MICHIGAN'S HANDOUTS CONTINUE

We lucky folks in Michigan woke up this morning to a large tax increase. For anyone who doesn’t know, Michigan faced a government shutdown and the solution our brilliant governor, Jennifer Granholm, and our esteemed legislature “worked out,” was a tax increase. Michigan’s state income tax was increased overnight and many services that were not taxed will now be taxed at 6% with a sales tax.

With the state threatened with a possible partial shutdown, I was elated. I couldn’t wait to see how things ran without the thousands of unnecessary employees bleeding us as they’re wasting away in their union protected, bloated departments.

The local news rounded up and interviewed the usual suspects to show us how they “support” the actions of their governor and legislature and how they think Michigan will now enter a new era.

Puke! Gag me!

Judging by what the interviewees had to say, they no doubt have their hands in the till and aren’t ashamed of shouting that fact to the world. But then again in Michigan, it’s normal to expect a handout.

I’m not talking about a “My children are cold can you spare some food, clothing or shelter?” handout, I’m talking about the typical entitlement mentality around here. Everyone who has a kid, craving or complaint in this state expects to be given the means to support it. By ‘given’ and by ‘means,’ I mean they expect me and you, if you try to earn an honest living, to cough up a few more bucks for them at the end of the barrel of a government equalizer (the 9mm variety).

Everyone is a victim!

I don’t care what their means or circumstances, people in this state are used to the gravy train. Problem is we’re running out of gravy makers. Most of the people who do work and support themselves in this state are on their way out of here or dreaming of the day they can book. The rest have already left. They went to the states where educated people contribute to the economy, not just take. They’re contributing to states that don’t have income taxes or have a much lower rate than ours at 4.35% (yesterday it was 3.9%).

Guess what? The idiots in this state would reelect the same brain dead and cowardly trough-slop eaters tomorrow if given the chance. Anyone who promises a big enough handout around here is the easy winner.

Our most recent gubernatorial contest featured a wildly successful business owner who understands market economics and isn’t afraid of ruffling political feathers, against our current second-term political-machine-educated, lifetime public-trough-feeding lame-ass governor. And the latter won in a landslide. Welcome to Michigan. If you’re a proven failure but still promise the right freebees, you’re elected in this state.

Michigan – Hands out America!

As if to boost my point and in case there was any doubt in the Country’s collective mind about the moronic state of the State here, the UAW went on strike against General Motors less than a week before the state budget deadline. If there was any doubt at all about the sloth mentality here, that should have erased it. UAW members think they won something, though anyone who can think and read a book, knows better. The union leadership knows better, GM made out like a bandit and the rank and file were told to be obedient little soldiers and be happy for how they stood up to “the man.” Joke’s on them. But most of us know you can only siphon so much before you start sucking air.

What to do...

Since we’re fast running out of income sources because corporations and other revenue generating taxpayers are leaving or staying away from here, what would be the logical solution?

Our cowards in Lansing, of course looking no farther than their next election, have decided to punish us who remain and ensure no one else shows up at the border trying to invest and create jobs in our state. It’s a demolition derby of sorts where we beat the hell out of each other, taking each other’s stuff until the last man is standing.

Then maybe someone will try to start a democratic republic in the big mitten.

JD.

Ps. Speaking of pandering via handouts, Hillary says she wants to give all babies $5,000. No explanation, no plan. And the dopes eat it up. I shit you not!
Like a colleague told me today; “This is one screwed up world we live in.”

FEAR OF NOT FLYING

God help us travelers. The government wants to take action and force new guidelines onto the airlines to make traveling “more pleasant.”

The feds, i.e. Congress, think they can make waiting more pleasurable. I am so sick and tired of our wussy, nanny-prone electorate running to the government every time they sense a little discomfort. The government, folks, at least when it comes to money, would be you and me.

I’m not interested in bucking up for even higher fares while the airlines are burdened by another rule distraction that will surely be passed on to us in the name of surcharges that will certainly contain a little extra profit for the airlines. That’s the way it always goes.

As someone who takes from 75 to 105 flights per year to enjoy making a living, I certainly am sympathetic to paying passengers who are forced to sit on an airplane for extended periods of time for seemingly weird or unacceptable reasons. After all, I am one of those passengers.

But to go to the policing, gun-toting, menacing, inefficient taxocrats for an answer? Please, I’d rather spend my waiting time toe tapping in a Minneapolis men’s room.

As it stands, most of the problems with the airlines lie in part or whole with the FAA and their antiquated air traffic control system. Everything they’ve touched in the field of air travel, and every other field, come to think of it, has been a predictable disaster.

JD.

I figure I’m back and I feel like bitching again, so if you’re interested, tune in often. I’ll be here.

CALL IRAQ BOSNIA AND WE'RE OKAY ACCORDING TO PRESS

Apparently Usama Bin Laden doesn’t understand that when he delivers speeches to the U. S. he strengthens America’s resolve to defeat him. This translates into increased support for Republicans and even more specifically, President Bush. When Usama speaks, the nation doesn’t want to hear a simultaneous surrender chorus from Generals Pelosi and Reid. The Dems lose much appeal on these reminders that we are under siege.

We have been promised a speech by the esteemed leader of Al Qaeda to be delivered on September 11.

Who has forgotten what Usama calls “The invasion of Manhattan?” Apparently, too many. The “invasion of Manhattan” was a bigger invasion than that of Pearl Harbor when Americans were as serious as their leaders about defending her boarders.

Run Politicians, run! Scared to death of reminding Americans of the threats we live under, they run toward certain reelection rather than increased security for their constituents.

But why run scared now? In 1999 the British and American press enthusiastically embraced President Clinton’s invasion of Serbians, a people in an area that never once threatened the U.S. or any of her allies.

Yet when Clinton fabricated an ethnic cleansing of Muslim Albanians by Serbs, not the New York Times, nor the Mirror (UK) or any other major, liberal allied media outlets lifted a finger to investigate the whys or the seriousness of such an illegal and unprovoked action as bombing Serbia. To be sure, the Serbs were not totally innocent, but their actions were small potatoes compared to what was happening on the world stage in 1999.

Let’s review. In the Kosovo Province of Yugoslavia, Muslim Albanians complained of violence from the area known as Serbia. Clinton – needing a legacy – seized the opportunity to tag the disturbance as ethnic cleansing, comparing himself in his autobiography to the hypothetical leader who would listen to Winston Churchill and be the one who would have stopped Hitler before he had a chance to engage in his murderous genocide.

Did anyone in the mainstream media question the action? Actually, virtually everyone of any note in the leftstream media enthusiastically cheered Clinton for stepping in.

In fact, nearly every media account of what was going on in the Balkans omitted the fact that the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was murdering Serbian civilians and Albanians with some regularity and brutality in an effort to do what Clinton said the Serbs were doing. The Clinton Administration called the KLA, as recently as 1997, a “terrorist organization.”

But in 1999, when Clinton was worried about a legacy (beyond Monica Lewinsky), these people were suddenly our friends. The KLA was trying to force the Serbs to agree to making Kosovo an independent State or annexing it to neighboring Albania. Terms the Serbs understandably could not accept.

Now Clinton wanted to bomb the Serbs in an effort to embrace the cause of the “terrorist” KLA. Even though the Serbs accepted very trying conditions put forth by NATO in order to keep the peace, the bar was raised to an unacceptable level, by everyone’s measure; so high that the administration admitted it was made artificially high in order to make the Serbs look noncompliant.

The Clinton administration regularly embraced fabricated casualty figures to advance its agenda and gain public acceptance. In one press release, 500,000 Kosovo Albanians had been killed by the Yugoslav army. This is a figure Clinton never bothered to object to in the interest of truth. He went along with several other exaggerated accounts in concert with the American and British liberal press. The real number turned out to be about 4,000 including those killed by NATO and KLA actions.

Another account called the Trepca mines “another Auschwitz” even though later inspections turned up not one body and no evidence of atrocities. Yet Clinton went along because it justified his “cause.” Another so called “atrocity” site was supposed to be found in the city of Ljubenic, where there were supposed to be 350 bodies buried. Seven were found.

Yet Clinton bombed. And he bombed the Serbs some more. He bombed the Serbs despite Congress's rejection of the act. When presented to Congress for a resolution, Congress rejected the idea and refused to authorize Clinton to bomb. Clinton bombed anyway for two more months.

(As I recall, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved an invasion of Iraq.)

Where was the outcry from the press in 1999?! Where was the outcry from the American people? I’ll tell you where the latter was; they were so mislead and misinformed as to what was really going on, the American public, by design of the American and British press, knew little if any of the facts. They were ignorant…blissfully as far as Clinton was concerned.

And Clinton continued to bomb. John Pilger reported in The Guardian that eighteen hospitals and clinics were destroyed. 200 Nurseries, schools, clinics and students’ dormitories were destroyed or damaged together with housing estates, hotels, libraries, youth centers, museums, churches and fourteenth century monasteries.

The American media remained in lockstep with the Clinton administration. Historian Thomas E. Woods, Jr. called it “one of the worst cases of yellow journalism in recent memory, in which the Western press almost without exception portrayed the conflict as a simple matter of good against evil.”

Pope John Paul II described it as an “act of diabolical retribution.”

So what happened? After the bombing the KLA began a massive ethnic cleansing campaign of its own against all non-Albanians. More Serbs were killed than Albanians had before the conflict. Serbs were forced from their homes with more than 200,000 fleeing Kosovo. In Kosovo’s capital city of Pristina, 120 Serbs remain out of an original population of 40,000. That’s right, 120! And they live in desperate fear from the Albanian Muslims.

In addition to the Serbs, 100,000 Roma Gypsies were driven out of Kosovo during the KLA’s ethnic cleansing program.

So Clinton wanted to advance the “liberation” of people (the KLA) who engaged in massive ethnic cleaning, leaving in the wake an extremely strong and violent Muslim presence in the region. According to Woods, a UN official described the situation thus: “Kristallnacht is underway in Kosovo. What is happening in Kosovo must unfortunately be described as a program against Serbs.”

Since NATO took control of the province, the few Serbs still living there have watched thousands of their homes looted or destroyed and 150 Christian churches and monasteries destroyed, says Woods.

Mr. Woods goes on to say, “There is the real Clinton legacy in Kosovo.”

I’ll say it as I’ve said it before; other than for ignorance, where was the outrage then and why the outrage now? Why now, after over 3,000 innocent civilians were killed in the “invasion of Manhattan” do the accomplished Generals Pelosi and Reid earn any semblance of credence from the American citizenry? Ignorance, that’s why!

JD.

POTENTIAL "PANDERERS IN CHIEF" CHANGE IRAQ TALK

Democrats presented, and President Bush signed into law last Sunday, an updated and more powerful version of the wiretap bill that the Democrats made a whole lot of noise about, and against, before the 2006 elections.

The President signed into law a bill giving government even greater powers to allow investigators to monitor international calls and emails without warrants.

The “Protect America Act of 2007” allows government to listen in on communications between people in the U.S. and overseas if the target of the surveillance is outside the country.

In December, 2005, before the Dems took control of Congress, California Senator Diane Feinstein had this to say about the less intrusive eavesdropping methods in use at the time; “(This)…calls into question the integrity and credibility of our Nation’s commitment to the rule of law.”

It’s amazing how a dose of reality and the burden of real decision making can put your political decisions on a different course.

Here’s another example of how the real deal can smack some idiotic campaign trash-talk back into a candidate’s “say anything to get elected” mouth. Remember how the Democrats were promising everyone with a sandwich board manufactured by the Party, and no job to keep them from marching for the cameras, that they would get us out of Iraq? Here’s what they have to say now according to the Sunday New York Times:

John Edwards would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries.

Hillary Clinton would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north.

In public appearances, Hillary often says, “If this president does not end this war before he leaves office, when I am president, I will.” Then she confirms recently to the New York Times, when reminded of an interview with the paper in March, that there were “remaining vital national security interests in Iraq” that would require continued deployment of American troops.

Barrack Hussein Obama would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.

ISN’T THAT WHAT WE’RE DOING NOW??!?!?

And there’s this quote, according to The New York Times: “We’ve got to be prepared to control a civil war if it starts to spill outside the borders of Iraq,” John Edwards, who has run hard against the war, said at a Democratic debate in Chicago this week. “And we have to be prepared for the worst possibility that you never hear anyone talking about, which is the possibility that genocide breaks out and the Shi’a try to systematically eliminate the Sunni. As president of the United States, I would plan and prepare for all those possibilities.”

A “possibility that you never hear anyone talking about?” He ought to peek out from behind his wife’s apron from time to time and listen to the folks, not to mention the Administration. Oh, that’s right; he’s too busy working with the poor folks to be bothered.

Maybe the public is finally catching on. The recent Democratic debate on MSNBC, a network that author, commentator and former CBS newsman, Barnard Goldberg calls “the network equivalent of the witness protection program,” drew less than a million viewers. Yawn.

JD.

Environmentalists are already exploiting the recent mining accident as a launch pad for an anti-coal agenda. Sick!

HATE AMERICA BUT DON'T INSULT THE CAVEMAN

The producers of ABC’s new comedy “Cavemen” had to reshoot the pilot episode in response to cries of racism from reporters.

This is a new low in this pansy-ass, cry-baby, Victims-R-Us, liberal-infested, love-anyone-who-hates-America, hate-anything-American, creepy society we’ve become. Jeez, people, lighten up!

My reaction may seem a bit like I just can’t get through step 8 of over-reactors anonymous, but I have a real hard time containing myself anymore when I’m reminded how wimped out this country is.


____________________



"They're looking for me, to like trip, so they can be like, 'Oh Lindsay's wasted and driving drunk.' And that's not it. I wouldn't violate. ... I'm much more responsible than that." - Lindsay Lohan, in her Elle Magazine interview 36 hours before her July 24 arrest for drunk driving and possession of cocaine, according to the New York Daily News.


____________________



The far left Web site, DailyKos.com, held a forum Saturday for the Democratic presidential hopefuls. All but one of the “contestants” were present at the event for liberal bloggers near and far.

DailyKos is a lovely site that posts serious hate speech. So serious is it that if anyone not calling themselves a liberal Democrat made comments like the crap that is posted on that site, they would be summarily drummed into PC submission, crucified and literally given a front row seat to watch their careers destroyed.

Here are a few examples of statements posted on the site, according to Bill O’Reilly of Fox News:

- “The world would be better off without him,” regarding White House Press Secretary Tony Snow after he announced his cancer had returned.
- “The Pope is a primate”
- “Evangelicals are nutcases”
- “Better luck next time,” after an assassination plot against Vice President Dick Cheney in Afghanistan was thwarted.
- “Some attacks against coalition forces in Iraq are legitimate”

Also at the DailyKos.com convention, a uniformed army reservist who served in Iraq challenged a panel to prove by any means that violence had not decreased since the recent military “surge.” He was booed, jeered and escorted out of the building. So much for reason. I guess they can’t let a little serious debate from a soldier who's been there interfere with their thuggish hate rhetoric.


____________________



This weekend I went to see “The Bourne Ultimatum” at the cinema with my son and daughter. First of all, it was a great action thriller in league with the first two “Bourne” movies. I highly recommend it to Bourne fans everywhere.

Best part of the experience, though, was during the previews and promotions before the movie began. Along with the previews and usual ads, a recruiting piece by, and for the United States Army was shown. I looked around the theatre for reaction from the mostly twenty-something packed house, and then a great thing happened…The theatre erupted in spontaneous applause in obvious support for the Army spot. Very, very heartwarming! I wish the Kos folks and the Dem contestants could have been there.

JD.

DEMS WON'T SACRIFICE POWER TO HELP THEIR BASE

So who loses as the Democrats cruise to what they imagine is certain victory in 2008 in both the White House and the Capitol?

Many will reactively think the Republicans lose. But do they? I remember a liberal colleague who bristled while expressing her concern to me in 2001 when Bush took office, wondering whether the country could survive a Republican President as well as Congressional majority.

My answer was simply this. It doesn’t matter. Perception is everything and whatever happens on their watch, the Republicans will be blamed. I told her that they will be blamed and they will pay, which will eventually lead to a majority in the other direction.

There’s nothing prophetic about that. It’s just common sense…Ass backwards common sense, which is the only kind that seems to work for the confused and uninformed electorate in this country.

Now with Hillary or B. Hussein, or both, racing for the White House next year, history will repeat itself as it does term after term after term.

So back to the original questions; who loses? The main constituency of the Democrats, that’s who loses. With the general public seething at the Republicans, deservedly or not, the Dems are getting away with ignoring their base.

Certainly the GOP screwed up big time and deservedly got tossed from office. They got arrogant, fat and imperial. The people spoke in numbers in November and summarily booted them out. Did they deserve it? Hell, yeah!

Too bad though that the vast majority of voters I spoke with didn’t have a clue as to why they hated the Republicans or what they thought the Democrats would do. They just wanted “change,” which they think they got.

The Dems gave us a peek at how they are treating their constituency when Newt Gingrich last Sunday singled out the Detroit school system as a disaster that is crippling young Americans. He pointed out the failures of that system in how they only graduate 22 percent of freshmen on time, citing the Gates Foundation. Fully 75 percent of Detroit public school students do not graduate on time, which leads to a 72 percent unemployment rate among African American males in the city and a 60 percent chance of going to jail by the time they reach their mid 30s.

The official reaction? Very predictable by anyone’s honest measure. District officials were quick to defend the fine job they’re doing with (to?) the children of Detroit. The city’s largest employer (city government being the second largest) is fraught with waste, bureaucracy, absenteeism, cronyism and overall incompetence…obviously.

Where is the Democratic Party? They won’t say anything to criticize the school system. School districts, along with most government entities are union, protected by archaic rules and tend to vote Democrat so they can stay safe and inefficient.

The Democrats won’t chance offending their core constituencies simply because keeping these groups status quo, keeps the Dems in power. And that is tragic!

Are the Republicans any better? No! And they’re just as scared of attempting to do anything for fear of alienating the very people who won’t vote for them anyway.

So the losers, my friends, are the folks who lose time after time. The so-called underclass that Democrats claim to champion, and that mistakenly think are being championed by the Democrats.

If the Democrats were to get serious about caring for Americans, they would lose their power. And that’s simply not an option…for them.

To quote Newt, “The crisis is simply a failure of citizenship.”

What a shame….

JD.

Ps. I love Texas! I spend a fair amount of time in the Lone Star State and absolutely love it! Though it’s somewhat embarrassing having affection for a state from where the Dixie Chicks came.

NEW CONGRESS? NOT!

I echo Jeff Babbin’s question in a recent column in which he asks who, exactly, are the 14 percent of Americans who approve of the job Congress is doing?

The lowest approval rating the last Republican Congress received, before being summarily, and rightfully, tossed from office, was 24 percent in August of 2006 according to a Fox News poll.

Could it be that this Congress, after all their ballyhooing and hype about doing things differently and more honestly, haven’t accomplished a thing yet? Could it be that they helped themselves to a nice raise for doing nothing since the November elections?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came into office promising massive reform. I’ve yet to witness any meaningful reform. The House, which averaged less than two work days a week in 2006, was given January 8th off – after less than a week in office – to watch the collegiate national championship football game…compliments of Mrs. Pelosi. Does this make them look serious?

Special interests still (and presumably always will) rule the halls of Congress. These people are not working for you, as you showed up in droves to elect them to, but for the same old army of lobbyists and fellow back-scratchers. Imperialistic crooks and losers still roam freely about the Capitol.

Speaker Pelosi apparently isn’t serious about cleaning up corruption either, or she wouldn’t try to protect fellow members from investigation. In the recent case of Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson who was caught on tape by the FBI accepting a $100,000 bribe, she took exception to the FBI searching Jefferson’s office. She and former Speaker Dennis Hastert both tried to claim documents seized at the Congressman’s office were taken illegally, citing “separation of powers.”

So Pelosi is obviously very interested in protecting here cronies from investigation. Boy, that’s serious reform! Seriously, the gall!

West Virginia Democratic Congressman Alan Mollohan recently stepped down from the House ethics committee because of a probe by federal agents looking into his steering funds into nonprofit groups he founded.

That’s right folks, the former ranking member of the House ETHICS committee!

According to Dick Morris, former advisor to President Clinton, Congressman Mollohan’s personal assets rose from less than $500,000 to more than $8 million just between 2001 and 2005. And that’s on a $162,500 congressional salary. He steered $5 million in federal funds to one of his nonprofit organizations. His comment? He saw “no conflict of interest.” In the past decade, he directed more than $250 million to nonprofit organizations he created in his native state, according to Morris. You might want to reread that.

But he’s not alone. Here are a few more of your legislatures under recent investigation:

Sen. Ted Stevens (AK), Rep. Don Young (AK), Rep. John Doolittle (CA), Rep. Jerry Lewis (CA), Rep. Gary Miller (CA) and Rep. Rick Renzi (AZ), all Republicans.

You wanted change when you went to the polls in November? You rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic.

JD.

"GORED" AGAIN ON HURRICANE FORCAST

Private weather forecaster WSI said on Tuesday that they expect the 2007 hurricane season to be a bit milder than originally expected. Isn’t that something? I’m shocked! Amazingly, since Bush took office, global warming, according to the great climatologist with a degree in political science and who barely graduated college, Al Gore, and all his lackeys, say there will be, and has been, an increase in hurricane activity. Especially since hurricane Katrina, which certainly was a born of a conspiracy involving Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and George Bush? But there’s one annoying little problem. There hasn’t been an increase in hurricane activity, despite the hopes and prayers of the former Vice President and current sore loser.

Now, slightly into hurricane season, due to little, if any, reportable named storm activity in the Atlantic, the forecast, just like last year, must be downgraded.

It’s painfully apparent that the forecasters in Gore’s camp will predict a more severe than usual hurricane season every year until the dire warning comes true. No need to explain the normality of the weather, just go crazy over the one hurricane season worth noting, when and if it happens.

This, like so much other bull that comes out of the global warming…err, climate change alarmists is reckless. Chief in the complicity of anyone who needs funding and is afraid of Gore’s reputation sliming machine…a’ la The Weather Channel, or as I prefer to call it, the Global Warming Channel, etc.

When Gore pushed his Oscar winning film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” on the unsuspecting and gullible public, no one, it seems, had the gumption to challenge the junk science put forth.

Challenges to wit; the planet is not warming; only the northern hemisphere is. The southern hemisphere apparently didn’t get the memo. There are many hypothetical reasons for this truth, but they can be addressed in another edition. Also, a precursor to the most recent spike in average global temperatures was the collapse of the Soviet Union between 1988 and 1991. During said collapse, Siberian climate and temperature reading stations were abandoned or put out of commission. Siberia being above the Arctic Circle, the “average” global temp should go up by any moron’s math. Will anyone take this information into consideration while, before or after they view “An Inconvenient Truth?”

Oh well, like I said, this can, and will be, revisited in the near future.
JD.

DEBATE TO BE RUN BY CNN, NOT YouTube!

If you’re looking for anything revolutionary to come out of Monday night’s CNN / YouTube debate, forget about it. Outwardly teased as a debate featuring questions from the YouTube nation, it will, no doubt, strictly be a CNN / Democrat love fest. And here’s why.

Anderson Cooper, one of CNN’s resident Democrat partisans, will “moderate” the debate. John Roberts of CNN’s weeklong “CNN/YouTube Debate Preview” said (55 minutes into the show) that CNN will be choosing which questions will make it to the Contestants. That’s right, CNN, not YouTubers.

CNN Senior Vice President and Washington Bureau Chief, David Bohrman, told Los Angeles Times’ Paul Brownfield that “We will make responsible editorial decisions about what will air during the debate.” Anyone with half an honest mind knows what that means. This is a CNN love-fest…er, debate.

Another reason this won’t be a debate more open than any other is the cozy relationships between news organizations and campaigns. CNN wouldn’t jeopardize its access to a major candidate’s campaign by letting some crazed ordinary American ask an honest, probing question. Oh my God, the implications of such a thing! The real public having fair access to a presidential candidates’ debate?! Think again.

LA Times’ Brownfield said “Monday night’s debate promises at least to expose a clash of cultures, as the grungy, youth-oriented YouTube meets the buttoned-down campaign talking point.” Don’t count on it, except possibly in the initial naivety of the questioners. But CNN will sift through the questions to find enough intelligent, yet predictable, questions about universal healthcare, Darfur, Iraq, big oil, corporate profits and all the other “hot points” of the politically and generally uneducated.

One more thing you can take to the bank; the Democratic candidates will be sucking up to the misspent youths of this country big time. Will they succeed? They will barely have to try. But as much as they like to change their stores and contradict themselves, look to some candidates, maybe most, to trip over their own condescension.

JD.

VITTER SHOULD "CONFESS" HE'S HETEROSEXUAL

Republican Senator David Vitter of Louisiana was recently forced to admit publicly that he used a prostitute because his name was on the client list of the so called “D.C. Madam.” Well, big deal!

I’m sure some of my more conservative friends are about to scream at me for being “pro-prostitution,” but Oh Well, that’s their discomfort. The point, as Mac Johnson of "Human Events" has alluded, is that when Democratic Congressman-for-life Barney Frank of Massachusetts was busted for cavorting with a known prostitute and actually letting the male prostitute run his business out of Rep. Frank’s home, Frank just had to tell us he was homosexual, and the press coverage just went away.

Now let’s be clear about my views on homosexuality. To the satisfaction of most folks and to the horrors of the religious right, I couldn’t care less about someone’s sexual orientation. I believe some people are born with a predisposition toward either and they choose to live their lives according to what comes naturally. I also don’t believe this is flawed as that belief, in my opinion, would be calling God’s plan flawed. That last point assuming that God knows all present and future, and all is His will. So someone will say that just because someone does something bad that I must be condoning it because I think it is God’s will. Well, get a grip. I don’t think homosexuality is inherently bad. Anymore than I think bad people who are heterosexual are bad because of their heterosexuality.

With that said, the topic isn't worth any more ink. Good people are good people.

It’s really too bad that I actually had to explain that. But I know this site has a variety of readership from across the country, and they bear all stripes…including self righteousness. So especially to the latter, C’est la vie.

So back to my point. Mac Johnson had it right; all Senator Vitter should have had to do was declare his heterosexuality and if there is any consistency in the logic of the press, Democrats, Republicans or nuts of any flavor, he should be getting a pass, based on past performance of the above referenced proud organizations.

So by the logic applied to the Frank episode, Senator Vitter should be able to proclaim his heterosexuality -- proudly, I might add -- and move on without being further harangued.

Frank was letting his lover run a gay escort service from his home. Vitter paid for a heterosexual escort service. Frank, by simply explaining he was a homosexual, was treated as a victim. Vitter, by explaining he is an out-of-control heterosexual, should be vindicated as such. And both should be able to, as Johnson put it, declare their diversity.

Do you think it will work that way?

JD.