CatHouse Chat

Carnival of Cats 31Oct

When Cats Attack!! has this week's list up, and Pixel and Smudgie make their debut appearance!

Oh, this is so exciting! My first Carnival, and one early visitor already... This is better than Halloween!

Time for the Left to Look in the Mirror

From Little Green Footballs, a post that makes me dream....

Time for the Left to Look in the Mirror - but they won't.

I'm just astonished that the liberal left doesn't seem to "get" the idea. Do they really want to support a candidate that Osama bin Laden doesn't appear to dislike? Do they really want to have a President that the Islamo-fascist-terrorists like?????!!!!!

Talk about needing to "wake up!" Here's a wake up call: The Towers, September 11, 2001

UPDATE: And also, what she said.

Calm down! God is in control!

This post over at La Shawn Barber's Corner was a big encouragement to me today.

Just last night, Al Jazeera released a new video from Usam bin Laden. We haven't heard from UBL in many months, and I was pretty sure the man was dead, so this was rather discouraging.

Yesterday, I listened to Boortz fora few minutes, but tuned him off when he started predicting that Mr. Kerry would win this election. Now, he was pretty upset about this, of course, and thinks it will be due to voter fraud, illegal votes, and the Republicans not being quite as motivated to show up and vote, but still...! It was also rather discouraging.

So on the long drive out to my mother-in-law's, I angsted about the election. I really don't want Mr. Kerry to win. I think it would be disasterous for our country, and would give the extreme Islamo-fascist terrorists encouragement.

So, this morning I'm surfing around looking for news (on a Saturday?), and decide to visit LaShawn's place, which is new on my "favorite places" list. She posts:

Some of you are nervous, others confident. To every believer, no matter how you feel about this election, I offer the word of the Lord:

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. (Romans 13: 1-7)

If the people want John Kerry, so be it. If he wins, it is God’s will. If Bush wins, it is God’s will. On election night, I’ll be praying that Bush’s re-election and Kerry’s defeat is God’s will. He may have other plans. I trust him.

God is in control. He is working everything out for His glory and our ultimate good. I need to remember Romans 8:28, so often fondly quoted, "And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose."

God is in control. I can rest in that.

Freedom vs. "Peace"

INDC Journal: Sacrifice - Why Fight? a beautiful photo illustrating the differences in ideology.

My husband's and my response would baffle these people:

We would rather lose our lives fighting for freedom than lose them living in "peace."

Freedom costs. True peace costs. Sometimes the cost is war. Anyone who loves the liberties America is blessed with should understand this, and be willing to pay the price.

A little welcome frivolity

Over at Annika's Journal, she posted a Fash-ism Tutorial For The Maximum Leader which ("that?" what is the proper grammar?) is just so lovely, light and fun, that I had to blog it.

I've never cared for heels (except for boots - and did you vote in the poll?), and now I can't wear them at all (metal in my ankle), but this blog entry almost makes me wish I could wear those f***-me heels....

Y'know, sometimes I forget how fun girly things can be!

"Rawhide" for 2004

The Daily Recycler: The Choice is a video that just screams hilarious!

I am keeping this one on my hard drive forever!

Woooohooo!

What kind of Mom am I?

Well, apparently, this kind:

You're an agitator! Your kids have grown up on the
front lines of rallies and pickets, and chances
are that you boycott at least one company for
its bad business practices. Your kids are
learning what matters to you and how they can
change what matters to them.


What kind of a freaky mother are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

Pretty funny, huh? I didn't think something like this would come up......

Ten miles wide, 1500 long - and 1/8 inch deep

Jeff Jacoby has an article at Townhall.com about Mr. Kerry's supposed religious convictions. (HT to Dr. Sanity's post here).

I continue to be flabbergasted by this man's ability to stand for everything and therefore nothing.

Former President Clinton remarked the other day that it is a very foolish man who never changes his opinion in light of new evidence (or words to that effect, I'm paraphrasing). I quite agree, but usually a change of viewpoints of this magnitude is far more credible when there has been plenty of time to demonstrate practical evidence of the "new man."

Mr. Kerry's about-faces are legendary. He cannot seem to hold onto one long enough to convince people of his conversion. Also, all his new convictions seem to have appeared extremely close to the election. Mr. Kerry will, apparently, sacrifice anything to get another vote, including his principles (assuming he even has any....).

I'm sorry - the man is a limp noodle waffler of the first degree.

Hm.... Well, I suppose he has to be good at something...

UPDATE: Let's Try Freedom makes a very good point right here about the discrepancy between Mr. Kerry's "personal" opinions and his "public" duties.

Elect this man!

THIS is the man I trust to lead this country in war.

I thank God that He gave us President Bush in stead of Mr. Gore four years ago. If Mr. Gore had won, I completely believe that America after September 11, 2001, would have been demoralized, broken, and cowering in the face of the terrorist threat.

I do not agree with all of President Bush's policies, I think he has made mistakes in prosecuting this war. However, there is no man, right now, who is as trustworthy to finish this job of exterminating the terrorists. I believe Mr. Bush is an honest man of deep faith and compassion who understands the nasty job that must be done. I believe that he will stay the course with true determination and will finish these animals off.

Mr. President, God bless you and give you strength and clarity. May He give you wisdom and purpose to do the right thing. May God also grant you the discernment to guide this country and offer our assistance to others with grace and compassion. Stand firm in the faith, stand firm in your family, stand firm in your principles. You and your family are a rich blessing to us, and you have given us a living example to trust and follow.

It would be a great honor to meet you one day, shake your hand, and say "Thank you, sir, you were the right man for the right job at the right time."

I'm not sure I should mourn...

Barking Moonbat has a lovely announcement about Yassir Arafat, which is also mentioned by Emperor Misha's blog, Little Green Footballs, and even CBS.

Oh, wait - if CBS is reporting it, it couldn't possibly be true, right?

Gee, I understand that Arafat's death would create a power vacuum, but it's really hard to be concerned about a lying, thieving, murderous, manipulative, devious, arrogant, cheating, self-centered, slimey, lower-than-dirt (apologies to dirt), fork-tongued, ugly terrorist bastard. He probably smells bad, too. *sniff* Am I being too harsh?

Frankly, I openly confess that God Himself is going to have to find it in His heart to forgive and love this guy, because in my far-less-than-perfectness, I just don't have it in me.....

A Lovely, Clear Picture....

Some Perspective for the Willfully Stupid - in other words, for some perspective on the "missing" explosives, just check out this post.

Citizen Soldiers

Let's Try Freedom has a beautiful post about our responsibilities as citizens of this blessed country. We all too often forget that freedom isn't free, and that we have important duties to perform.

All I can say about this post is, "Amen, and amen!"

Why am I not surprised?

New York Times Defends Missing Explosives Story -- 10/26/2004 despite all evidence to the contrary.

I have an image in my mind of a small, grubby kid with his hands clamped to his ears and his eyes screwed shut whining, "Nyah, nyah, nyah! Can't heeeeeeaaaar yoooooouuuuuuuu!"

Demo-nization Of Bush Recalls 1984 Election

Demo-nization Of Bush Recalls 1984 Election - this is an interesting little item....

It reassures me a bit that all is NOT lost or more-terrible-than-ever.

But I do wish there were a lot more honesty in the news and politics!

Which reminds me of a story by the science-fiction author, Spider Robinson (of "Callahan's Crosstime Saloon" fame), many years ago. I cannot recall the title, but it involved a couple travelling aroung and hitting everyone they could with a truth drug. If you can find the story, it has some fuuuuuuun implications!

CBS almost at it again?

Drudge has an interesting story about the missing explosives, and has this quote:

Jeff Fager, executive producer of the Sunday edition of 60 MINUTES, said in a statement that "our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..."

You would think, after the forged documents scandal earlier this fall, that 60 Minutes would be a little leary of cultivating this type of story with this sort of dubious timing.

Sean Hannity was commenting rather forcefully on his radio program today that the main-stream media is becoming more and more obviously partisan. In my opinion, this wouldn't be too terrible if only they didn't claim to be unbiased - or if they offered fair time to opposing views.

FoxNews, of course, features Mr. Hannity in the evening on Hannity & Colmes, which I think is a fantastic example of an excellent "partisan" program. Different sides/opinions are presented by articulate, intelligent people, going head-to-head in a public arena. The veiwer knows the biases of each anchor, and can clearly see the pros and cons of each side. Definitely the way to do the "We report, you decide" video editorial!

What is also interesting is that - despite the accusations of incompetance the Kerry campaign is flinging at Bush - those weapons/stockpiles were probably "lost" before the U.S. forces took control of those weapons. Check out this article at the Belmont Club. See also this and this.

WHY do these idiots keep doing this?? Do they think we are that stupid?

Bigley Murdered

Headline news from Sky News - Witness the event (via Drudge, of course) states that there are reports of Ken Bigley being murdered. I am so glad the article referred to these monsters as "terrorists." I also submit that "animals," "thugs," and "barbarians" would also be appropriate descriptions.

These barbarians are in no way interested in a solution to the situation in Iraq. They are interested in being terrorist bullies who get their thrills from heinous and despicable acts of destruction.

If they were interested in a real solution, they would come to the table and present their concerns and desires like civilized adults, instead of acting like psychopathic children. (With my apologies to psychopathic children everywhere.)

WMD or no WMD - no longer the question

And so what does this do for the President's case for going to war? Well it hurts it in one way, but the follow up in the WMD report validates it. Go read:JunkYardBlog: October 03, 2004 - October 09, 2004 Archives

I've been exchanging comments about this with James over on the Jawa Report. I initially commented because James really hated Bill Whittle's essay "Deterrence" over at Mr. Whittle's website. Now, Mr. Whittle does not post often (drat), but when he does, I take notice. I feel he writes extremely well, and although I do not agree with all of his positions, he has well stated opinions and reasoning.

In spite of the fact that Hussein did not have WMD, as my comments over at the Jawa Report state, I feel we still had reason enough to go over there and get rid of him. I'd quote some of my remarks, but my cursor is curse-worthy this morning. (laughing)

Storms, Iraq and the barbershop

Storms, Iraq and the barbershop

Now this..... This is scary! Reeeaally scary......

Are there any pastors out there claiming that our weather, the earthquake, and Mt. Saint Helens are God's judgement for our actions in Iraq?

I'll update this later - I'm surfing around for the evening, but I need to come back and address this.

Newspapers Endorsing Bush or Kerry?

Lowell Sun Endorses Bush! This Massachusetts newspaper endorses Bush with some rather harsh criticism for Kerry:

In his 20 years in the U.S. Senate, Kerry, a Navy war hero, hasn’t risen above the rank of seaman for his uninspiring legislative record. He’s been inconsistent on major issues. First he’s for the 1991 Persian Gulf War, then he opposes it. First he’s for the war in Iraq, then he’s against it. First he’s for a strong U.S. defense, then he votes against military weapons programs. First he’s for the U.S. Patriot Act, then he opposes it.

Kerry’s solution to stop terrorism? He’d go to the U.N. and build a consensus. How naive. France’s Jacques Chirac, Germany’s Gerhard Schroeder, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and other Iraq oil-for-food scam artists don’t want America to succeed. They want us brought down to their level. And more and more, Kerry sounds just like them. In a recent campaign speech, Kerry said America was in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

This is, of course, compared to the Crawford, TX (President Bush's hometown), paper, the Star Iconoclast, which came out for Kerry. The Star apparently has a circulation of about 425, and its website is here.

The Lowell Sun, with a circulation of about 48,000 endorses Bush here.

Now, circulation does not determine truthfulness, certainly. Nor does high circulation imply credibility. However, it does carry influence.

The MSM (Main Stream Media) has touted the Iconoclast ("Ooooooo! Bush's hometown paper!")- but will we see anything about the Sun (me: "Ooooooo! Kerry's hometown paper!")? I suspect, if we hear anything, it will be on FoxNews.

A Friend E-Mailed This To Me....

I hate those messages. With a major passion. I get probably 10-20 each week. And they drive me NUTS!

Actually, this little tirade was sparked by an attatchment Mom sent me, which asserted we should all boycott Starbucks because they were being meanies and not sending free coffee to the US Marines.

*sigh*

I happen to like Starbucks, on occasion, and I just adore the Marines, but can we be a little more mature?

Most people who get these posts, in my experience, pretty much trust them. After all, "My friend wouldn't send me something which wasn't true!" Well, no, not knowingly, I'm sure. But most people don't check the story out on Snopes or other websites which keep up with urban legends. You can even run a Google search on the key words, which will bring up several places to research the claim.

The Snopes article about this Starbucks/Marine thing, by the way, is here.

Anyway, I have yet to encounter one of these forwarded e-mails (and remember how many I seem to get) which has been proven true. People don't check out the Madelyn Murray O'Hare story (she's taking "Touched By An Angel" off the air!), or "It Takes Guts to Say Jesus!" (false virus warning), or things like that. The knee-jerk response is, "Oh, that's terrible! I must tell all my friends!" and it's forwarded to the whole address box.

It is particularly irritating here in the United States ("Innocent until proven guilty.") and in the Christian community (which supposedly has standards of honesty, and searching out the facts). This sort of laziness - and I myself am very lazy in many ways - is asinine. Unfortunately, it's my Christian fellow-citizens who most often send me this dreck, even after I have asked them not to.

So, now to my petty little rant: I sent Mom an e-mail saying, basically, "Please don't do this. Research first to check the facts." Then I had the brilliant idiotic idea that others may be interested in learning a little more, and did a "Reply All" e-mail to the other people who had been sent this story. Out of the maximum of 20 people I sent to, I've received two replies. I know, 10% is not awful, but both (so far) had the basic attitude that I was a rude little wench, I need to learn "tact" and "discernment," and that I was interfering with their personal lives.

*bigger sigh*

I didn't know I was so powerful. I actually interfere in their lives with one e-mail! Never mind how much these bogus warnings must interfere with my life. I must hit the delete key once or twice a day because of this! [rolls eyes]

Upon reflection, yes, I could have rephrased a bit in the e-mail I sent out. And, yes, I could have only sent the e-mail to my mom and the two main "forwarders." But you know what? I did not intend rudeness, and I said so, and I would suggest that at least 80% (based on my experience) of e-mailers out there need this info. I am hopeful that even one person may be somewhat more inclined now to check the facts first.

[/rant]

So, if you want to warn me of something dire, check facts first.

Otherwise, don't bother.

Just.... don't.

Bunker Busting Nukes - Are They Necessary?

Hugh Hewitt has set up a virtual symposium among bloggers to answer these questions:

Did Kerry blunder in denouncing nuclear bunker busters? If so, why? If so, how great the damage to his candidacy?

Several prominant blogs have posted, as well as some that are less well known (to me, anyway! LOL) and make very good points. I'm just going to go down Mr. Hewitt's list and quote the points made which I found particularly interesting.

Bill Hobbs is the first blog linked, and makes his point very clear:

It only makes perfect sense that having the ability to destroy such weapons caches and weapons facilities of rogue regimes such as Iran and North Korea would make America safer. We don't currently have that capability. And yet John Kerry doesn't want us to have it.

Mr. Hobbs closes with this stern warning:

A vote for John Kerry is a vote to risk the lives of millions of Americans on the proposition that a strong defense is risky but having no defense against madmen is sane. It is, quite literally, a vote you may one day pay for with your life.

Little Green Footballs agrees with Mr. Hobbs:

John Kerry will help the mullahs of Iran develop a nuclear program, but wants America to disarm—because if we disarm and stop researching the mean! evil! bad! nukes, the rest of the world will join us in the world of colorful butterflies and laughing flowers, and we’ll all dance happily through the meadow. Tra la!

Remember: a vote for John F. Kerry is a vote for Armageddon.

The American Thinker has a very readable entry on the type of nuclear device that might be used for these Bunker Busters. He (I'm using the term generically - I have no idea of the gender) discusses the differences between "strategic" and "tactical" nukes, which is very helpful to get a picture of the just how large or small a bomb is needed.

There are several other links, varying between brief posts, rants, and short essays. I have no doubt that there will be more posted after I close this window.

The main point is that Mr. Kerry is following his blindly anti-nuke background, and that possibly - and probably - would be disastrous for America if he is elected. Frankly, I can see that: I read just last week (and I can't remember where, sorry) that if we allow our enemies just one avenue of escape or shelter, they will be able to hold out longer. In the interests of making this war as short and successful as possible, that is obviously a terrible tactic.

We must prosecute this war aggressively, with every means at our disposal. If, after 30 years, we look back and consider this another Viet Nam, it will not be because we pressed the war. It will be due to a lack of dedicated, determined leadership which didn't use every tactic to hunt these animals down and exterminate them like the vermin they are.

Oh, I really hope this isn't true...

..... but I'm afraid it may well be. *sigh*

The Spoons Experience: DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU posts about the possibility that the two Italian women who were kidnapped may not have been truely "kidnapped."

Spoons cites an article on Captain's Quarters as well as the News Telegraph (UK).

Apparently, this suspicion is not limited to the Italian women: Captain's Quarters also posts this about the Japanese hostages, and this with its update.

If this aspect to the hostages indeed is proven, it certainly makes it far worse for the true hostages. I will definitely keep my eye on this topic, and I hope I can follow up with more positive proofs. For my part, I hope this whole thing is disproven.