great disappointment, that we've allowed the problem of illegal immigration to receive the perennial sidestep from our leaders.

First, what's the problem? The US estimates that 700,000 illegal immigrants simply strolled into the US last year and ventured inland without stopping (up to Arkansas to work for Tysons or WalMart, into New Mexico, up to Washington). The bonanza years before brought nearly 8 million in, their identities, politics and whereabouts unknown.

It seems the U.S. has finally overcome denial and has begun to show leadership. I support the President's proposal for immigration reform. It's a first step, a process finally for appealing to the common sense and better natures of our foreign friends who would give anything to become citizens.

However, part of the proposal is helpful in identifying where and who illegals are. What it won't do is prevent others from coming in and in fact may exacerbate the problem. Here's where I believe we need to take desperate measures, place troops on the borders, and stop this senseless enablement of Mexican immigrants. Find the illegals inside the US, force them to go through the naturalization process, but stand firm at the borders. If it takes troops, so be it. We have to do something.

Contrary to popular belief, immigration control is a national sovereignty issue, not a direct civil rights issue. If the President would use the same rhetoric relating to borders as he does national security, i.e., "...we do not need a permission slip to defend ourselves," and not be afraid to use necessary force, the influx will eventually stop. Only when this million-people march into the U.S. ends can we achieve some stability, thus becoming more able to keep terrorists outside our continental borders and shores.

How do we do it? If we have the capability to know when an old Mig taxis down a runway in Iran or Syria, we can stop illegal immigration. It may be impossible to patrol the entire border at once, but certainly we can stop the sieves and breaks along the line.

But, such a proposal isn't very pretty. It would likely get bloody. However, America must retain its sovereignty if we are to survive. We've made tough choices in the past. The real question is are we Americans up to it? Are we strong enough and centered enough in our own values to make the touch choice?. Or is this a choice we must never make? What's the alternate? Just let the illegals pour in?

We can't sidestep this forever.

Thanks for the read.

The revealing Iowa caucuses tells me one very important thing: most people, even Democrats, are offended by the type of campaigning we've seen by Dean and MoveOn.dumb.

I'm frankly thrilled. I'm hoping the hyennas remove themselves from the perimeter of this country and quiet down. They've done inestimable harm to our country in ways that have yet to manifest. I pray for a return to decency in our discourse.

John Kerry, the tall Dem from Massachusetts, looks to have won first place, with John Edwards from N.C., in second. Guess what fairly liberal Iowans want is a feisty candidate, like Kerry, but others look for good manners. We'll see what the stiff necks in New Hampshire have to say about all this. Remember, General Wesley Clark dropped out of Iowa to concentrate on N.H.

Politics.

I notice Dowdy's back, sans the slashing vitriol, and worries that Governor Dean's wife hasn't shown her face during the campaign. I think we can all figure out why. Would you like to be in a motel room with HIM for six weeks?

Anyway, I wonder whazzup with Dowdy. I mean, did she have a lift, or a job, or a tuck? Tell us all, Dowdy. Hey, I understand. Living with a Hwood writer brings up lots of insecurities. Maybe she just took a vacation. Shy, endearing little Maureen, was an absolute pussygato in her latest screed.

Meanwhile, Dowdy's next column probably includes a lecture on why we should never, ever believe the President of the United States. After the Prez's successes his media foes will attempt to misquote, mischaracterize and mistake the President's motive. Dowdy's slip into niceness will not last.

Cancel your tickets to the Tijuana bullfights, what we got ahead of us is bloodsport. In other words, if you think the Dems spats are unpleasant, just wait until summer. Politics at its peak--the stakes of which are the highest in human history.

L.A. Times Columnist Has Communist Past

Robert Scheer, the ultraleftist columnist, grew up in the arms (or shall I say shackles) of thd Communist Party (his parents were members). I think for the sake of diversity, the L.A. Times should identify their token Communist. Or did he renounce it and bleed into the Trotskyites?

Most of us rubes don't know these things like those big city slicker publishers do.

Is it okay to be a Communist in America now? Yes? How come? Did the Communist Party change its ideal of destroying democracy? Did I miss the memo?

A Personal Note

I began a diet with NurtriSystem.com last week. I chose this one because the program and food is a no-brainer. And when I'm around food, I have no brain.

Best of all, it's a low glycemic diet--the best of Atkins, South Beach, Weight Watchers. What's even better, all you have to do is order a month's worth of food and eat only that. Since I hate even being in the kitchen (I don't know why...I used to love to cook), this makes it easy, and less stress for me.

I promise not to mention my weight loss regularly. But you have to bear with me if I reach my goal! I've lost five pounds in one week. Feel great and working out regularly.

The website has a virtual model (you) before, during and after. Check it out:


Thanks for the read.

I'll be glad when the tell-all books finally go away. Of course, that won't happen until every subordinate close to every powerful person understands such books never accomplish a thing, usually. Other than making the author look real small and stupid.

When I was younger, before I wrote professionally for a large air freight company and then for myself, I worked as an administrative/executive secretary to the president of an oil company, assistant to an ad agency boss, and assistant the viice president of a huge retail chain. In my fourteen years the culture in the executive wing, regardless of company or industry, was supported by the complete loyalty, expected from all people in power.

So when Paul O'Neill comes out with his sour grapes book this week, I have to again remind folks that the president has every right to run his shift his way. He is president, after all. And if he wants to sit in a room of deaf people, like a blind man, then it is his right. By the way, what does that mean? Whatever they were doing, it seems to have worked.

Another excerpt I've read concerns the fact that the Bush Administration had been planning the Iraq war before 9/11. Yeah. And? Iraq was in noncompliance with the UN. Bush and his neocon friends know how dangerous these people were becoming...they understood the importance of democractic beachhead in the middle east. Iraq's a perfect choice.

Count your blessings we have a president who understands the importance of taking the fight to the enemy and proactively places your safety ahead of all else. This is the fight of the millennium; there is no more important job for this president to accomplish.

O'Neill's book is silly, and he deserves to be humiliated. "We (at the White House) never listened to Paul anyway; why should we now?" Frankly, this is one CEO who shoulda known better.

Thanks for the read.

I'm in a pickle. I'm tossing around one of those "gray" (not black nor white) things in my brain: the ethos, then, the personal.

Yesterday, I blasted Pete Rose. Today, I'm feeling the same about his punishment, but after his appearances in the last day or so (I've seen three--shut up! I've been sick.), I feel great empathy for him.

His first contact with the media came off combatively. Last night, his interview with Chris Wallace was annoying because of his insincerity. I attributed his demeanor to postpotent testosterone syndrome, the hallmark of which is a quick spurt of guy juice, with a quick let down the next day.

Today, with O'Reilly, he's human, beaten, humiliated. It breaks all rules: the presence of Pete Rose. What a baseball player! Cincinnati loves him still to this day, and after this evening's interview, I can understand why. Where else do we get to watch a bad game plan pay out such as Rose's. Honestly, I think he thought he'd be forgiven by the ones who count. No, not his fans; the media and Baseball.

Tragically, we are watching the public unraveling of another sportshero. It is tragic because it is so avoidable--read, he had a choice.

I hope contemporary fathers will lose the "nonjudgement" baloney they learned in PS 103, and use our cultural stories as examples of how NOT to live your life. "Son, you just don't cheat. And if you're caught you'll go down in baseball history like the Black Sox. or Pete Rose. And even if no one finds out, you know, Son. You know you cheated.. Ohh, Son, that's a heck of a way to learn a lesson."

Kids look up to adults, whether we like it or not. I'm not sure, but I think Mr. Rose might be thinking about how he really looks, not about how he'll look in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

They Won't Even Read Their Own Press Clippings

I'm not a bona fide journalist, so I don't have to cite my source, but...the AP has quoted the President of Portugal as saying, "Clinton told me he was convinced that Iraq had WMDs," (sic). The meeting from which the alleged quote came occurred in October 2003.

If the antiwar twits would look outside their navels, they would find that they're taking their party off a high cliff, like the ones in Jane Eyre--the first one, the one with Joan Fontaine. Ooooh, I just loved that movie, didn't you? Olivier was a hottie. And the beautiful lighting. You know, when I was a little girl, I thought, well...nevermind.

I'm just guessing here, but I've wondered if they didn't have a secret suicide meeting wherein they decided they'd lay their socialist, multilateralist, extreme environmentalist and other doctrine out on the table for everyone to see, dammn the torpedos, full speed ahead. They're setting themselves up for PoliticalRelic.Org.

It's the war on terrorism, Stupid.

Thanks for the read.

Ahnold's Boffo Speech Leaves Dems Cold

The Democrat members of the California legislature, many flaked out on their chairs, leaning on their desks, look like a bunch of Tom Sawyers and Huckleberrys telling their classmates about their latest scam at Aunt Polly's fence.

If you're not watching Arnold's speech real time, you're missing the melodrama displayed by the juveniles amongst them--John Burton speaks behind Arnold's back--literally, he's leaning over talking to the guy on the left behind the dais.

The old pols' body language, wise and bored, tells me they still haven't dealt with Arnold's presence.

Arnold's speech's rhythm has picked up, his lapse into Austrian-English allows him to spit out words like "modest reform." Modest, he says? Other topics deal with time lines, limits. He just called a spade a spade again, "The state is flat broke...had to borrow from Washington..." Takes on the regulatory structure--wants sweeping reform of wholesale energy buys. Jobs? Wants to create, create, create, bring in business personally. He promises to go all over the nation to recruit business for California. He promised he could sell California. I kind of think he can.

Encourage building of hydrogen hiway--urgehome builders to stress the use of solar power--successful co-existence of environment and business.

Listing areas of cooperation include military issues, will fight as a state to keep our military bases open. Good thing.

Arnold has fired a shot across the bow: go with me or face the people. Burton, chief of the Dems, yawns.

Good finish.

California Democrats Resond

The usual--Republicans hate children and old people and would like their families to freakin die.

P. ROSE--POSTER BOY FOR HALL OF FAME

yeah...for thieves, liars and twisted sisters!

The first inductee, of course, has to be O.J. Simpson.

Following somewhere under him is anyone who helped O.J. Simpson.

Bill Clinton comes to mind, as does Michael Jackson, and my two personal favs, Bin Laden and Saddam.

Meanwhile, Pete Rose is trying to gain eligibility into the baseball Hall of Fame. What, has he died and risen from the grave, only to appear again? The verdict was "banned for life." Don't people ever mean what they say?

Rose's new book tells all. Yes, he did bet on baseball, and lied about it for fourteen years. But, he never, ever, nnnnnever bet against his own team. Fortunately for baseball, only the citizens of Cincinnati believe that whopper.

So here's another opportunity (we'vew had many the last few months) for our truthphobic culture to redefine rules for the rich and famous. Show little boys and hero worshiping big men that it's not enough just to fess up and say you're sorry. No. You gotta lose something; that's just the devine way of things. Good God. Any loving father would tell his kid what happens when ya lie, cheat and steal. And he oughta use people like Rose as an example.

We're going to be taking lots of stands from now on, I am certain. We may as well start with Pete Rose, get into practice of saying something rather unpopular. We may even have the nerve to mention, just mention, that Bryant might be guilty. Actually, I'm always amazed at how many folks agree with me.

Thanks for the read!

Below are the phrases and words of the new political language: theirs and mine.

New? Remember when pro choice was pro abortion? Here are some more.

-slippery slope-

The left uses this when there's really no proof of the loss of civil rights, but if Ashcroft and Bush get their way...well, they look over their half specs: the Patriot Act puts us on a slippery slope.

I've decided never to use this term again unless I'm referring to that Class 2A school somewhere in Pennsylania.

-Bush is Hitler-

This ridiculous comparison, once relegated to really wacky leftists (pretty unknown) are now passwords between really, really wacky leftists who act in motion pictures and write books (well known).

Bush is Hitler? If any of the dolts who run moveon.org ever read serious Hitler authors, they'd know they've once again spoken before they knew what the hell they were talking about. Isn't it embarassing to see just how illiterate these people are? Let's see: Sean Penn's CV. Graduate of ??? Oh, yeah, a GED from the studio.

-Bush and his Conservatives-

According to the Dems, President Bush's cabinet is full of conservatives (refer to paragraphs above about moving the language around. Conservative is now a dirty word). You know, the crazy right wing nuts...telling Bush what to say and how to act.

Psst. Hey, over here. Yeah, here. Listen.

Sssh. This is one president the Conservatives just can't get their mitts on. Look at spending, our socially acceptable welfare state. It's happening, just the way a lot of MORs like me think it must.

I'll think of more later after I listen to the mainstream news.

Thanks for the read.