Everyone should contact their Democrat "leaders" in their State and tell them to vote YES on the John Doe Bill.

Is that the "Flying Imam" bill, kimberly? If so, I agree.

Everyone should also contact their local pest control service and have them round up Dr. Rerun...

It is, Keef. Americans cannot be sued if they alert the authorities of suspicious behavior. Can you imagine anyone voting against that? If they do, they should be rounded up and sent to Iran. :-)

Everyone should contact their Democrat "leaders" in their State and tell them to vote YES on the John Doe Bill.

Posted by: kimberly4bush

Excellent suggestion, Kimberly4bush!!! Call your representatives, TODAY! If that brave Circuit City store clerk had feared that he'd be sued, he might not have called about the Fort Dix Six!

Bush is such a tragedy.

French Resistance to Jihadism: The Broad Implications of Sarkozy’s Election by Walid Phares

Family Security Foundation, Inc.: When I was leaving Paris at the end of October 2005 after a visit to France, I had two things in mind: First, I had seen the beginning of the urban intifada, which would soon engulf about two hundred cities and towns. Second, I was able to have my book Future Jihad received by Minister of Interior Nicolas Sarkozy. And as my plane was taking off, I concluded that the jihadi “invasion” of France’s cities would lead to a French popular response. This Sunday’s presidential election epitomized this reaction, and Nicolas Sarkozy embodied it.[..]

UNREST IN FRANCE

On October 27, in Clichy-sous-Bois, an eastern suburb of Paris, “youth gangs” began torching cars and destroying property.[..] By November 8, 2005, a state of emergency was declared. Ten thousand cars had been burned.

The French public took this as a warning. The media, government, and academia insisted on the unemployment-youth-socio-economic paradigm. But the silent majority didn’t buy it. People living close to the “insurgents” and interacting with them, including the security agencies, understood what was happening: Large urban zones around France’s cities had slipped away from national sovereignty. The radicals had built a “société parallèle,” concluded the average citizens. If the police couldn’t go into the suburbs, it was because they had become Taliban-like pockets. A national leader had to step in.

SARKOZY ARRIVES

Moving swiftly and energetically, Nicolas Sarkozy, the minister of interior, took charge in what was the most sensitive aspect of the French collective psychology. After having organized the Islamic Federation of France in an attempt to whisk it away from the radicals the year before, Sarkozy became the target of attacks by the Salafi clerics, many of whom were preaching Jihadism in the mosques. Sarkozy used French laws to deport a number of them who were non-citizens. In 2003, Sarkozy had organized a state backed Council for Islamic Faith to contain the rise of the Islamists. The November 2005 intifada was a response to the Sarkozy counter-Jihadi measures. In response the minister of interior pushed for the deportation of the radical clerics he accused of incitements.[..]

His statement about being a friend of the United States doesn’t mean only that he will listen to what Washington has to say about the world, but also that he will make known to our politicians his experiences with a common enemy. [..]

After he was elected, Sarkozy pledged that France would support the oppressed and persecuted around the world. In other words, France is committed to helping weak societies struggling for liberties against dictatorships. This statement is a prelude to what could become a new era of French solidarity with the global resistance to ideological jihadism. In this respect, Sarkozy’s victory can be viewed as a first step in the return of the French Resistance, this time against jihadism.

Bush is such a tragedy.

Actually, MindlessLiberal, he's not, but you know what is? Attempting to blog after the bar closes, now that's a tragedy...

Queefer,

Did you just get home?

I often visit the Washington Monthly for laughs, of course I can not make comments on the site anymore apparently because they got tired of a dissenting voice. I found this thread there today.

THE FEINGOLD PROPOSAL....So how are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama going to vote on Russ Feingold's proposal to begin withdrawal from Iraq within 120 days and complete it by March 2008

Aides to the two 2008 presidential hopefuls declined comment on the issue Monday night, two days before a scheduled vote....

These two are running for president. They've thought long and hard about this stuff. Regardless of which side they're on, shouldn't they at least know which way they're going to vote by now? It's hardly the kind of thing that requires a lot of close study of the legislative language.—Kevin Drum

Now what's funny about this is they are perplexed on exactly how their two star senators will vote on this bill. Still not realizing that their senators will continue to play both sides of the fence for fear of losing political power, mind you, neither of them have vision or conviction.

Also what's laughable is the posts by the mindless liberals that followed. They are convinced that if we just leave, the violence will stop.

This would be much more funnier if it weren't so dangerously brain dead.

Open thread Tuesday.
Forget Iraq and all of that for a moment. Here is the latest. Jerry Falwell is dead and "all options are on the table" in the parlance of Wolfowitz directed at the directors of the World Bank. I guess that includes nuclear. After all, the US owes the World Bank so much it is no wonder that Wolfowitz ended up with the keys to the saftey deposit box. Which he promptly gave a portion to his gumba girlfreind.
Now lets talk about the next Monica to bring down a presidency, shall we? Her last name is Goodling. Imagine that, a goodling little christian named Monica. After Lewinsky no doubt as far as God is concerned. Retribution is a bitch, isn't it sinners?

well first of all medebde,

As a respected attorney, Monica Goodling is far more accomplished and successful than the tart Lewinsky ever hoped to be. Secondly, Monica Lewinsky WAS NOT the problem. If you recall it was her suitor, President Bill Clinton who lied to a grand jury under oath which was THE PROBLEM.

Nobody cared about Lewinsky, except Bill.

Wolfowicz has done NOTHING wrong and will be proven as such, as has Goodling. Both of their good names and reputations are being drug through the mud for strictly political puroposes and gamesmanship of which the liberals excel at.

If you have PROOF of their guilt, I will expect to see that. If not, focus on something that is reality based, and no, that's not your political party.

Goodling is not a respected attorney. She has no experience as a prosecutor and was a graduate of the lowest ranked "law school" run by a televanglist who by definition is the American version of the Taliban. She quit the DOJ out of fear and was using the 5th amendment to avoid being prosecuted herself until she was granted immunity. Her criteria for firing USA's was whether they were christian enough or Bush loyalists, not how competent they were. She is 33 and her only qualification is that she came out of Regent University, along with 150 other christianists who have jobs with the federal government. So much for the separation of church and state. BTW, hopefuly her testimomy will hang Rove once and for all.
Wolfowitz is an ideological hack who thought he could steamroll the World Bank, just like he did the American public in his hysteria about the danger Iraq posed to us.
Quit defending the indefensable and educate yourself before you are impressed by a religious nut case looser like Goodling.

Did you just get home?

No, dumbass, I'm getting ready to go to work. Why are you up--I thought they mailed out unemployment checks these days?