More Tea Party pics are coming soon...

but I had to put this up first:

This is the entire lead page off CNN this morning at 9:20. You have to scroll clear down to their "iReport" section (which is one page down from the top, even on my gigantic monitor) to find something involving the Tea Party protests yesterday, and when you finally get something, what is it? A video of an average-looking man saying that he and his wife just want to pay their taxes to "fund the military and build bridges", that he doesn't "know what they're upset about" and that the Tea Parties are "frightening".

Absolutely unbelievable. The media as we knew it no longer exists.

Seattle Tea Party Protest, Part I

The Tea Party protests started in Seattle, with a protest set up by a blogger named Liberty Belle in February. A month and a half later, this happened (sorry about the image size, click on it for full):


I'd guess there were 300-400 people there, and I left less than half-way through (late-term pregnancy and protesting are not the best match known to man).

Best signs (part I):


(Liberty and Tyranny is a new book out by Mark Levin. It's a conservative manifesto of sorts-- and has been number 1 on Amazon and the New York Times since its release.)

Eowyn is attending a Tax Day Protest

Tea Party
Seattle
5:45- 7:45

I'll be the massively pregnant one with a sign and a rockin' awesome camera. I'll update this post with pics as the day goes.

I'm a little nervous-- I've never been to anything like this. I promise not to riot (not that I think there's going to be one, but I keep remembering the Seattle WTO riot in the 90's... maybe all that caffeine goes to people's heads?). Pajamas Media and Instapundit have Tea Party links, and are well worth looking at.

UPDATE: Way too many good pics to add to this post. They're in later posts, so scroll up.

Cri de Coeur

I imagine you're probably wondering why I haven't posted in so long (it's not the migraines-- see earlier post).

The answer: too depressing.

Democrats have been in total (legislative and executive) power for two and a half months. And I figured it would be bad, I did. Truly, I wasn't one of those conservatives or moderates who thought that Obama was lying during his campaign, when he wanted to "spread the wealth", or when he took slam after slam at the rich (of which he is one), or when he ran from "victim" to "victim", reassuring them all that he was going to save their homes/paycheck/entitlements/self-respect. Oh, no. I believed him. I did. Which is why I voted for McCain, in spite of my misgivings (which I had. Palin reinvigorated me for a time, as she did many conservatives, but the effect turned out to be only palliative, not curative). Even John Derbyshire, in spite of vowing not to, voted for McCain, knowing how bad the alternative could be. Conservatives knew that an Obama administration could be damaging to the country.

But I don't think any of us knew how across-the-board horrifying it would be. Certainly I didn't. I'll take it in sections.

FOREIGN POLICY:
Obama promised "smart diplomacy". He promised to "rebuild our relationships" with other countries. He promised engagement and strength at the same time.

Instead, we have kissed Iran's butt, and then had it handed back to us on a platter for a second round, and a third with the March Video to the Mullahs. Meanwhile, while all this engaging was happening, an Iranian blogger died in prison. He was 29. His crimes were insulting religious leaders and producing anti-Iranian propaganda.

We've also been sucking up to China. Our vaunted SecState, Hillary Clinton recently told the Chinese that not only was the economy (and, by extension, all of our debt that the Chinese hold) more important than Chinese human rights, but that the "environment crisis" was too. "Sorry Tibet! Your yaks produce methane, you know. Sorry, members of Falun Gong whose organs are harvested before you're dead! Your philosophy doesn't produce anything "sustainable" or "green", so no support for you. Sorry, Taiwan! You're a stable democracy staring into the maw of hell (and producing goods that Americans routinely buy), but the Chinese premier holds some of our IOU's, you know. So sorry, all! I've got to board my helicopter now. Pilot, shake off those people clinging to the runners." Oh, and as a bonus rubbing in of salt, she said it from the comfort of Seoul, South Korea.

In between these disasters, we have also managed to screw over the most loyal supporters we had in Europe (the Czechs, Poles, Romanians, Ukrainians, Georgians... you know, all those people who have only just escaped the Iron Curtain) by blithely abandoning promises we made in exchange for Russia's support in our Iranian policy. The Russians said thanks, but no thanks, but guess what? We haven't apologized to our friends, we haven't redressed the damage we did, and we're still not putting missiles there for defense. We're just rolling over, playing poodle to Russia's wolf.

We have insulted Britain three times at last count: we sent Winston Churchill away without even a passing glance, we failed to treat Gordon Brown and his family with any measure of respect, let alone pomp and circumstance, and the treasury department can't even return its calls from a fellow member of the G7.

Oh, and we're sending 900 million American taxpayer dollars to Gaza. At the same time that we agreed to attend preparations for Durban II, the UN anti-Israel hate fest (which we later backed out of, but only after rejecting Israeli and Canadian requests to not attend). The American taxpayer is now not only funding AIG, GM, and trillions of dollars worth of other companies, but now we're funding Palestinians, who voted in a terrorist organization which is sure to get its hands on any money we send.

DOMESTIC POLICY:

Where do I even start? With the "stimulus"? TARP II? The omnibus? Obama's mortgage plan, enacted almost entirely by executive order with no legislative vote or debate whatsoever? GM? The fact that I am now on the hook for GM buyers' warranties? Or that Obama fired GM's CEO? Perhaps I should start with the cabinet full of tax cheats? Or the fact that the administration names critics (private citizens) and singles them out for attack? Or the rumors that the administration is considering wage controls for ALL banks, ALL insurance companies, and perhaps all PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES?

Or I could start with the administration floating the idea of making Iraq and Afghanistan veterans pay for treatment of wounds they received in the course of duty. Or that Obama seems unable to bring himself to cut spending in any major area (except defense, of course). Or that he routinely apologizes for the U.S. in every statement he makes to foreigners.

Business

Regular blogging will now recommence.

No, I haven't had my second son yet. I've discovered that a can of Mountain Dew (or the generic equivalent) in the morning usually keeps the migraines at bay, so I should be able to post most of the time. There are still a couple nasty days every few weeks, but I can deal with that.

On with the show!

Fear Her*

M. Sara Rosenthal is a "bioethicist" at the University of Kentucky's College of Medicine. She spoke to CNN concerning the woman in California who just gave birth to octuplets. Behold:

Rosenthal, on the other hand, questions the woman's capacity to make a good decision under the circumstances. Some neonatologists believe that when pregnant women are told about dangers of prematurity or have great expectations about giving birth, their judgment can be impaired, she said.

The situation raises the issue of whether a doctor ought to override a patient's wishes for the sake of saving lives, she said. Although the health care system in America gives patients autonomy in making decisions about their own bodies, when emotionally distraught, some people decide poorly, she said.

A mother deciding not to kill any of her children is "decid[ing] poorly"? A bioethicist is even considering whether a doctor should override the wishes of the patient if they think that their patient is making the wrong decision? What would she do, arrest people and perform forced abortions a la China?

This is disgusting. It should terrify any woman looking to get pregnant, or indeed, who is pregnant and believes that motherhood doesn't start in the delivery room. As alarmist and crazy as it sounds, there are bioethicists who question your right to not have an abortion.

It's only more frightening when you realize that this woman is a teacher.

*Bonus points to any sci-fi fan (or Briton, for that matter) who gets the post title reference.

Doomed, doomed

to quote John Derbyshire. I saw this article, by Amir Taheri, yesterday while catching up on the news. Opener:

In his "first message to the Muslim world" Tuesday, President Obama on Al-Arabiya TV invited the Is lamic Republic in Iran to "unclench its fist" and accept his offer of "unconditional talks." A few hours later, after Obama had appeared on the Saudi-owned satellite-TV channel, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a crowd of militants that no talks are possible unless the United States met a set of conditions.

Ahmadinejad: You aren't going to set conditions?
Pres. Obama: That's right.
Ahmadinejad: Oh, that's great. We will.

Ahmadinejad's requests are only modest, of course. They include an apology for U.S. "crimes", and not only those against Iran, but the entire Muslim world-- apparently the whole religion elected Mahmoud, not just Iran. He also demands that U.S. troops leave not just Iraq, not just Afghanistan, but every foreign base.

Give a donkey a carrot and he'll take the entire farm.

American Invertebrates

First off, where on earth have I been? I have been fighting the Black Breath-- in this case, pregnancy-induced migraines. Sorry for the lack of posting recently. I get visual migraines, which leave me functionally blind for a while. Which makes blogging hard.

Anyway, I finally got enough vision back to start reading the news yesterday. I have never seen Instapundit so torqued as he seems to be over the "stimulus" bill-- he's calling it the looting bill. Click through the links you'll find over there, and (as I did), you'll find out why. Will someone (other than Nancy Pelosi, please) explain how $335 MILLION in teenager STD prevention will create jobs, or stimulate the economy? Or any of the other liberal monstrosities that are tucked away in there? See Ron Brownstein:

"[T]he bill also emphatically expands programs targeted more at the far term than the near term — from aid to schools in low-income areas ($13 billion) to expanded college loans ($16 billion) and scientific research ($10 billion). In normal times, Congress might never enlarge so many programs at once. But, as with Reagan's tax cut, the crisis-induced demand for action may suspend the normal laws of political gravity — and allow Democrats to redirect federal priorities as boldly as Reagan did. "This is a once-in-a-25-year opportunity to [implement] a lot of our agenda," a top House Democratic aide says."

This is no stimulus bill. This is a liberal reworking of society. There's even wording in there with the capability to undo the welfare reform of the 90's, according to Charles Hurt. Support for the bill is falling rapidly, but (surprise!) the Democrats that we elected simply do not care.

As they are fond of saying over at National Review's Corner, elections have consequences. As a people, we elected Barack Obama. We put in a nearly filibuster-proof Dem majority with only a few conservatives and weak-kneed "compassionate conservatives" to oppose them. We did this. I remember the incredulous tone over at The Corner a couple of days before the election-- "Are we really going to do this? Elect the most liberal, inexperienced member of the Senate to the office of the President?" Well, yeah. We did. Or rather, as a people, we became so complacently ignorant that we let Hollywood and the main-stream media do it for us. We let ourselves be railroaded. This is what happens when America loses its collective spine. This is what happens when we lose any sense of self-reliance, let alone fair play.

This is what happens when we decide to let the liberal, nobody-should-have-to-lose playground mentality of the left take over.

This is what happens when we decide to let the government take care of us.

Unalienable rights

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

I've seen two or three posts on the Corner over the past couple days, regarding the question, "When should Israel stop?" When should Israel stop its bombarding of Gaza, the ground troop incursion it recently began, etc.? And there were a few answers: Victor Davis Hanson, who originally posed the question, said, "When they think there is a good chance the rockets will stop — and not until then." Responding to Hanson, Andrew Stuttaford said that there were no easy answers, but that, from the U.S. point of view, it would be a mistake to ignore the propaganda Israel is giving terrorist recruiters in the form of dead Gaza civilians.

Here is a good place to point out of that I have great respect for both Hanson and Stuttaford, and that I agree with them on most things. But here, they are wrong. Very wrong.

When should Israel stop? She should stop when her children are safe. She should stop, not when there's a good chance of the rockets stopping, but when they have stopped, and Hamas offers complete and unconditional surrender. She should stop when she has secured the rights of her citizens. Americans hold that ALL people are given the right to life-- but how secure is that right when you're a civilian and cowards are dropping bombs in your (civilian) city? How secure is your right to liberty when you're terrified to leave your bomb shelter? And how happy can you be when your children are under constant, deadly threat?

The people of this world who think they are enlightened like to portray the Palestinians as victims. And maybe, in the beginning, they were. I don't know, and can't speak to that. But Israel and Israelis have been in existence as long as three of your average suicide bombers. If every country in the world dealt with every historical grievance as they seem to condone Palestinians doing, the world would be in constant, never-ending war. If any other country tried it, the "elites" would be quick to point out the idiocy. But Israel, according to the "elites", may not defend herself. She may not defend her children. She may only accede to the demands and whims of the barbarians across the way.

Palestinians as a whole are not victims. They have the right to life-- and they blow it away in order to strip that right from others. They have the right to liberty-- and they exercised it by electing terrorists and launching rockets. They have the right to happiness-- and every time they failed to condemn a suicide bombing, a rocket launch, or incitement to another Holocaust, they forfeited that right by terrorizing others, including the innocent of their own people, whom they use as living shields with one hand and dead propaganda with the other.

Propaganda value is not more important than doing what is right. International opinion is not as important as drawing a line in Israeli sand and saying that barbarism has come thus far, but no farther. If Israel can stand up for herself, she has a golden opportunity to show terrorists that civilized people are not something to be trampled over on the way to the caliphate. If Israel can win first and then show mercy, she can show the Muslim world another light-- not one that requires murder, mayhem, and conversion or death, but one that allows all peaceful people to live. Without barbarians like Hamas.

There is an easy answer-- just not one that most people like to hear. It is to do what our grandfathers would have done, and did do: defeat evil, and defend their children.

TARP, President Bush, and the Constitution

Can I just stop calling it TARP? The Troubled Assets Relief Program, as it was originally called, shall henceforth be known as PERP, the Presidential End-Run Program. As in, President Bush didn't like Congress' decision on the auto-bailout, so he did an end-run around the entire legislative branch and did what he darn well pleased. After all, he's the executive.

Well, Mr. President, let me tell you about the Executive Office, and the powers it holds.

The President of The United States of America is bound by the Constitution to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". The Presidential Oath requires the would-be president to swear to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.''

Nowhere does the Constitution enable the President to circumvent the will of Congress, save by veto. As Congress never passed an auto bailout bill, there was nothing for President Bush to veto, or to send back to Congress. He simply saw something that he did not like, and dismissed the objections of the elected representatives of the citizens of this country. He took a law marginally related to what he wanted to do (TARP/PERP), and made it do what he wanted, contrary to the expressed will of Congress, American citizens, and the wording of the bill itself. No fanfare, no rationalizations of the illegality/unconstitutionality of what he was doing. No justifications of how this was "faithfully upholding the law". Just a few penstrokes, and a quick press conference.

Great. Peachy. One can only imagine what horrors this could be the precedent for.

There's a reason that the Constitution balances the executive and legislative branches. There's a reason that laws must be approved by both Congress and the President. But now, according to President Bush, the entire legislative branch and the Constitution can be bypassed at the will of the Executive.

Just great.

I am indebted to George Will's article on this subject in the Washington Post.

UPDATE: I just finished reading the Will article all the way through (I had only seen a couple paragraphs before), and I note that a lot of this post makes the same points as Will's article. I could say something to effect of "great minds think alike", but that would be somewhat egotistical, don't you think? So I'll simply say that Will's article is great, and deserves a thorough reading through, as I should have done before I wrote this. That said, this is my material, not copied or paraphrased from Will's. He did give me a great idea, however.

Hey!

Tigerhawk linked to me-- Christmas has come early in Ithilien!

Moving on, you remember those end of the world posts? Well, it could be worse.

I could live in Britain, where enforcers from debt collection agencies have been given the go ahead to break into people's homes, pin the homeowners down, and ransack the home for belongings to appropriate to pay down the debt.

Don't worry though. They say they'll regulate it. Besides, these new powers "will not be used to search debtors’ pockets or to remove jewellery." So if you're into carrying everything of value on your person, you might be safe from these people, who, despite the word "bailiff", are not police.

Of course, Britons may wish to give their pockets snap and velcro closures, as things could fall out when the enforcers breaks into their home and tackles them. And they might want to ask national icon Doctor Who just who he gets his jackets from, as the pockets are bigger on the inside than they are on the outside.

Another link up

This time it's On Tap, a nifty blog written by the guy who writes NRO's Campaign Spot and a few other guys whom I have never heard of, but I'm pretty sure I should have. Truly good stuff, funny, and a thoroughly interesting series going on right now called the On Tap Awards.

Housekeeping

People who look at my link sidebar (all .75 of you) will notice that Jac has been removed. Is there still good stuff on Jac? Yes. Do I object to being called a prostitute by the author simply because I'm a stay-at-home mom? And do I object enough to avoid the blog?

Also yes.

Anyway, Jac has been replaced by Althouse (his mother, coincidentally). I've been planning to add Althouse to the list for quite a while. Occasional bizarre and Not Entirely Safe for Work posts, but usually good stuff from a center-left point of view. If you're concerned about NSFW-ness, avoid the comments in certain posts (her recent one on tattoos, for example. Yikes!).

It's the end of the world as we know it, Part Three

A ten-year-old boy has been arrested, and charged with terrorism, for bringing a cap gun on a school bus, and later not having put his toy down before he answered the door. Actually, truly charged, and facing imprisonment if convicted.

The kid wants to be a police officer when he grows up.

This should make every single parent sick. And angry.

All links for "It's the end of the world as we know it" parts one through three were found on The Corner. You should go and read it.

It's the end of the world as we know it, Part Two

God is being airbrushed from American history-- at the Capitol Visitor's Center. As in, the Capitol Building of the United States of America. Edited out of our national motto, the rostrum of the Speaker of the House, the Northwest Ordinance, and the Constitution.

There's nothing left for me to say about this... well, no, there's two things. The first one is that, while I'm rarely alarmist about the whole "war on Christianity" thing, I will say that this is despicable, and that you should read the article for full effect. The second thing is that nowhere in the Constitution are people granted a right against being offended.

Unless that's been "edited" too.