Passing thoughts during the State of the Union address

9:05 p.m. – CNN’s already helping the Democrats write their post-speech response…

9:12 p.m. – Introduction of Bush, continuing applause. Cindy Sheehan in attendance, but wait, she’s been arrested and removed from the building. Fine. The last thing the crowd needed was another white man in it.

9:20 p.m. – Bush mentions Syria, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Iran. “We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it”. Translated into local languages for those nations, “you may be next, Sparky”.

9:28 p.m. – No apologies for Iraq. Kerry mouths something to the Senator next to him… probably reminding him that he served in Vietnam.

9:32 p.m. – Nook-lee-er, not nook-ya-lar… no reason to nitpick though. So far so good.

9:37 p.m. – “The terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks… we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.” In other words, “Impeach this!” Hillary sports her usual velociraptor grin.

9:43 p.m. – Bush: “Make the tax cuts permanent”. Dems react like Michael Moore after being told by the Krispy Kreme manager that they’re out of donuts.

9:45 p.m. – Bush mentions his dad’s friend, Bill Clinton, causing another velociraptor grin from the woman Bill loves… Hillary did the same.

9:50 p.m. – “I ask the Congress to pass medical liability reform this year”. Uh huh. You’ll have better luck getting Barney Frank interested in going to Hooters for lunch than of getting dozens and dozens of lawyers to pass medical liability reform.

9:51 p.m. – “America is addicted to oil”. Addicted? Bunk. If my car ran on kumquats, I’d buy kumquats and jam them in the gas tank, and all without getting the shakes from the lack of oil.

9:54 p.m. – “Fewer abortions in America…” Democrats, dead babies don’t applaud.

9:59 p.m. – “Ban cloning”. Dozens of people with similar ideologies, silver hair, wearing dark blue suits, red ties and reading glasses applaud.

10:04 p.m. – Could be the beer talking, but Nancy Pelosi is… still not very attractive.

10:05 p.m. “We move forward… confident about the victories to come. May God bless America.” Michael Newdow just coughed up blood.

End of speech, start of parade of media analysis and of course the Democrats response, which in the past couple of years featured desperate members of the donkey party looking like they were offering pleas in a political hostage video.

All in all, the speech (transcript) was pretty good. No “swinging for the fences”, which is in character for Bush, but it was nice to hear him directly address wiretapping with a no apologies approach, along with many other major issues.

Hey, anybody have bail money for Cindy Sheehan? No? Good.

Cindy Sheehan is removed from the building shortly before the State of the Union address, and escorted back to her tent in Crawford, Texas

A & E's "Flight 93": Well done and highly recommended

Last night, flipping through the 300 channels (301 on days I unblock CBS), I ran across the beginning of “Flight 93” on A & E. At first, I cringed. I didn’t know what to expect.

In previous weeks, I’d heard that a TV network was producing a movie about the plane that was taken down in a Pennsylvania field on 9/11, and wondered at the time how Hollywood would manage to screw up the story, add bias, subtract fact, etc.

It was nice to see that none of that happened. The film did something that’s a rarity: stuck to the facts as they are known.

There were no “Steven Seagal” type characters among the passengers on the plane. They were ordinary people in a horrible situation who acted heroically.

Much of the movie revolves around phone calls from the passengers to family members and others on the ground, and tower communications with Flight 93, and other planes in the area. News eventually reaches the passengers, slowly, that terrorists have struck the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon.

Probably what the film most effectively deals with is remembering that the passengers were completely unaware of the entirety of the situation. There were no “America’s under attack, boys… let’s get ’em!” moments that, as a director or producer, may have been incredibly tempting to toss in.

Conversely, the hijackers weren’t humanized, as may have also been incredibly tempting for a director or producer in the PC universe that is the moviemaking industry. There were no explanations of the hijackers’ “cause”, because, essentially, the murder taking place was their cause, and the filmmakers were bright enough, and intellectually honest enough, to avoid redundancy.

Obviously, some of the dialog between those in the plane had to be assumed, but otherwise the movie made no logical leaps or assumptions, culminating with the ultimate crash of the plane in a Pennsylvania field.

I’m not big on movie reviews, but I do suggest you see it for yourself to get an idea of how refreshing a historically based movie can be when it sticks to the facts, and, when there are gaps in those facts, it leaves them open and untouched, to be filled in by the viewers.

We know the ending, and yet the story manages to be gripping, mournful, enraging, and yet motivational and inspiring. It’s a film of many emotions, and it works on several levels.

Watch the movie if you can. Not too far into it, you’ll realize that it’s also a movie about you. In America, we all played a part. In many ways, it’s our story, and it’s refreshing to see that it was so well done and is a terrific reminder to never, ever forget.

__________
But don’t take my word for it. After all, I think the best movies ever made are “Airplane” and “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”, so you’ll have to decide for yourself.

Here’s the schedule for “Flight 93” on A & E:

Tuesday, Jan. 31 — 10 p.m.
Wednesday, Feb. 1 — 2 a.m., 9 p.m.
Thursday, Feb. 2 — 1 a.m.
Saturday, Feb. 4 — 12 noon

Addendum: You can read a less positive review by the Washington Post television reviewer/reporter Tom Shales. In “From tragedy to tripe, nonstop“, Shales wrote that the movie “Flight 93” was a “lust to make a buck”. As if Tom wrote his review of that lust to make a buck for free.

A & E’s “Flight 93″: Well done and highly recommended

Last night, flipping through the 300 channels (301 on days I unblock CBS), I ran across the beginning of “Flight 93” on A & E. At first, I cringed. I didn’t know what to expect.

In previous weeks, I’d heard that a TV network was producing a movie about the plane that was taken down in a Pennsylvania field on 9/11, and wondered at the time how Hollywood would manage to screw up the story, add bias, subtract fact, etc.

It was nice to see that none of that happened. The film did something that’s a rarity: stuck to the facts as they are known.

There were no “Steven Seagal” type characters among the passengers on the plane. They were ordinary people in a horrible situation who acted heroically.

Much of the movie revolves around phone calls from the passengers to family members and others on the ground, and tower communications with Flight 93, and other planes in the area. News eventually reaches the passengers, slowly, that terrorists have struck the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon.

Probably what the film most effectively deals with is remembering that the passengers were completely unaware of the entirety of the situation. There were no “America’s under attack, boys… let’s get ’em!” moments that, as a director or producer, may have been incredibly tempting to toss in.

Conversely, the hijackers weren’t humanized, as may have also been incredibly tempting for a director or producer in the PC universe that is the moviemaking industry. There were no explanations of the hijackers’ “cause”, because, essentially, the murder taking place was their cause, and the filmmakers were bright enough, and intellectually honest enough, to avoid redundancy.

Obviously, some of the dialog between those in the plane had to be assumed, but otherwise the movie made no logical leaps or assumptions, culminating with the ultimate crash of the plane in a Pennsylvania field.

I’m not big on movie reviews, but I do suggest you see it for yourself to get an idea of how refreshing a historically based movie can be when it sticks to the facts, and, when there are gaps in those facts, it leaves them open and untouched, to be filled in by the viewers.

We know the ending, and yet the story manages to be gripping, mournful, enraging, and yet motivational and inspiring. It’s a film of many emotions, and it works on several levels.

Watch the movie if you can. Not too far into it, you’ll realize that it’s also a movie about you. In America, we all played a part. In many ways, it’s our story, and it’s refreshing to see that it was so well done and is a terrific reminder to never, ever forget.

__________
But don’t take my word for it. After all, I think the best movies ever made are “Airplane” and “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”, so you’ll have to decide for yourself.

Here’s the schedule for “Flight 93” on A & E:

Tuesday, Jan. 31 — 10 p.m.
Wednesday, Feb. 1 — 2 a.m., 9 p.m.
Thursday, Feb. 2 — 1 a.m.
Saturday, Feb. 4 — 12 noon

Addendum: You can read a less positive review by the Washington Post television reviewer/reporter Tom Shales. In “From tragedy to tripe, nonstop“, Shales wrote that the movie “Flight 93” was a “lust to make a buck”. As if Tom wrote his review of that lust to make a buck for free.

Senator Sheehan? From Protesting the Ranch, to Buying the Farm

Cindy Sheehan, war protester, and… Senator?

Sheehan, in Venezuela to attend some socialist/communist conference or other, has said that she will return to Yasgur’s Farm south, formerly Crawford, Texas and that she is also considering opposing Democrat California Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Once in Crawford, she will to continue the peace vigil and folk festival near Bush’s ranch, where, if you look carefully, on occasion you can catch a glimpse of a war protester behind all the media.

“Joan Baez, white courtesy phone. Joan Baez… white courtesy phone.”

Actually Sheehan didn’t say she was returning to the Crawford KOA. Cindy’s spokesman, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, did. Said Chavez:

“She is going to put up her tent again in front of Mr. Danger’s ranch.”

“Mr. Danger”? Somebody please go down there and pull the plug on the James Bond-a-thon on VTV.

There’s no telling how popular, or not, Sheehan’s newest campout will be. The numbers dwindle as she moves more and more to the left. Soon it’ll just be Cindy and Noam Chomsky at a cozy table for two.

During Sheehan’s earlier visits to Crawford, Yasgur’s Farm south attracted more weasels than an open-air chicken coop.

Folks like the Reverend Al Sharpton, after announcing that Sheehan’s protest had finally gained the focus of enough TV cameras to satisfy the media coverage rider in Sharpton’s contract, showed up on the anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech, to deliver his own speech, which could very well go down in history as the “Vermin on the Mount.”

Groups such as MoveOn.org and True Majority (rule of thumb: any group with the word “majority” in it’s name, isn’t in it) were, and may continue, helping finance the base camp at Yasgur’s Farm south. True Majority is a group set up by Ben Cohen, of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, the company that displays a pretty exterior of socialist idealism, all supported by the camouflaged joist of fierce right-wing capitalism. Shhh … don’t tell.

Senator Sheehan?

In addition to all this, Sheehan has announced (and I think it was actually her that said this, not Hugo Chavez, though I can’t confirm at this time) that she may challenge Dianne Feinstein for U.S. Senate from California.

Sheehan will be asked about this while in Crawford, and she’ll have many quiet moments with which to begin to pen her concession speech.

Nice knowin’ ya, Cindy. You’re going to be challenging Dianne Feinstein, and you’ve ticked off Hillary Clinton— you might want to bring back Chavez’s security detail with you from Venezuela. If you think Republicans and conservatives can be vicious… wait until you see how mean your friends can be.

Sheehan said she wants Feinstein out because Dianne supports the war in Iraq. Feinstein, true to form, responded by saying “No I’m not… I mean, I voted for it, but only because I didn’t want to not vote for it, but only because I was misled, so I continue to vote to fund it even though I was bamboozled into voting for it…” Well, something like that.

Cindy Sheehan may be losing Democrat pals, but the hard core left is still with her. Leftist organizations and anti-war Hollywood still firmly stand with Cindy, as will the MSM cover her exploits, even if nobody else shows up.

A final thought about “friends” of Cindy Sheehan.

One can only hope that Ms. Sheehan is able to someday find peace for the loss of her son, and the first step in that would be for her to ask herself – and honestly answer – one question: “Why does the media, special-interest groups, and Hollywood left seem to care so much about my son now that he’s dead, and were nothing but critical of people like him, his fellow soldiers, and their beliefs, when he was alive?”

Maybe it’s just me, but I’d never side with somebody to whom my loved ones are worth more dead than alive.

Addendum: If you ever wondered how the radical anti-war group “Code Pink” got it’s name, click here. Hint: It must have something to do with Pepto Bismol.

Make sense?: President Bush (above in 2004, kissing Sheehan), the only public figure to give Cindy Sheehan the time of day while her son was still alive, is now the bad guy, and all those who despised the mission of Casey Sheehan are now hangers-on of his mother

Monday''s column: Jimmy Carter goes gaga in Gaza

Well, it’s Monday, which means it’s time for yet another column over at WorldNetDaily.

This week’s topic revolves around a subject that’s been discussed here at the blog for a few days, and that topic is Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy has been traveling the world offering hug therapy seminars for dictators and despots, hoping to infuse them with a healthy dose of malaise, as well as offering to monitor their elections. The former doesn’t work, and the latter is a joke, as evidenced by Jimmy’s latest adventure “monitoring” the elections in Palestine.

Read “Jimmy Carter goes gaga in Gaza” to find out why.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled Monday.

Monday’’s column: Jimmy Carter goes gaga in Gaza

Well, it’s Monday, which means it’s time for yet another column over at WorldNetDaily.

This week’s topic revolves around a subject that’s been discussed here at the blog for a few days, and that topic is Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy has been traveling the world offering hug therapy seminars for dictators and despots, hoping to infuse them with a healthy dose of malaise, as well as offering to monitor their elections. The former doesn’t work, and the latter is a joke, as evidenced by Jimmy’s latest adventure “monitoring” the elections in Palestine.

Read “Jimmy Carter goes gaga in Gaza” to find out why.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled Monday.

Ted on arrival: Koeppel's first NYT column dances around the truth

Former Nightline anchor Ted Koeppel has written his first regular column for the New York Times. For those who don’t want to actually pay for it, here’s a good synopsis.

What it boils down to is this: continued mainstream media refusal to open their eyes and see the light of why the likes of FOX News is gaining, and network news continues to lose viewers.

“The accusation that television news has a political agenda misses the point. Right now, the main agenda is to give people what they want. It is not partisanship but profitability that shapes what you see.”

It’s incredibly comforting to know that a liberal agenda isn’t A) what people want, and B) profitable.

Thanks, Ted. You’ve made my Sunday.

Ted on arrival: Koeppel’s first NYT column dances around the truth

Former Nightline anchor Ted Koeppel has written his first regular column for the New York Times. For those who don’t want to actually pay for it, here’s a good synopsis.

What it boils down to is this: continued mainstream media refusal to open their eyes and see the light of why the likes of FOX News is gaining, and network news continues to lose viewers.

“The accusation that television news has a political agenda misses the point. Right now, the main agenda is to give people what they want. It is not partisanship but profitability that shapes what you see.”

It’s incredibly comforting to know that a liberal agenda isn’t A) what people want, and B) profitable.

Thanks, Ted. You’ve made my Sunday.

Weekend housecleaning: letters, Jimmah, Prince Charles, Reno on Karaoke, Kerry on Coulter, and King on poor chaps

In Thursday’s “Letters to the editor” section of WorldNetDaily, there was a comment on my column about the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade:

I enjoyed Doug Powers’ clear column on abortion, but was struck by the comment that “rare, safe and legal” is almost impossible to argue against. I’m not sure I agree with that. If it’s legal, it can’t be rare. And either way, it can never be safe – at least one person dies, every time.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. As a matter of fact, I did… Didn’t I?
__________

Hamas and Fatah battle over election results. Violence is allegedly breaking out now. This, of course, can’t be the case because Jimmy Carter said the whole process was “completely honest, completely fair, and completely safe“. Jimmy also expressed hope that Hamas would “act responsibly”.

Doesn’t Jimmy seem like the kind of guy who would let his little boy spend the night with Michael Jackson because Jacko assured him he wasn’t into that particular hair color?

An “election process” includes a peaceful and fair transfer of power after the actual vote, and the odds of that happening are about the same as the chances of seeing Michael Moore at a salad bar. Care to comment now Jimmy? … Jimmy?
__________

Prince Charles is warning the British people not to get fat like Americans, urging them to exercise more. I’ll promise not to comment on this as long as the Brits promise that this exercise will include walking to the dentist.
__________

Former Attorney General Janet Reno sang “Respect” with Aretha Franklin at a fundraiser in Florida (video).

Reno brought the house down. But enough about the Branch Davidian compound.

In 2002, Reno held a “dance party” inspired by the SNL skit, but found that “cutting a rug” exposed all the stuff she swept under it for Bill Clinton, so Janet has switched to singing… or at least something resembling somebody trying to.

__________

John Kerry says that a good reason to vote against the nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court is because Ann Coulter supports him. Kerry made the remarks on the floor of the Senate (here’s a transcript). Whatever Ann thinks, Kerry will plead the opposite.

Note to Coulter: Please urge John Kerry not to resign.
__________

And now, to completely ruin your weekend, this: Larry King’s wife talked to Howard Stern about about her sex life with the reptilian CNN host. He puts on an Indian costume, she puts on chaps, the rest of us put on a vomit bag.

Larry pleads guilty… to being a sex machine!