I urge all of you to watch this video and read the transcript of Rush Limbaugh’s supposed blanket statement calling troops who oppose the war “phony soldiers”.  It is a lie and another smear campaign by MediaMatters and parroted by MSNBC. 

I heard Rush at the top of his show Friday when he replayed the alleged broad smear from Wednesday’s show.  He was clearly talking about one particular soldier (Jesse MacBeth) who never served in Iraq, but claimed to have witnessed US military atrocities, and therefore became the celeb du jour for the Loony Left.

But don’t believe me… watch for yourself…. unless you are afraid of the truth.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from GPW): I just watched the clip that Bruce provided above and listened to and read the audio clip on Media Matters‘s site. It seems that, once again, Media Matters is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

In the clip on Media Matters’s site, Rush seems to be making a general point about some of the “soldiers” whom the left likes to feature as war opponents. I agree that he could have been a bit clearer, but there is no evidence to suggest that he he meant all soldiers who oppose the war.

Perhaps, he should have acknowledged that some soldiers who did serve favor withdrawal. That said, the left (and the MSM) has trotted out soldiers with spotty (or non-existent) service records who happen to oppose the war.

This was not his prepared monologue, so, given the nature of the program, I’ll give him a pass on not being perfectly clear, especially given his clarification in the clip above.

He made the comment “phony soldiers” only once (at least in the clip Media Matters provided). It seemed rhetoric more than anything else. Not just that. It seems that this left-wing web-site is grasping at straws in its attempt to smear Rush. And I don’t think it will have much traction.

UP-UPDATE (from GPW): When Rush uttered the expression “phony soldiers,” maybe he was thinking of this ABC NEWS report (Via Instapundit).

Via Forbes.com….

As air travelers’ summer of hell draws to a close, stories of canceled flights, lost luggage and late arrivals abound. But while it might seem that the whole system is a mess, which carriers are actually the biggest culprits?

Other than Jet Blue’s much publicized ice storm fiasco in February, customers seem to be engaged in a general rage against the industry machine. And it’s true that some common annoyances, like long security lines, come courtesy of the government and tend to affect airlines across the board.

The Top Ten Worst, according to Forbes are:

1 – Atlantic Southeast (Delta carrier)
2 – Comair (Delta carrier)
3 – American Eagle (American carrier)
4 – ExpressJet
5 – US Airways (*shocking!!!!*) - On-time performance: 68.3% (third worst), Baggage mishandling: 8.6 per 1,000 passengers (seventh)
6 – American Airlines
7 – Mesa Airlines (United carrier)
8 – Delta Airlines
9 – United Airlines
10 – Alaska Airlines

But we need more than the just the provisions being pushed in the “Air Passenger Bill of Rights.” 

Some of us actually want/need to get from one place to another in the same day.  And we want to be treated like customers (or at least human beings).   For example, if I owned a restaurant that satisfied my customers only 50-60% of the time, and had only nasty waiters and waitresses, that restaurant would be out of business tomorrow.

In addition to the Bill of Rights’ ideas to force the airlines to stop holding us hostage on the tarmac, we actually need the airlines to simply do their jobs:  Get us there on time and treat us with respect.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

This is a guest posting from GP Commenter Jeff (aka – I Love Capitalism)

******************

I live in a “blue” area, dominated by liberals.  Despite their dominance, some still need to proclaim their views in the oddest places.  At the YMCA the other day, an older man and an older couple – think aging semi-hippies: unkempt hair, a tie-dye T-shirt among them, and all three of them caucasian – overflowed in joyful agreement about how terrible the Iraq war is.  I couldn’t imagine why they needed to uplift their voices to the whole weight room, but I did admire how the one dude was like a machine, the way he rattled off Daily Kos clichés:

1) He “supports the troops” (quotes here show his words, as best I can remember), but we must understand, his idea of it is “bringing them home and not spending another *dime* on their equipment.”  And he certainly doesn’t support “all those mercenaries” in Iraq.
2) America is “making the same mistakes as Vietnam”, as our troops “kill innocent people.”
3) People who don’t think like he does are “blindsided” (i.e., idiotic).
4) Iraqis don’t want democracy and “aren’t capable of it”, due to their “different culture”.
5) He says we should “leave native cultures alone” and not try to “develop these countries, like in Africa” or “teach them anything”, because “we just cause pain” in doing so.
6) Iraq is a “war for Christianity”.
7) He’s into Buddhism because “nobody ever fought a war for Buddhism”.  In fairness, at this point, he or one of his companions added, “Well maybe the Japanese.”

I kept my mouth shut, so as not to compound their faux pas – inflicting politics on strangers who only came to do squats!  But I kept thinking, wow, surely I know this guy from Gay Patriot.    For the enlightenment of you left-wing GP skimmers who still don’t get it, I’ll answer the guy’s rote points:
 
1) Our troops and NGOs in Iraq are volunteers, not mercenaries.  Their mission is to beat al Qaeda (and some would argue, Iran).  They accepted that mission when they re-enlisted.  Understand this: You DO NOT support them, if you don’t support them doing their mission.

2) Al Qaeda kills innocent people in Iraq.  Our troops defend innocent people with care and professionalism.

3) People who don’t think just like you are not “blind” or “blindsided”.  You, on the other hand, may be.

4) Ordinary Iraqis want democracy and are as capable of it as other non-Westerners.  It’s not only false, but racist to pretend otherwise.

5) When America “leaves native cultures alone, like in Africa”, we condemn the people to subsistence-farming and lives that are nasty, brutish and short.

6) Iraq is not a war for Christianity.  It is, however, a war to prevent a radical Islamist Caliphate, and so to prevent or mitigate a greater, future war.  If we leave Iraq in the hands of either Iran or al Qaeda – in 10 years, we are so screwed.  Get it?

7) If you seriously believe “Nobody ever fought a war for Buddhism”, Amazon has a book for you.

It’d be nice to go somewhere without running into crazed lefty loonies.

Dateline Washington… news via Log Cabin Republicans.

Senate Approves Anti-Gay Hate Crimes Bill 60-39 - All Headline News

Senate Democrats on Thursday morning passed by a 60-39 vote a hate crimes bill attached to the critical defense appropriations bill funding the Iraq War and Pentagon.

The bill incorporates violent crimes against gays into the federal hate crimes laws.

The hate crimes bill had key bipartisan support from co-sponsors Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.).

“We cannot fight terror abroad and accept terror at home,” Smith was quoted by the Associated Press as saying.

“The defense authorization is about dealing with the challenges of terrorism overseas…This (bill) is about terrorism in our neighborhood,” Kennedy said according to the AP.

However, many Republicans viewed it as inappropriate.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said that violent crimes against homosexuals did not constitute terrorism and adding such a bill to the defense authorization amounted to a “hijack” of the bill, which includes a pay raise for troops during war time, the AP reports.

Analysts had said that adding the hate crimes bills lessened the chances the defense appropriations bill will be passed.

But delaying passage of the defense authorizations bill buys time for Democrats to muster more Republican support to develop a plan to withdraw from Iraq, according to The Hill reports.

We have mixed feelings here at GayPatriot on the hate crimes legislation.   I would have much preferred a full-court press on Employment Non-Discrimination legislation than his close-to-borderline infringement on the First Amendment.  And I certainly think it is a mistake to put this legislation onto the Defense Appropriations Bill!!

Reax from Hypocrite Rights Campaign’s Panderer In Chief….

For over a decade our community has worked tirelessly to ensure protections to combat violence motivated by hate and today we are the closest we have ever been to seeing that become a reality.  Congress has taken an historic step forward and moved our country closer to the realization that all Americans, including the GLBT community, are part of the fabric of our nation.  The new leadership in Congress fully understands that for too long our community has been terrorized by hate violence.  And today, the US Senate has sent a clear message to every corner of our country that we will no longer turn a blind eye to anti-gay violence in America.

By the way, does the hate crimes legislation do something useful like make illegal the efforts to publicly “out” gay Americans against their wishes?  That would be a nice amendment….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Wow.   You really can’t make this stuff up.

SC Amputee’s Lost Leg Found In Barbecue Smoker - Charlotte Observer

John Wood is trying to get from South Carolina to Catawba County today to retrieve his leg. 

On Tuesday, a Maiden man found the lost appendage in a barbecue smoker he’d bought from a storage facility.  The man took the smoker home, looked inside, and saw something wrapped in paper.  Inside, said Maiden Police Chief Troy Church, was Wood’s leg — the foot and most of the calf. Police are keeping it for Wood.

Doctors amputated Wood’s leg after a 2004 plane crash in Wilkes County that killed Wood’s father and injured two other family members, Wood said.

“When it was amputated, he told (the hospital) that he wanted that leg saved,” said his sister, Marin Wood-Lytle. “He wanted to keep the bone because he wanted to be buried as a full man.” Instead of a bone, a funeral home delivered the whole leg.

Wood put it in his freezer, his sister said. It became something of a joke when she came over. “I wouldn’t even get a Pepsi out of his refrigerator.”  But it stopped being funny when Wood got behind on his power bill and his electricity was shut off, the sister said.

Despite his family’s protests, Wood-Lytle said, her brother took the screen off his front porch, wrapped the leg inside and “tied it to two posts to let it dry.”   Wood-Lytle said her brother was homeless for a while, living in his van, which he eventually lost.

Their mother put his belongings in a storage facility in Maiden, about 45 miles northwest of Charlotte, Wood-Lytle said, and paid for the first few months.

Reached Tuesday, Wood declined to answer most questions. He did say he put the leg in the smoker because “I didn’t have anything else to secure it in. There were no macabre intentions.”

Maiden police talked with the storage facility’s owner, who was auctioning off items in the units of people who were behind on their payments. Wood said he asked the owner of the storage facility not to open his belongings and is trying to get from Greenville County, S.C., to get his things.

On Tuesday his sister was watching TV and saw the man who found her brother’s leg and thought “it just seems to never go away.”

When I first read this, I assumed that the lost leg was a prostethis of some kind… which made the guy’s name (Wood) even funnier.   But nope, it was truly his own leg he lost.

I’m not sure what there is left to say….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Given how busy I’ve been these past few weeks, I haven’t had much time to focus on the case of the “Jena 6.” While it does seem that the District Attorney there was a little overzealous in prosecuting six black teens accused of assaulting a white peer, there’s no doubt these adolescents beat up their caucasian fellow.

Standing up for the “Jena 6″ has become the latest cause célèbre for the left, with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson heading down to Louisiana to lead a protest. It’s no wonder then that Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese has weighed in on the story, joining Jesse in standing up against the unjust treatment of the black teens. Joe does seem more more interested in standing united with various left-wing leaders than in standing tall on gay issues.

In his remarks, Solmonese even faulted George W. Bush for failing as Governor of Texas to sign a hate-crimes bill. The alleged injustice here was not the absence of such legislation, but the presence of prosecutorial misconduct. But, I guess that’s irrelevant to Joe when he has a chance to join his fellow leftists in attacking Bush. (If anything, a hate crimes law might justify the prosecutor’s alleged excesses if he believed that the Jena 6 assaulted the white teen because of his race.)

Blogger Chris Crain, assaulted two years ago in Amsterdam because he’s gay, wonders why Solmonese picked “this case:”

Why pick a case of six bullies who beat, kicked and stomped a defenseless teen unconscious in a schoolyard — as the one for the GLBT movement to take a stand?

When Joe spoke . . . at a Washington, D.C., rally to “Free the Jena 6,” here was the head of the nation’s largest GLBT rights organizations standing at a podium comparing the senseless beating of Justin Butler at Jena High School to a hate crime.  But he wasn’t comparing victims. Oh no. He was invoking the image of James Byrd no less to side with the six macho bullies who punched and kicked Justin unconscious on the ground.

I’m sorry but that just goes too far. Way too far.

I agree.

But, what’s going too far matter to Joe Solmonese when you have a chance to stand united with other activists of the left. Or, as Chris puts it, “It’s scratch-your-back and no doubt for some based on a genuinely felt bond among civil rights groups.”

Chris wonders why Solmonese devoted so much time to this issue while he and HRC remained silent about the “beating, stabbing and mutilating” of “Scotty Joe Weaver [of Bay Minette, Alabama] because he is gay.” Chris wonders why HRC was similarly silent about the upcoming trial in New York City for the “murder of African-American gay man Michael Sandy.

No wonder so many gay people wonder about HRC’s advocacy on behalf of our community. It seems more interested in being part of a broader leftist coalition than in focusing on the issues of particular concern to the gay community.

And rather than excerpt further from Chris’s powerful post, let me just encourage to read the whole thing!

[WARNING:  This post contains graphic and dripping sarcasm throughout.  Reader discretion is advised.] 

Well…. I’m just completely shocked by this news.  Shocked, I tell you!  (h/t – Instapundit)

UN vote on homosexual human rights was yesterday derailed at the last minute by an alliance of disapproving Muslim countries. 

[GP Ed. Note -- Hey, wait.... I don't see Bush/Cheney listed here as blocking this effort!?!  That can't be right!  What about the gay concentration camps that have been under construction in Idaho since Reagan's term?!?]

The UN had been due to vote on the matter for the first time in its almost 60-year history, but five Muslim countries delayed the vote until today and introduced amendments designed to kill it off.

The amendments remove all references to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and render the resolution meaningless.

UN sources said Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia were doing everything they could to stop the resolution. “I suspect they want to stall as much as possible and lobby other countries to win support for their amendments,” said a source.

The historic resolution on “human rights and sexual orientation” was originally tabled by Brazil at the UN commission on human rights, in Geneva, with the support of 19 other countries including Britain. It calls on all UN member states to promote and protect the human rights “of all persons regardless of their sexual orientation”.

But the sentiments are anathema to many UN states; almost half outlaw gay sexual relations and more than 70 countries keep a total ban on homosexuality – in some cases it is punished by death.   [Worth repeating:  PUNISHED BY DEATH.]

[GP Ed. Note - Please take notice that no Western democracies whose creation was influenced by Judeo-Christian values are among those 70 countries.  That includes Israel and the USA, I should add for our slow readers.]

The British gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, said: “The vote has been derailed and delayed by Islamic fundamentalist states where gay people are either jailed, flogged or beheaded.”

[GP Ed. Note - Ah, c'mon Peter....the real problems for the world's gays lie in the eeeeevil Bush Administration and American capitalism.  We all know THAT!    Just count the rainbow flags at the next ANSWER anti-war/anti-American demonstration.]

He said those countries’ records of gay human rights abuses showed why the resolution was urgently needed.

Quick, someone tell the Human Rights Campaign!  After all, immediately following 9/11/2001, they shoved their heads in the sands of Islamofacism. 

Ah, who am I kidding?  They’ve been ignorant and silently complicit to the real threats against gays for years — while instead using false scare tactics to raise more money for their nice fancy offices and big salaries.  Oh yeah, and protesting abortion and the Jena 6.  Makes perfect sense to me.  [*sarcasm off]

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

If I didn’t know better, I would think that either Ted or Michael is a clone of me!

Separately we enjoy: tech gadgets, reality TV, political discourse, Harry Potter, computer games, ancient history, kitchen accessories, romantic/comedy films, Johnnie Walker, pop culture, The Office, Jimmy Buffet and feta cheese.

Together we enjoy: cooking on Sunday afternoons, reading, Gosford Park, our dog Charley, playing bridge, world travel, Montreal, shoes from Allen Edmonds, our log home at the lake, seafood, our Mini Cooper and House.

Well, aside from the bridge-playing.  Somehow I always thought that game involved math.   Math….yucky.

Welcome to the blogosphere — The Adventures of Ted & Michael!

Oh…. ya gotta love the Elephant pic banner!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from GPW): Hmm. . . . gay bloggers who also like ancient history, reading and appreciate the (in my opinion, underrated) flick, Gosford Park, sounds like they have a blog worthy of my attention.

In my last post, I noted that Pajamas Media had asked me to write a piece on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments today at Columbia University that they “don’t have homosexuals” in his land.

To whet your appetitie, I’ll give you the first paragraphs and then encourage you to read the rest at Pajamas:

Today is a day when gay people of all political stripes should be united. On this day when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is all over the news, we should be standing tall and condemning this leader of one of the most anti-gay regimes on the planet.

Leaders of gay groups rush to put out press releases when the highest court in a state rules that their state’s constitution does not require it to recognize same-sex unions. But, even with that ruling, gay couples can still live openly in Maryland. As they can in many other states which have refused to recognize gay marriage.

But, in Iran, not only are gay couples prevented from living together openly, they could be executed for expressing their feelings for same-sex intimacy. Perhaps it’s because his busy sentencing gay Iranians to death that Ahmadinejad claimed today that “In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. . . . In Iranian we don’t have this phenomenon. I don’t know who’s told you that we have it.“

Click here to read the full piece.

Wonder what the lesbian Sally Kohn was thinking as she was busy listening to one that terrorist-loving tyrant whom she found almost cuddly enough “to turn [her] straight” when he proclaimed that in his land, they “don’t have homosexuals like in your country.”

At least this response did not earn the dictator much applause (as he reportedly got for other comments). Instead, Rich Lowry reports, the audience responded with “lots of derisive laughter.”

Pajamas has asked me to write on this. I’ll let you know when that piece is up. Until then, feel free to weigh in with your own comments on Mahmoud’s claim about homosexuals in his land. The piece is now up on Pajamas!.

UPDATE: Maybe Mahmoud doesn’t think they have gays in his land because his government has been busy executing them.

-Dan (GayPatriotWest)

********

GP Update:  Here are some of the gays that never existed in Iran, according to its President. 

When I heard Ahmadinejad’s statement that “there are no gays in Iran”, it immediately made me fear for the gays that are there.  Hitler systematically erased Jews in Germany, both literally and by erasing their existence in public records and history books. 

Any gay or lesbian American that still denies Islamists are targeting gays, and instead thinks President Bush is the enemy, demonstrates the true definition of a ”self-loathing homosexual.”

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

When Hugh linked this post on the DailyKos where a Jewish lesbian, confessed having A Little Crush on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I quickly e-mailed Bruce, telling him that this was “beyond parody” and that I couldn’t find the words to express my stupefaction. Once again, I was rendered speechless by the far left.

Yeah, the writer “sallykohn” does acknowledge that the anti-Semitic supporter of terrorism would “probably have [her] killed.” She even notes that there “are certainly many things about Ahmadinejad that I abhor.” All that notwithstanding, she gets “turned on” by this guy’s “frank rhetoric” because he’s “calling out the horrors of the Bush Administration and, for that matter, generations of US foreign policy preceding.”

Then, she goes on to favorably “fisk” his May letter to President Bush.

So, she’ll discount all this terrible things that this man has said and take him seriously because he, like she, hates George W. Bush!

She takes this man’s rantings quite seriously even contending that while “Ahmadinejad. . . has flagrantly trounced due process and the rule of law in his own nation is still way ahead of Bush on this point, too.” Way ahead of Bush? Sally, had someone posted a piece in Iran, claiming that Bush was way ahead of the Ahmadinejad on any issue, the blog would most likely be shut do and the author locked up. While you, after posting this nonsense, will remain free to continue to criticize the president in this and other forum (just as many other left-wingers, angry and otherwise remain free to protest the president).

She goes on to ask, “Could it be that, to the Bush Administration, one of the most dangerous things about Ahmadinejad is that he is calling the Bush Administration out?” Um, Sally, it’s because the regime this guy heads calls “Death To America,” trains terrorists to attack the US and provides bombs to terrorists to kill America soldiers while attempting to build a nuclear bomb.

But, today, “when Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia University in New York,” Sally’ll be listening. Guess she wasn’t listening he called for wiping Israel “off the map.” For in her post, she cites only the Ahmadinejad’s May letter, noting that “He doesn’t call for violence against Israelis.”

It seems that when listening to Ahmadinejad, Sally hears only what she wants to hear. And she sure does like that guy’s frank rhetoric in calling out the really bad guy, George W. Bush.

Amazing. In response to Michael Barone’s query about why Lee Bollinger would honor with an invitation to speak at Columbia “a man who heads a regime that executes homosexuals–not just excludes them from military service, but hangs them by the neck until dead, in public ceremony” Glenn Reynolds wonders, “Because Ahmadinejad doesn’t like Bush, and that covers all sins?”

For Sally, that seems to be the case. She even has confessed a crush on the guy because he asks tough questions of the man she really hates. Amazing. Simply amazing.

Hey, Sally, Bush has been president for over 6 1/2 years and he still hasn’t killed you, locked you up or even shut down your blog. And you and your ideological confrères have been criticizing and otherwise badmouthing him for at least that long–and will, I expect, continue to do so. Doesn’t that say that the guy might be a little better that a man who, in your own words, would “probably have me kiled“?

Well, at least Sally acknowledges what a number of us have long observed, that for all too many on the left, Bush hatred trumps all. Even the rantings of a man whom, she acknowledges may well kill her if he could.

Welcome Hugh Hewitt and Michelle Malkin readers!! While you’re here, take a few minutes to explore the web-site that has been called “ the most reliably conservative gay blog on the Internet.”

UPDATE: And yes, this left-wing lesbian did say that the man who presides over a nation which hangs gay people and regulates women to second (if not third) class status is quite possibly “cuddly enough to turn me straight.”

UP-UPDATE: Linking this post, Davo Grande comments:

Oh, don’t worry… she knows he’ll probably have her killed, but she’ll take that chance rather than accidentally be seen to support Bush indirectly by opposing his opponents.

After all, how crazy can a dictator really be if he says Bush is wrong and evil? Doesn’t everybody think that?

UP-UP-UPDATE: In writing about Sally, Snarky Bastards quotes Eric Hoffer who wrote, “An American’s hatred for a fellow American (for Hoover or Roosevelt) is far more virulent than any antipathy he can work up against foreigners.” Read the whole thing for some other commentary on Ahmadinejad’s visit.

UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Looks like Sally’s not the only one at the Kos who has warm feelings for this America-hating lunatic. a “Richard Cranium” is upset that Scott Pelley of CBS’s 60 Minutes was “believably scary in asking the questions he asked” of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He goes so far as to call such frank questions “a masterful Goebbel-esque . . . on behalf of Dick Cheney and the drums of war.” So, when a deranged leader who would kill a Jewish lesbian asks tough questions of the president of a country which has a free press, that lesbian falls for her. But, when a reporter asks tough questions of that lunactic leader, his performance is “Goebbel-esque.” You can’t make these things up. Just more evidence for the notion that for the left Bush-hatred trumps all (H/t: Dean Barnett who has more.)

UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Another kosite weighs in, Roseeriter says that the Iranian president “ain’t such a bad man” (Via Dean Barnett who has more).

UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: So, if Sally is really interested in listening to her cuddly Mahmoud, Simon Barnett provides a summary of some of his sayings (Via Hugh Hewitt).

UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Gosh, these Kos-folks really get all uppity when anyone asks tough questions of their man Mahmoud. Thomas C is upset with Columbia President Bollinger for taking on the tyrant:

As an American, I was stunned and embarrassed by Bollinger’s harangue of Ahmedinejad. It was a craven and cowardly capitulation to political pressures, and unworthy of the academic institution that Bollinger represents. . . . Bollinger’s behavior was inappropriate. It presented to the world the face of an ugly and bullying America. I am utterly humiliated that Bollinger should have behaved this way.

I’m sure they’d be cheering if someone introduced President Bush by comparing him to Hitler and asking similarly tough questions (Via American Digest via Instapundit).

This incredible story did indeed give me chills and I couldn’t let this one go by unnoticed. Spc. Channing Moss was about to be written off for dead after being impaled by a live RPG, when his buddies and medical personnel “broke protocol” by risking their lives to save his. I cannot help but see a touch of the miraculous here and thank God for it, along with once again being stunned by the caliber of men and women we have serving in uniform.

Spc. Channing Moss should be dead by all accounts. And those who saved his life did so knowing they might have died with him…

…Protocol, as far as Oh [the surgeon] knew, dictated that someone in Moss’s condition be placed in a sandbagged bunker and listed as “expectant,” which means he would be expected to die because nothing could be done for him.

But Oh believed something could be done for the wounded soldier before him.

He “was still talking to me,” Oh recalled. He choked back tears as he explained: “When he comes in like that, there’s no way you can give up at that point.”

After the EOD team arrived, Oh warned the volunteers one last time that the surgery could cost everyone their lives.

The operating room crew prepped Moss for surgery…

I’m speechless. You can watch the video interview here.

(h/t Ace of Spades & Infidels Are Cool)

– John (Average Gay Joe)

After reading the brief transcript of CBS’ Scott Pelley’s interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I realized this was definitely a case where things must be getting lost in translation….or at the very least you had to read between the lines.

So let me try my best to translate from Islamoterrorese to English:

PELLEY: Mr. President, do you intend to press your request to visit the World Trade Center site?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, it was included in my program. If we have the time and the conditions are conducive, I will try to do that.

[GP translation:  "I can do whatever I want... I'm a prophet from the 12th Imam!  And, by the way, if I happen to see a woman without a burka or one of those filthy homosexuals near Ground Zero, I'm throwing both of them into that big hole so they are closer to the burning hell they belong in."]

PELLEY: But the New York Police Department and others do not appear to want you there. Do you intend to go there anyway?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, over there, local officials need to make the necessary coordinations. If they can’t do that, I won’t insist.

[GP translation:  "I'm not going down there alone, dawg!  Isn't that crazy Rudy G still the mayor?  He still has a chip on his shoulder about my terror-brother bin Laden... I'm afraid Rudy might take me out.  Go there alone?  You are silly one, aren't you."]

PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?

[GP translation:  "Nah, that's not insulting.  What would be insulting is a country that holds American hostages for 444 days and then elects one of the hostage takers as their President 30 years later.... and then that leader speaks at a major US university... now THAT should be insulting to the Great Satan."]

PELLEY: But the American people, sir, believe that your country is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Well, I’m amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?

[GP translation:  "You are only a filthy media beast.  The government tells you what to say -- like in Iran.  You can't possibly speak for every American.  ."]

PELLEY: Well, the American nation–

AHMADINEJAD: You are representing a media and you’re a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there.

[GP translation:  "Well, Scott ... thanks to our propaganda and your media's willingness to peddle it unchecked, you and I have duped half of the American public into thinking their country is evil and their own President is Hitler.  Is that awesome or what? 

So you can't possibly be speaking for those folks... they are just my useful idiots.  And those Democrats love me and recite my own talking points.... And [*laughs*] those stupid Democrats don’t even mind that Iranian troops and terrorists are killing the troops they “say” they support.  Hell, I’m just wanting to visit New York to save Nancy Pelosi the airfare costs from San Fran to Tehran.  I can’t wait to give her a big kiss.   Then I’m throwing her to the dogs of hell, too.”]

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

As usual, the MSM (or “drive-by” media) is completely missing a huge political story that will probably shape our lives for a generation:  The emergence of French President Nicolas Sarkozy as a conservative (in USA terms) revolutionary in Western Europe.  For the first time in my lifetime, a French President is embracing American-inspired goals, dreams and freedoms long scoffed at by the socialist/neo-fascist French leaders of the past 40 years.

I am thrilled to see that the Roger Cohen at the New York Times (now totally free online!) has highlighted the Sarkozy Revolution in his column today, The French Revolution.  (Note this is an opinion column, not news coverage that the Times should be doing on Sarko.)

The French Revolution of 2007 has not seen heads roll but has involved the destruction of 10 taboos as President Nicolas Sarkozy assumes the role of Europe’s most dynamic leader.

Enthusiasm for the United States was unacceptable for a French political leader because it was always interpreted as an embrace of “Wild West” capitalism, “Anglo-Saxon” hegemony and vulgarity. De rigueur attitudes held sway: patronizing contempt in Paris met macho derision in Washington. Communication suffered. Sarko’s New Hampshire vacation, enthused American dreaming, iPod-accompanied jogging and in-your-face style cleared the air.

To run France, you had to be cultured. Mitterrand’s bookish references and Delphic utterances (“A president must know how to be bored”) positioned him as too clever to contest. Chirac had a recherché passion for Japan. Culture — like cows but on a different level — connected the president to the Gallic eternal. Sarko, an American movie buff, is more at home with Johnny Hallyday than Jean-Paul Sartre.

Strong French ties and traditions in the Middle East dictated coolness toward Israel. Chirac let slip that an Iranian nuclear bomb might be acceptable, before saying he’d misspoken. Now Sarkozy, forthright in his support of Israel, declares that “an Iranian bomb or the bombing of Iran” may be the terrible choice looming; his foreign minister says the world should “prepare for the worst” in Iran, meaning war. Iran is no Arab country, but these utterances betray a changed politique Arabe.

Moscow was France’s offsetting power to the United States. For many cold-war years, the French left struggled to decide what was worse: Soviet totalitarianism or American imperialism. Some of the French right was undecided, too. Later, Chirac suggested “neo-liberalism” — unfettered market forces — was as much a danger in the 21st century as totalitarianism in the 20th. Weak-kneed moral equivalency often placed Paris in a halfway house between Washington and Moscow. Sarkozy is clear: American democracy beats Russian authoritarianism, just as U.S. freedom beat Soviet enslavement.

The bulk of this taboo-smashing is positive because it has stripped away paralyzing French hypocrisy, opened the way for unfettered French-American discussion and cleared a possible path to tackling chronic high unemployment.

Should Sarkozy’s success in knocking down French taboos continue, he may be the most important leader to emerge in World War III.   If al-Qaeda’s success is as much propaganda and influencing Western politics as it is car bombs, I believe the Islamic terror movement suffered a serious blow with the election of Sarko.  The French people had their choice between Ronald Reagan and Hillary Clinton in their last election….. they chose wisely, for once.

Could it be we have a French Margaret Thatcher in the making?   I hope so.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Looks like we were right to award Rather the James Earl Carter Bitter Old Man Award. Only someone following in Carter’s footsteps would file such a suit, faulting CBS for its “‘intentional mishandling” of the aftermath of a discredited story about President George W. Bush’s time in the Texas Air National Guard” (Emphasis added).

Um, Mr. Rather, if anyone intentionally mishandled that story, it was you. It seems, just like Mr. Carter, you (to paraphrase something I wrote in awarding you the Carter award) are attacking your former employers to deflect attention from your own failings. Or that you just can’t admit that your bias caused you to blow this story.

Powerline‘s Paul Mirengoff puts it best when he writes that the “suit, for as long as it survives, should serve to reinforce Rather’s status as a laughingstock.”

I neerly fergot me, maties!  Arggggggh!

The Original Talk Like A Pirate Day Website.

Whatever you do today, lookout for Davy Jones and the Flying Dutchman.   Only bad things can happen….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

One of the constant frustrations I’ve expressed here at GayPatriot is how the Gay Left can be so much in bed with the pro-abortionist crowd with chilling facts right in front of their faces? 

Advances in genetic science, ignorance among many segments of our society and gay leftist ideologues content with silence are rapidly converging to put unborn gay children, and perhaps a whole generation of gays, at risk.   This latest story only reinforces my concern.

Brave New World – Kathryn Lopez at The Corner

An Italian doctor who aborted a healthy twin by mistake and the obstetrician who performed a sonogram ahead of the bungle are under investigation for negligence by a Milan court, a report said Tuesday. The operation, carried out in June, was intended to remove the other twin, who tested positive for Down’s Syndrome.

The foetuses reportedly changed places after the sonogram and before the procedure.

If tried and convicted, the doctors face between three months and two years in prison, ANSA news agency said.

K-Lo further points out….

What’s most infuriating is that it’s only an outrage because the “healthy” baby was murdered. If the child with Down’s did, it would all be in the name of choice.

It is of course, all an outrage.

Substitute “Down’s Syndrome” with “gay” and we are on the verge of a serious problem, folks.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

I’m pleased and honored to be able to announce that we have a new regular contributor — Revolving BlogPatriot, as we call them.

After many months of intense negotiations on terms, I’m happy to welcome the one and only Vera Charles to our humble blog home.  Vera has been a regular commenter for a number of years, bringing her own sense of the world and biting wit to the events of our time.  I’m happy that we will be blessed with longer postings now from the esteemed Ms. Charles.

Note to Vera — per our agreement, your first monthly shipment of ready-made martinis is on its way….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Courtesy of Hot Air, a video has been posted online showing Jason Mattera of the Young America’s Foundation* confronting Rep. Jack Murtha over past comments he made in light of the recent exonerations of 4 of the 8 Marines (so far) involved in the now infamous engagement in Haditha, Iraq. Remember Murtha? Besides being the fellow with the brilliant strategy of fighting the war in Iraq via Okinawa, he couldn’t run fast enough to every TV camera in town thundering that these Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood“. All this before an investigation into the massacre allegations was even completed. Did the ‘honorable gentleman’ apologize for his crass presumption or retract any of the outrageous comments he made? Nope. Instead he whined about how he had served in Korea and Vietnam and “redeployed” in an elevator. Funny how this self-centered SOB whines in outrage about his service but conveniently forgets that of these Marines he falsely accused.

If Larry Craig was forced to resign for his bathroom antics (rightfully so), surely Murtha’s despicable behavior deserves equal treatment. Of course, this would be expecting some political groupings to have an idea of what integrity and honor are all about.

Comment of the day from a poster at Hot Air:

It looked to me as though Mr. Murtha, under heavy questioning, redeployed to the elevator.
Blaise on September 18, 2007 at 4:23 PM

* – You may remember this group from the controversial outing of Tyler Whitney, a member of YAF, and the truly homophobic statements of one of its leaders Kyle Bristow.

–John (Average Gay Joe)

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit has a video of someone else asking Murtha about his previous comments, which he angrily dismisses with his line “the trial’s not over yet”. 4 down, 4 to go Jack. Regardless of the outcome of the last 4, what about the 4 men who have been cleared that you slandered?

A year and a half ago, when we graded the president on fulfilling Reagan’s legacy, I wondered if we spent so much defending him because:

his critics, particularly those on the gay left, make such outlandish (and very often inaccurate) accusations against him. Had they made more responsible critiques, they might find us less critical of them.

As our report card showed, we found that the president deserved criticism in a number of areas, most notably federal spending and federalism.

Too often it seems that the president’s critics come from the fringes. They fault him not only for his policies, but at the same time also accuse him of being a horrible, no good, very bad person, seeing his position only as a means of power for himself and of financial gain for his cronies.

Yet, conservatives bloggers (and pundits) have, like us, taken issue with the president in a civil manner. We have even on occasion found such civil criticism on liberal web-sites and editorial pages.

These past few weeks, I have been reading about two books, each of which (at least according to the reviews I have read) offers some pretty judicious criticism of the president without, at the same time, faulting him for being simultaneously dark, dangerous and dastardly. Last night, I bought Alan Greenspan’s The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World and immediately started reading it. (To be sure, the book is a memoir of the immediate past Federal Reserve chair, more than just a critique of the current administration.)

While Matthew Benjamin calls the tome gift to Democrats and grenade for Republicans, I see it instead as a tonic for my party. In the book, the former Federal Reserve chairman reportedly skewers “President George W. Bush and congressional Republicans for what he said was reckless spending and a politically driven economic agenda and said they deserved to lose control of Congress in 2006.” We Republicans need this reminder that if we attempt to retain power by sacrificing our principles, we will be left bereft, standing for nothing and out of power.

In the second book, The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration, Jack Goldsmith considers his time as head of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Department where he advised the president on the laws governing the War on Terror.

While many of the reviews have focused on Goldsmith’s criticism of the president’s methods, he also notes, in Michael Barone’s words, how “the administration has been strangled by law, and since September 11, 2001, this war has been lawyered to death.” From what I’ve read about the book, it seems Goldsmith gets at one of the key flaws of the president, that he did not work as well with Congress as he could (and should) have. Barone writes:

argues that the administration would have ended up with more latitude in fighting terrorism if it had worked with Congress to get legislation, even if those laws would not have been as expansive as the administration wanted. It’s a serious argument, and he also presents fairly

It’s too bad that more critics of the president don’t make the effort as Goldsmith and Greenspan apparently have to make such serious arguments in a similarly fair manner.

As my schedule permits, I look forward to reading both books. Let us hope as well that other Republicans take the time to consider these two conservatives’ criticism lest they repeat the mistakes of the incumbent and his party in recent years.