4 Mile Creek

That's Why They Are Called Killer Whales

Shamu "attacked" his (her?) trainer during a show at SeaWorld.  Shamu grabbed the trainer's foot in his mouth and dragged the trainer underwater twice.  The trainer has been hospitalized with minor injuries to his foot. 
CNN interviewed a mother who said that she didn't expect to see such behavior from a killer whale.  A killer whale!  Is SeaWorld doing a disservice to the public when they put on years of this type of show? 
Years ago I brought my kids to a Shamu show at SeaWorld in Florida.  The whales wouldn't perform because the female was in heat, and the male wanted to make sure he didn't miss his chance.  So while the female was clearly distracted and wouldn't do most of  her "tricks", the male circled the rear tank and pounded his tail against the gate that needed to be lifted for him to get into the big performance pool where the female was.  I got a chance to explain to my kids that the act, built upon natural activities of the whales, was being changed by the whales in order for them to act upon even more natural activities.  I thought it was better for my kids to understand that the whales, fun to watch, were still wild animals and not machines.  It's a good lesson, especially for those families that spend as much time in the outdoors as my family does. 

History Lessons Not Welcome

The last time the US looked to the Left and the Democrats to define what was a civil war and when we were "defeated", was during the Viet Nam War.  Back then, they said that the Viet Nam War was simply a civil war that we shouldn't be involved in.  Of course that was completely wrong, and the movement of the NVA into Laos and Cambodia shortly after their victory in the south put the proper face on what the war really was about.
The Left and the Dems (and a TV News Anchor...sound familiar?) declared our defeat after the Tet Offensive, and of course that was also completely wrong.  The Tet Offensive was a stunning military defeat for the Viet Cong.  Though US deaths spiked at that time, the Viet Cong deaths were even more horrendous and they ceased to exist as a military formation from that time on.  All the fighting after that point was conducted by the NVA.
The end result of the Left's and Dem's inability to understand warfare at even the most basic level, and their outright cowardice, was that they believed we were defeated in Viet Nam and that our best option was to cut and run (is any of this sounding familiar yet?)  Which we did.  After we abandoned the South Vietnamese, the ensuing fight and political cleansing resulted in over 2.5 million Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotian deaths, twenty straight years of political upheaval in those three countries, and almost thirty years of economic stagnation.
The Left and the Dems have never acknowledge that they were wrong about Viet Nam.  I'd say the opposite is true; they view their opposition to the Viet Nam War and our abandonment of the Vietnamese people as a shining star in their past that guides their every movement today.  Why we would be looking to that group to define and set a course for the Iraq War is completely beyond my ability to comprehend.   

Celtic Women

I'm watching a show on PBS called "Celtic Women".  The singing is absolutely beautiful.  The lady who plays the violin is impressive.  I'm very taken. 
My Scottish mother must be rolling in her grave. 

My, What Big Lies You Have!

Sooooo, if you are enough of a (political) child to believe the fairytales of Joe Wilson, are you enough of a (political) child to believe in the AP fairytales of Iraqi Police Capt Hussein? 
Yup. 

Open Letter to Leftists?

Now why on earth would the leader of a nation that regularly leads his citizens in chants of "Death to America" think he could preach to the Democratic Party on how they should govern?

Oh, that's right.

Is there any reason to believe that a fascist like Ahmadinejad would get a welcome from the Left in America?

Oh, that's right.

But really, is there anyone who's stupid enough to think that this guy is sincere?

Oh, that's right.

Managing Defeat

No matter why a person voted for a Democrat this last election (good guy, great local politician, perfectly honorable record of service, etc) that vote will be construed by MoveOn.org, the Krazy Kos Kids, the loony Left, and the MSM as accepting of US defeat in Iraq.
There's nothing cynical or devious about it; they said it would be taken as such way back when Ned Lamont was considered a serious candidate. 
Now the MSM wants to know how the US military will "manage the defeat" in Iraq.  The defeat that they themselves, and the Democrats, have worked hard towards, and have accepted as necessary and good.   I didn't really want to put in my retirement papers this last August, but when I read stuff like this, I'm happy that I did.   

When They Say "We Support the Troops", They Mean al Queda Troops

First Kerry, now Rangel. 
There really shouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind why a lot of military think the average Democrat would rather spit on them than shake their hand. 
On the other hand, if Charlie Rangel were on fire, there's quite a few soldiers who wouldn't even piss on him to put it out.

(update - in response to the snarky emails I've received:  The Army didn't pay any of my undergraduate degree costs.  I paid them all.  The Army didn't pay any of my graduate degree costs.  I paid them all.  I have 100% of my Montgomery GI Bill benefits remaining, and will probably use none of them. So no, I haven't benefited from the Army educational benefits that Rangel says is the only reason soldiers join, so I can say that had nothing at all to do with my nearly 22 years of service. 

And by the way, I can't wait to see his committee  "prove" we are all a bunch of societal losers.  First black soldier he should have in front of his committee - Gen(R) Colin Powell.)   

Promises Broken

Swept into power just two and a half weeks ago, the Dems are already breaking their promises to their biggest supporters, the KKK (Krazy Kos Kids).

(T)he incoming chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee said his committee would not take on contentious issues, such as extending expiring tax cuts or overhauling Social Security, at the beginning of the year. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Democrats do not want a fight with President Bush, and want to prove they can govern.

"The first thing we're going to do is try to work together on things we know we can accomplish," Rangel said. "Rather than have the committee against the president, it's not going to happen," Rangel said.

"Work together"??!!  That ain't what they were voted in to power to do.  They were put there to fight the President.  Nice backdown, Charlie. 

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich), is even more timid:

Among the investigations he said he wants the committee to undertake:

_The new Medicare drug benefit. "There are lots and lots and lots of scandals," he said, without citing specifics.

_Spending on government contractors in Iraq,  including Halliburton Co., the Texas-based oil services conglomerate once led by Vice President Dick Cheney.

_An energy task force overseen by Cheney. It "was carefully cooked to provide only participation by oil companies and energy companies," Dingell said.

_A review of food and drug safety, particularly in the area of nutritional supplements.

Wow!  Talk about taking on the President!  A review of food and drug safety!   Man, I'm not sure that the American public is ready for such radical legislation.  Oh wait, when exactly was The Jungle written?  Oh, 1906?  Okay, maybe the American public is ready for a review of food and drug safety, given that we've had one hundred years to get ready for the Dems to take action!  And there isn't a true conservative that isn't begging for a congressional committee to take on Medicare scandals, reviews of government contracts and energy policy.  Good to see the KKK worked so hard to put a bunch of conservatives into committee chairmanships.
Thanks guys!

The Point is Terror, and the Terrified Get the Point

The National Post gets it partly correct:

The good news is that al-Najar was unsuccessful: She didn't kill anyone except herself. And we suppose it's also good news that Hamas is so short of recruits that they must now resort to brainwashed grandmas -- much as the Nazis conscripted young boys and old men in the waning days of the Second World War.

The bad news is that -- well, the bad news is that there are Muslims on this earth who think Allah wants them to turn grandmothers into walking bombs. It seems the harder Israel and the rest of the world try to give the Palestinians their own country, the harder they try to prove that they don't deserve one.

Nah, that's not the bad news....that muslims want menopausal women to blow themselves up.  That's not even news.  The bad news is that the editorialists at major newspapers are wrong about how successful the "granny bomb" was.  The idea behind palestinian terror isn't to kill enough Israeli soldiers to effect a victory on the ground, the idea is to create enough terror (ergo the name) in the heart and soul of the euroweenie so that they continue to pour money into palestine.  For that, a geriatric bomb machine is near-perfect.  It would only have been better if the old hag had been partially crippled and had to wheel herself up to the checkpoint in a wheelchair.  It is called "asymmetric warfare" and a lot has been written up on it, so there's no excuse for journalists, or editors, to misunderstand what's going on. 

American Democratic congressmen, on the other hand, have a excuse.  The effective range of a terrorist's explosion is not about 30 meters.  It's range is effective as far as the New York Times can send its newspaper and website.  The fact that terrorists are terrorizing Nancy Pelosi with 10 lbs of explosives from a base nearly 5000 miles away is perfectly understandable.   When President Roosevelt stated "the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself" he could have very well been talking about the effect of terrorists on his party of today.  The terrorists cannot defeat us with a few planes driven into buildings, but this last election clearly shows that as long as there are Democrats running for office, they can defeat us with fear itself.  And the only thing those of us who would like to see the terrorists routed and killed need to fear, is that Democratic fear, itself. 

Why Would a Leftist Pray, Anyway?

If it is okay to pray for the death of one conservative, is it okay to pray for the death of all Leftists? 
Given Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Tito,  Mugabe, et al?