Archive for July, 2008

MEMPHIS LIAR FACT-CHECKS MCCAIN, HILARITY ENSUES

Thursday, July 31st, 2008

Memphis Liar Editor Bruce VanWyngarden picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue:

The presidential race is starting to turn nasty — at least on one side. John McCain said last week that opponent Barack Obama was willing to “lose a war in order to win a campaign.” McCain also ran an ad falsely claiming that Obama canceled a meeting with wounded vets in Germany because “cameras weren’t allowed.” (This, even though McCain similarly had canceled an appearance with wounded vets this spring, also at the request of the Pentagon.)

First off, and this is an admittedly minor point, the McCain ad doesn’t make the direct claim Bruce reports. To be exact, the ad’s narrator says: “He made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn’t allow him to bring cameras.” The ad certainly implies or suggests that BRCK BM canceled his visit because he wasn’t able to stage it as a campaign event, but the direct charge is not specified, and VanWyngarden also tampers with the quote: “cameras weren’t allowed.”

Second, I find no evidence for VanWyngarden’s assertion that McCain “canceled an appearance with wounded vets this spring.” According to CNN, “the Navy declined a McCain campaign request to speak at the Naval Aviation Museum at the naval base in Pensacola, Florida, because it is a military owned installation and is located on the base.” Unless there were wounded vets lined up to appear with McCain at the museum, VanWyngarden appears to be making a stretch.

Third, and most importantly, VanWyngarden falsely suggests that the Pentagon asked the Senators not to meet with wounded troops, when in fact it has simply asked both to make such appearances in an official, rather than a political, capacity.

The Dallas News quotes Pentagon Spokesman Bryan Whitman: “Nobody denied Senator Obama the opportunity to visit our wounded being cared for at Landstuhl. Obviously as a sitting senator he has an interest in that and can certainly visit in an official capacity… The senator’s staff was informed of the limits on what the military can do with respect to a political campaign and how we could support a senator’s visit to Landstuhl, and quite frankly I expected them to have the visit.”

According to BRCK BM’s own campaign statement, canceling the event was a decision of his own choosing:

The senator decided out of respect for these servicemen and women that it would be inappropriate to make a stop to visit troops at a U.S. military facility as part of a trip funded by the campaign.”

I’m willing to give BRCK BM the benefit of the doubt and take him at his word on this one, but McCain’s campaign is certainly free to reach a different conclusion, particularly in light of the larger context of BRCK BM’s campaign.

VanWyngarden continues his editorial with an analysis of McCain’s appearance on CNN’s The Situation Room, in which he repeated his vow to capture Osama bin Laden or otherwise “bring him to justice.”

Blitzer asked how McCain was going manage such a feat when President Bush hadn’t been able to do it in seven years.

This is an unexpected and welcome departure from the Leftist mantra that President Bush took his eye off the ball, but unfortunately it’s the only line approaching reasonable criticism in the whole editorial.

Of course, a few days earlier, McCain had proclaimed himself worried about the situation on the nonexistent “Iraq/Pakistan border,” which would suggest he doesn’t know the area quite as well as he’d like us to think.

Yes, of course… but what VanWyngarden fails to mention is that McCain’s comment was, like the question that elicited it, about Afghanistan, which in fact does border Pakistan — suggesting not that he’s unfamiliar with the area, as VanWyngarden implies, but instead that McCain’s simply as prone as any politician to verbal gaffes and temporary geographic confusion.

Take, for example, BRCK BM, who forgot his home state of Illinois shared a border with Kentucky when talking about that state’s primary…

“Sen. Clinton, I think, is much better known, coming from a nearby state of Arkansas. So it’s not surprising that she would have an advantage in some of those states in the middle.”

… and who at one point seemed to have discovered an additional eight states:

“Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.

VanWyngarden continues:

What got to me, though, was his assertion that he knew how to capture bin Laden but hadn’t bothered to share this magical information with the president, the CIA, or the Pentagon. He’s a U.S. senator, for heaven’s sake. Surely the president will take his calls.

Seems to me that McCain was dangling his secret plan to capture the world’s leading terrorist as an incentive for the American people to elect him president. “Elect me,” he appeared to be saying, “and I’ll get the bad guy.”

It’s nothing short of absurd to claim that McCain’s confidence in his own military experience, knowledge about warfare and determination to defeat Al Qaida somehow amounts to “magical information” that he has refused to share with the White House.

Yes, it’s unfortunate that McCain seems to be making the capture of Osama bin Laden a campaign promise, rather than simply expressing his desire and readiness to continue aggressively taking the fight to Al Qaida.

But at least he’s not promised to cure paralysis, a la John Edwards, or worse, control the land, sea and air, a la BRCK BM, who told the crowds in Berlin, “Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands.”

Huh. Sounds like he’d rather win a campaign than capture Osama bin Laden. Either that, or the “maverick” is full of, uh, non-straight talk.

The Memphis Liar certainly knows a thing or two about “non-straight talk.”

Cross-posted at MemphisLiar.com.

HOMELESSNESS IN MEMPHIS AND SHELBY COUNTY

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008

The U.S. homeless count continues to drop, and the chronically homeless population in America has also continued to decline over the past few years.

The national trend holds up in Memphis and Shelby County, where the number of unsheltered, chronically homeless individuals has decreased more than 57% since 2005.

HUD awarded the area’s homeless agencies with a grand total of $4,865,244 for the year, which works out to about $2,682 per homeless individual.

It will be interesting to see if the Commercial Appeal covers this story as poorly as it did last year, when it failed to include the numbers or link to the HUD report.

year homeless individuals unsheltered homeless individuals chronically homeless individuals unsheltered chronically homeless individuals
2007 1814 70 87 35
2006 1776 194 113 39
2005 1876 109 346 82

Table: Homelessness in Memphis / Shelby County, 2005-2007. Source: U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Development.

HAPPY ISRA AL MI’RAJ

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008

I just wanted to be the first to wish you and your children a merry Isra al Mi’raj. Enjoy your “optional prayers.”

ANOTHER KNOXVILLE CASUALTY: THE FIRST AMENDMENT

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

After 9/11, the Left was quick to attribute the terrorist attacks to Islamic Jihad’s distaste for America’s values, freedoms and culture. We were to blame for Al Qaeda’s violent radicalism, they said, because we had the audacity to project our influence around the world, defend Muslim populations in Europe and the Middle East from invading dictators and ethnic cleansing, advocate religious freedom and equal rights and even step foot on their holy places.

So it should come as no surprise to see Leftists like Aunt B., katie allison granju and LeftWingCracker blame conservative free speech for the murderous rampage of some insane lunatic in Knoxville.

I’m not sure what exactly is conservative about stepping into a church and killing random parishioners, or how it could be considered conservative for some fool to blame complete strangers for his own economic situation, as he reportedly did. Conservatives respect life, defend religious liberty, value the free market and believe in the equality of all mankind. I’m no follower of Bill O’Reilly, specifically mentioned by Aunt B., but I have yet to see exactly where he advocated church shootings, spewed hatred towards Christians or charged homosexuals with causing unemployment.

I also fail to see how one lunatic who shot up his ex-wife’s church, and who apparently experienced paranoia and had psychotic fixations on political and social groups unlike himself, somehow implicates conservative talk radio or conservatism in general, particularly if FARC-like savagery and Bill Ayers-style domestic terrorism are not attributed to Leftist free speech in general.

Furthermore, LeftWingCracker loses whats left of his fig leaf of credibility by calling for BRCK BM to kick off his Presidency by reinstating the Fairness Doctrine:

Yes, it will wipe out Progressive Talk, but it will also wipe out Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, and those other denizens of hatred of everyone non-white, non-rightwing and non-Christian fundie.

All free speech should be squelched, he says, just because of the murderous acts of a single individual. So much for his alleged concern for the Constitution, which he cited as the reason we shouldn’t track international terrorist communications passing through US networks and switchboards.

Even if we assume the Knoxville shooter’s mind was poisoned by 20 years of the Rush Limbaugh program — which is dedicated to liberty, equality, justice and patriotism — what exactly should we expect from those who for 20 years sat at the feet of Jeremiah Wright — a man whose ministry seems dedicated to racism, hatred and anti-Americanism, and whose frame of reference appears to be limited to slavery, Tuskegee and Hillary Clinton’s sense of entitlement?

Maybe you disagree with me about Limbaugh — that’s fine, you have a right to your opinion; that is, you will until LeftWingCracker, Aunt B., BRCK BM, et. al. get their way.

SEE ALSO: This guy.

OUR WEEKEND GUEST

Monday, July 28th, 2008

George

This little fella (and the colony of fleas living in his hair) wandered into our lives on Saturday. He had no tags or collar, and the Humane Society found no microchip on him, so we’re not sure who the owner is. Following with our alphabetical system, we’ve bestowed him with the temporary name George. We’re not sure what breed George is, unless he’s an Ewok or miniature Wookie. Thanks to Linda at Dogs 2nd Chance Rescue, George is no longer shacking up in our breezeway, though Eden and Freckles did enjoy him being around. He’s a sweet, friendly dog. If you recognize him, please contact 2nd Chance, or leave a comment here.

FIRST DAY OF PUPPY SCHOOL

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008

Mick, Eden and Freckles

Eden and Freckles were exhausted after their first day of doggie school, where they got lots of treats and engaged in only minimal killing. They’re just luring the other puppies into a false sense of security.

ANOTHER VICTORY IN THE GWOB

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008

The Global War on Bags is looking more favorable every day, especially in Los Angeles, where plastic bags will be banned by 2010. And it looks like paper bags won’t escape the wrath either, as they’re getting slapped with a brilliant 25 cent tax. It’s comforting to know the government is protecting us against this insidious foe. Of course, prepared shoppers will still be using bags under the BYOB policy, but if we’re lucky, people will eventually start using their own recycled mesh aborted fetuses instead (emblazoned with a Flyer logo, of course).

UPDATE: This news makes no sense to me; our heroic global warming alarmists and Al Gore wannabes are such winning personalities that I can’t imagine why anybody would object to being permanently glued to their side. It’s not like they’re all a bunch of preachy, hypocritical, ignorant, fascist leeches who want to dictate our every move.

WHY THE NY TIMES PANNED MCCAIN’S OP-ED

Monday, July 21st, 2008

The New York Times rejected John McCain’s Op-Ed on Iraq, a rebuttal to one they published that was penned by BRCK BM.

One reason the Times was forced to reject McCain’s editorial is that it clearly puts shame to their endorsement of him in the Republican primary:

Mr. McCain was one of the first prominent Republicans to point out how badly the war in Iraq was being managed. We wish he could now see as clearly past the temporary victories produced by Mr. Bush’s unsustainable escalation, which have not led to any change in Iraq’s murderous political calculus. At the least, he owes Americans a real idea of how he would win this war, which he says he can do.

One need only skim McCain’s Op-Ed to discover how profoundly wrong the Times editors were about the surge, even as they endorsed the man who helped initiate it.

Ironically, rejecting McCain now is probably the best gift they could have given him.

UPDATE: Welcome, Times editors! (more…)

BRCK BM: LOSING, WINNING NOT OPTIONS

Monday, July 21st, 2008

BRCK BM was interviewed for Face the Nation:

Logan: “What would be a ‘mission accomplished’ for you in Afghanistan?

Obama: “Well, a ‘mission accomplished’ would be that we had stabilized Afghanistan, that the Afghan people are experiencing rising standards of living, that we have made sure that we are disabling al-Qaeda and the Taliban so that they can [sic] longer attack Afghanistan, they can no longer engage in attacks against targets of Pakistan, and they can’t target the United States or its allies.”

Logan: “Losing is not an option?”

Obama: “Losing is not an option when it comes to al-Qaeda. And it never has been. And that’s why the fact that we engaged in a war of choice when were [sic] not yet finished with that task was such a mistake.”

Losing is not an option when it comes to al-Qaeda… except when it comes to al-Qaeda in Iraq. When it comes to al-Qaeda in Iraq, losing has always been an option, the only option BRCK BM will consider.

So take that, al-Qaeda! We will hunt you down and defeat you… unless you’re in Iraq. If you’re hiding, training or attacking people in Iraq, we cannot engage in a “war of choice” against you.

But otherwise, you’re pretty much targeted for destruction. And by destruction, we mean minimum security detention, full legal representation, all of the Geneva Convention rights, Habeas Corpus rights, three square meals and properly-handled, flush-proof Korans. And if you act up, we shall taunt you a second time.

We’re dead serious on this one, because we want a stable, progressing Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda is disabled and unable to target Americans and their allies. But what we absolutely don’t want is a stable, progressing Iraq where al-Qaeda is disabled and unable to target Americans and their allies.

Losing to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan is not an option, and neither is defeating al-Qaeda in Iraq.

WHAT CAN YOU BUY WITH YOUR STIMULUS CHECK?

Friday, July 18th, 2008

Because MCHLL BM seemed to downplay the value of the (admittedly idiotic) $600 stimulus checks, blogger Sister Toldjah and the Tennessee GOP are wondering what you did with yours, and what someone could purchase with that money other than “a pair of earrings.”

Thanks to the Memphis Flyer and a host of leftists who went before them, we know that you can eat for a week on less than $23.72. Accordingly, your $600 stimulus check could feed you for more than 25 weeks — that’s 177 days, or nearly six months.

So, what can you do with your $600 stimulus check? You can buy half a year’s worth of groceries.